Cryptocurrency and the unbanked

Post by redka » Sun, Oct 03, 2021, 10:05 PM UTC

ben_talent wrote: post #101

redka wrote: post #38

As usual, here on HN, any time something is posted that relates to cryptocurrencies the discussion gets filled with negativity and even, seemingly unprovoked, outright hostility toward the idea. Overall HN (in my opinion) has a very good quality of discussion and I often read the comments before opening a link or even just for the sake of it. Nevertheless when it comes to cryptocurrencies that assumption goes out the…

This resonates so much with me. Are you familiar with Paul Graham's: How to Disagree http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

Post by DennisP » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:15 AM UTC

davidgerard wrote: post #103

DennisP wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said we're heading for that, not that we're there now. The demand for transactions is increasing at a rapid pace. I don't think it's reasonable to expect price stability with so much change in demand.

It's as, or more, volatile now than it's ever been. You're basing this prediction on no evidence and a theory you don't outline. How will more demand for transactions stabilise the trading price?

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 2:19 AM UTC

bradwood wrote: post #63

davidgerard wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In El Salvador, there is no need to off-ramp fiat into BTC... This is a functionally incorrect description of how the system is working there, or doesn't. In practice, the bitcoin systems there are tremendously unreliable, and the populace hates everything about it. I wrote this about how it's going: https://archive.is/mJY30 You could argue that none of what went wrong with it is "bitcoin" per se - but then, the "b…

> the populace hates everything about it This sentence alone tells me everything I need to know about your position: "the populace" (implying everyone) and "everything" -- riiight... I think you need to tone down the superlatives a bit and maybe try researching both sides for your next article. A 1000 people marched against bitcoin -- this is hardly "the populace"... There is no arguing that it (Chivo) got off to a s…

Post by jsemrau » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 6:50 AM UTC

5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #47

jsemrau wrote: post #15

Not yet. The on and off-ramps are still way too complicated. Getting an account with one of the established banks (a.k.a exchanges) is painful. AML/KYC takes weeks, the user interface is a mess, every turn costs you "fees", trading is dominated by whales when they move their money around to pump some shit-err... alt-coin, and finally getting back into fiat so you can actually use all of the "in-game" currency is slow…

Yes, and in most cases you need a bank account or at least a debit card to buy crypto to begin with. I'm long crypto but i think the argument of banking the unbanked is a bit contrived, much like the store of wealth narrative in the face of regular -20% "corrections". It should be seen as a speculative investment and not really a currency. Perhaps stablecoins can serve that market eventually.

Post by DennisP » Mon, Oct 04, 2021, 12:35 PM UTC

chii wrote: post #107

DennisP wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not more demand but stable demand. Transaction demand growth is still vigorous, as any look at gas prices can verify. I'm just saying Hayek might be right, if the underlying GDP is reasonably stable as he assumed. But fine, I'll admit I have little to go on. Are you willing to admit the same? Because you're even further from the actual data so far.

> Not more demand but stable demand. as in, demand for using crypto as a transactional currency, rather than as a speculative asset right? The demand that is unstable is because it is driven primarily by speculation. There's very few commodities being exchanged via crypto. So to reach stable demand, crypto must be a currency that is used for non-speculative transactions (such as buying groceries, or buying oil from c…