511–520 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But crypto currencies are not the only potential use of blockchains right?
Having crypto currency is the equivalent of having a computer. I am not aware of anything you can do in the new "cryptonet" as long as you have zero cryptocurrency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blockchain is proving a more than capable solution in the ransomware payments space, enabling a whole new class of malware.
It also enables people to finance themselves despite tyrannical restrictions imposed by bad governments. Using bitcoin I can send money to someone in Chi no a who's social rating was degraded by the CCP and who is forbidden from using banks. This alone trumps any arguments against bitcoin. Crime will exist forever and criminals will find ways to finance themselves anyway, so the use of cryptocurrencies for their oper…
This is a ridiculous claim. Just because a technology can be used for good does not mean it is beyond criticism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the transaction I described (which was personal) involved a bank transfer between two EU states, and it's simply not true. It's not instantly, doesn't work 24/7 (a transaction made on Friday arrived on Tuesday), and you have to find plenty of tricks to avoid high fees and super bad exchange rates (EU has more than one currency, you know).
Uh, oh, will … no. Its Not true in that Description, also dont forget: SEPA!=Euro!=EU!=EER Source: Im running a bank. In the EU.
It's a political problem not a technological one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But....why. What problem does it solve. How is it better than existing insurance policies that are perfectly fine being bound to my name and address
I believe the promise of having an insurance contract publicly verified by a decentralised system is to reduce the inherent costs of the current regulated system. In my country,and I assume in most it's the same, in order for you to sign a buy contract for a house, there has to be a notary involved. The whole process costs a significant percentage of your already heavy purchase. A blockchain won't solve all the probl…
if the estonian government is operating and enforcing it, why do you even need the blockchain bit? just put the database onto mysql and and make a website for people to transfer ownership online
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Use cases like storing the history of a car on-chain, transparent supply chains, public voting... this all sounds interesting but never made it to product-market fit. Anything that does not exist natively on the blockchain doesn't need a blockchain at all. If a token on the blockchain would represent you as the owner of a car and one day someone steals your private key which represents your car ownership, that pers…
Not to say your completely wrong, just that the purpose of car tokens on the blockchain is to replace perhaps your insurance, but not the keys.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The law makes me the owner… good we have something to trust that my house is my house… the law and not crypto ;)
Well the law and the fact that (eventually) someone will come and physically remove whoever claims to own your house. A Blockchain without the ability to initiate (and complete) such a process is worthless for questions of real world ownership. Of course a Blockchain could be empowered to do that....through a law.
Gets even more interesting when people can buy puts and calls on someones liquidation via options dex.
A few of the ex-mil people in a DAO i'm apart of are really interested in this space growing for services like that, for obvious reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And literally none of it, not a single step that you mentioned requires blockchain.
> And literally none of it, not a single step that you mentioned requires blockchain. Then tell me, where is this wonderful centralized database that tells me who owns which car? Blockchains are not just about decentralization, it's also about publishing the actual databases in the wild for everyone to see, because you have the guarantee that no-one can fake it. Sure, a lot of the use cases could be done with central…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are all kinds of limitations in how exactly you are allowed to use your money. And settlement of such a large amount of funds between two parties is not simple and fraught with danger if you "do it alone". Bitcoin or your blockchain of choice has no such issues though! You can prove to your seller that you have the funds, as well as even pre-commit the money in a smart contract, or a multi-sig transaction. Doin…
> There are all kinds of limitations in how exactly you are allowed to use your money. Where are you getting that from? If the money has been earned in a legit manner and you want to spend it on a legitimate thing, who's stopping you from spending it? Yes if your source of money isn't legal or you want to spend on something illegal, that's a different story.
A.) Transfer a part of it (for this particular bank, anything more than $5000) to pay a deposit for a house;
B.) Make a final settlement on a house, again with money I had available in my account.
There are limitations on how much you can transfer easily at once, and different kinds of approval and parties have to be involved to pay for something large.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But....why. What problem does it solve. How is it better than existing insurance policies that are perfectly fine being bound to my name and address
People were asking the same questions when typewriters came out, but why we know how to write already.