Live data from Hacker News

Crypto is an unproductive bubble

alexkolchinski.com

421–430 of 539 posts

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#421
IMVHO crypto was and still is a test by IT giants to overthrown classic banking systems, reasoning that they were/are strong enough. Most think cryptos are "free", IMVHO they are definitively not:

- to exchange crypto you need an internet-connected computer, you can't exchange anything from a human to another human being, many might state that's not different than bank transfer on X.25 but it's different from cash, and that's just the appetizer that simply mean: to participate to the economy you need to be connected, and you can choose between few big ISPs for that and you need a computer chosen between the very few manufacturers we have around the world, typically a computer filled of proprietary FWs like moderns ones;

- cryptos are based on a "blockchain" concept, witch means on a giant append-only file, that's means sooner or later home computer will have not enough storage nor bogomips nor bandwidth to operate cryptos "freely", exchanges will be mandatory by technical needs, not by laws, since only big server farms will be able to process transactions at a viable speed. At this point the "free" and "open" part is gone. At this time cryptos are like today's banks, BUT without State laws and protection, an exchange can be in an exotic place, can disappear and start over with another name etc it's costumers are and will be totally powerless;

- not only: since we pay "on-the-go" naturally with cryptos wildly adopted that means de facto mandatory smartphone always with any humans, like the wallet in your pocket, and smartphones not only means already mandatory exchange on a hyper-surveilled platform but also means depend on them for anything, being unable to even buy food without and integrate social scoring it's natural.

Take the above and observe what WEF want in terms of digital identities and payments systems https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/01/davos-agenda-digital-... perhaps together with https://www.protocol.com/entertainment/upland-augmented-real... and you close the circle: cryptos so far are not there, but have created a narrative that digital currencies are good and needed. Most people do no even know the difference between cryptos and CBDC, in the end for most means just numbers inside a mobile (cr)app or website. I expect in a decade a final success of the cash-less push, with the sole payment system remained a smart-phone based one, connected and surveilled, of course linked to a digital ID, of course linked to social score: wellcome to the "western version" of modern China, evolved to surveil even more.

Oh beware a thing: if you want to wait and see because seems too extreme to be true... Once inside such systems, once our IDs, payment systems, social scores are implemented only an improbable civil war can overthrown them, and in a hyper-surveilled and hyper-centralized society where from ovens to toothbrushes to cars anything is connected a civil war means a thing: any Citizen can only let itself die hoping that's enough to crash dictatorship dominance, because it's impossible to fight if you can't eat, you can't travel because all the means to do so are connected and centralized in few hands. Take then a look as software these days: we tell for decades that we need FLOSS etc, what happen in the meantime? Emails are still there, only for 99% are webmails, so nothing practically different than a proprietary service like WA or Telegram. Dependence on few giants is far bigger then ever, anything desktop-centric and P2P-centric is disappeared, even tech communities are now on Reddit, HN etc, witch means on proprietary third parties platforms instead on open Usenet no one really own. Most people, devs included, live on APIs and cloud. Did you really think we are so far from the society depicted above? In the IT we already almost owning nothing "and being happy", actually IT is the core of our society functioning. Companies, especially from the finance sector have internal social score since decades, people think a society like a company, witch means a hierarchy not a Democracy etc...

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#422
post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t understand how anyone has any confidence in crypto after the current Ukraine/Russia situation. I thought that crypto was decentralized and no-one could place restrictions on who could own it, and what they could do with it. This also turned out to be total BS as Russian crypto accounts keep getting frozen. Funnily enough, I haven’t heard the “crypto community” make a single peep about this. Hilarious..

People use custodial wallets which is a bad idea anyway; but it supports the original point; people generally do not understand or care about the basic premise of decentralisation (and, as such, have no interest in the added inconvenience, although with enough tech that can be solved). They use crypto because ‘get rich quick’ and ‘no taxes’ and they do not know or care about how it works. Their coins are in centralis…

But rarely anyone is capable of securing local wallets, especially when it concerns serious amounts of money. So back at trust we are.

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with everything you said except a couple of things. >Unless crypto becomes actually useful for real world transactions, it has to be converted to fiat currency for use, and all the exchanges or technologies that do that conversion are subject to the will of governments. This is true, except that in some places governments are too inefficient to even control those things. The IT people works for them for penni…

Crypto should never be an investment. That is one of its primary flaws. Currency is not an investment. Yes, people trade currency, but for very small margins and as a hedge. When a currency swings 10,000x as crypto has done, it typically only happens in countries whose economies are going belly-up, see: Zibabwe. If crypto is an investment, that means it is fluctuating dramatically, and if it is fluctuating dramatical…

instead of float maybe you meant "peg"

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#424
post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU created and deployed instant zero-cost 24/7 bank transfers while crypto was twiddling its thumbs talking about “early days” and puffing out PoW carbon. If even the European Union moves faster than your cutting-edge decentralized system, maybe you have a problem.

I'm in the EU, doing a lot of bank transfers. I would love to see 24/7 instant bank transfers. The theory is nice, the practice however is very poor. With nano, I do actually have instant, 0 fee, 24/7 money transfers. Sorry, but your claim is just not true in practice.

> Sorry, but your claim is just not true in practice.

Of course it isn't, but they clearly have an axe to grind against things they do not understand at all and they will remain oblivious to the the very obvious fact that SEPA is pretty broken--EU nations and non-Euro nations (within the EU) do not transfer directly or instantly either. It can take days and the expenses, transfer rates, and exchange rates are not 0 either.

But, hey... this is Hacker news, where if you repeat a lie enough times about something you do not like, it will become true enough to be accepted.

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#425

Cryptocurrencies have a valid but very specific use-case: being able to transact in a hostile environment. It does so by making certain trade-offs such as an energy-intensive verification process. This is a very valid use-case when you need to transact against the will of a powerful adversary such as governments. It needs to be there and needs to be protected just like free speech needs to be protected. However, day-…

This is more commonly referred to as "crime".

The definition of "crime" varies based on the whims of who's in power. People protesting against the Ukraine war... err, I mean "special military operation" (wouldn't want to be a criminal would I?) are currently also considered criminals by the Russian government, and so did people who resisted the Nazi invasion back in the day.

I believe the possibility of breaking the law is a necessary escape hatch against authoritarianism. Back in the day this was achieved by physical limits (omnipresent surveillance & control just wasn't physically possible - the tech just wasn't there), nowadays this is becoming more and more difficult - which is great if your government is sane but recent events suggest that even relatively stable governments can quickly turn sour.

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#426
post #374
post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're comparing a centralized approach with the force of law to a decentralized approach which requires buy-in by the masses without any coercion. Of course the two approaches will be different.

I can’t understand how anyone has any confidence in crypto after the current Ukraine/Russia situation. I thought that crypto was decentralized and no-one could place restrictions on who could own it, and what they could do with it. This also turned out to be total BS as Russian crypto accounts keep getting frozen. Funnily enough, I haven’t heard the “crypto community” make a single peep about this. Hilarious..

> I can’t understand how anyone has any confidence in crypto after the current Ukraine/Russia situation. I thought that crypto was decentralized and no-one could place restrictions on who could own it, and what they could do with it.

You do realize that their are capital controls self-imposed by the Ukrainian National Bank, right? And that Bitcoin has been legalized in Ukraine [0] after the influx of Bitcoin donations (and other alts) which were used to fund supplies, logistics, military efforts, as well as the formal Ukrainian Government to continue the war effort.

If anything I'd say it proves that what we have said all along was the case, Bitcoin isn't going to matter to functional economies in the developed World, but will excel most in crisis situations in mainly developed nations.

Lastly, the only one to 'restrict' accounts was the YC-backed Coinbase [1] (the bane of the Bitcoin community as they hold so much BTC despite being vocal opponents of it since Segwit).

So, all I have been able to gather from all of this is that YC/HN remains incredibly ignorant of what Bitcoin and crypto avails, and will draw conclusions based more on that ignorance then take the time to actually look into what is actually taking place.

0: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/ukraine-legalises-bitcoi...

1: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/coinbase-bloc...

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're going to indiscriminately start beheading technology which uses energy why not start with vehicles, video games, machine learning, or anything at all? Its because in order to ask whether something should use energy you must first ask whether its worth it, and your sophistication when it comes to crypto-currencies, finance, and economics is too weak to have that conversation: ergo, you resort to zero value,…

Because vehicles bring value (transport people, food, resources, etc) and have energy optimisations (mass transit, electric, etc) because the energy use as a gatekeeper is not an inherent part of its functionality. I’d be shocked if video games as an industry outranked crypto for energy use. Even if we assume all gamers run their GPU’s at 100% the entire time they play games, miners will quickly dwarf the energy usag…

Alm you're doing here is measuring what you think the benefits to the society are from cars vs bitcoin. Just because it is useless in your opinion does not make it so, and you should qualify your statements with, "in my opinion", rather than saying this with absolute conviction.

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#428
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, AI mostly. Let's just say I thought it was interesting but not worth pursuing. I just re-checked. It was actually 2009 sorry.

Prove it. There are other 2009 era bitcoiners here who can vouch if you were there. The community was known in 2009. My x to doubt is because nobody claims to have “been in blockchain since 2008” it’s a give away that your talking trash. The Genesis block date was Jan 3rd 2009. You were talking to satoshi about Bitcoin pre launch?

The community was not fully known back then (at least not in 2009, post-launch). It was possible to play around with the bitcoin wallet software back then, let it mine some coins from your desktop, and read the bitcointalk forum but not post on the forums or trade whatever you mined until it was worth a few bucks a bit later.

I was one of those people (might have been early 2010 for me though, can't quite remember when I first became aware of bitcoin, but it was pretty early). I remember seeing the post about bitcoin first being exchanged for pizza after I had a bitcoin wallet. I read the forums sometimes but never posted (which is odd, because I posted on a bunch of forums back then).

Of course if I had a time machine I would have been mining nonstop back then, instead of just briefly to play around with it, and held on to it until much later. I thought it was cool but at the time I thought if it was successful it just meant it would get up to roughly the same value as a US dollar, i.e. $1 for 1 bitcoin, and wouldn't go up much beyond that.

By the way, I held on to my coins for as long as I did in part because I was super paranoid about fucking up my transactions, so I get where the OP is coming from. For a casual user they probably don't want that stress. Hell, whenever I do a transaction to another wallet now that's more than $50 even today I check the address three or four times and still sweat a bit until I see it go through.

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#429
post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thieves also consider the analogous irreversibility of cash transactions to be a feature. The rest of us probably actually want an anonymous, "like cash" crypto currency that is resilient against theft (which basically implies some sort of non-repudiation and compensating transactions). But, such a currency probably wouldn't be great for speculation or black market transactions, which are the killer use cases for bit…

it's easier to add time delays to cryptocurrencies than anonymity to our current banking system.

Perhaps:

> Chaum published the idea of anonymous electronic money in a 1983 paper;[1] eCash software on the user's local computer stored money in a digital format, cryptographically signed by a bank. The user could spend the digital money at any shop accepting eCash, without having to open an account with the vendor first, or transmitting credit card numbers. Security was ensured by public key digital signature schemes. The RSA blind signatures achieved unlinkability between withdrawal and spend transactions. Depending on the payment transactions, one distinguishes between on-line and off-line electronic cash: If the payee has to contact a third party (e.g., the bank or the credit-card company acting as an acquirer) before accepting a payment, the system is called an on-line system.[2] In 1990, Chaum together with Moni Naor proposed the first off-line e-cash system, which was also based on blind signatures.[3]

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecash

Re: Crypto is an unproductive bubble

#430
post #257
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How is this any different than what we have, just with extra steps? It's declarative. There's no vagueness about the state of the transaction, and settlement can be cryptographically proven. This creates transparency and accountability. It's also sovereign. Not every transaction NEEDS this level of customer protection. Paying in person at a restaurant or supermarket can be done with a simple transaction. Also, some…

> It's declarative. There's no vagueness about the state of the transaction, and settlement can be cryptographically proven. This creates transparency and accountability. It's also sovereign. What's to stop network effects from this just ending up with a bunch of centralized verifiers that in practice make it impossible not to use them for most daily things?

Even if that would happen, it's very different from today. Because these centralized verifiers now have an incentive to perform well.

1. I can ALWAYS choose to transact on L1 with others. This option is non-existant in our current system.

2. Because payment provision and customer protection are now split, it means that there can be more competition. You don't need to be a payment provider at the same time.

And most importantly: have you ever had to deal with scams and chargebacks? These "verifiers" (paypal, visa) are often utterly useless, with lots of unclear rules.

It turns out that many people don't actually WANT this "protection". What people want is an efficient, global payment system with strong authentication methods. And maybe a way to lock their account (which is much easier to realize with DLTs)

Post reply on HN