161–170 of 332 posts
The best crypto grift was the neobank startups that were front ends for investing in anchor, a 20%APY crypto ponzi. Anchor crashed with Luna and all those startups kept their money in failed stable coins and have folded and failed to make payroll. They lost all of their money and all of their customers money. Woof
What do you mean? It is still working and has an 18% APY for UST. UST may have failed to be a stable coin, but Anchor still works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Governments will likely fight this tooth and nail however, because crypto is currently an anti-government technology. Democratic governments represent the will of the people, and I don't think a technology can be pro-government or anti-government, it ultimately depends on what the people what. I think you are correct though for autocratic governments. Would you for example say that guns are clearly anti-government…
>Democratic governments represent the will of the people Such as the will of the people for pot to remain technically illegal throughout the entire nation, or the will of the people for a president to be elected with a minority vote? >Would you for example say that guns are clearly anti-government or pro-government? Neither. Guns are a tool usable by a variety of actors for a variety of purposes. Banning guns (or res…
Agree. Now replace guns with crypto and this is basically my position. There is obviously nuance for this kind of classification for any technology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you’d be an idiot to ignore the realistic and adopted use-cases Ignoring the hostility, what would you list as the realistic and adopted use-cases for crypto?
Do you think SciHub has a reason or right to exist? Financial censorship is real and growing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He also owns a exchange that makes a mint on trading in BTC and related derivatives.
-removed-
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give some examples of cool stuff that isn't a scam? I'm genuinely curious.
One of the cool parts of crypto is that it enables new forms of social coordination that take place entirely within an online context. We haven't even scratched the surface of what could be possible with DAOs; the UIs and educational materials don't exist yet. But given how online people are in general (and they're only likely to become more online in the future), it's natural they'll want digitally-native ways to or…
* If it's a governance token system where more money == more power...well, I just don't think it's a good idea in general.
* If it's a system that tries to replicate the idea of one person/one vote, you have to have KYC (and re-KYC upon membership transfer) or it devolves into the first case. Then the entity doing KYC has centralized control over membership, so it seems like storing membership info on a ledger doesn't offer any benefits compared to just having a central membership database.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We've been able to do this for decades. It's a core part of our PKI ecosystem.
Surely, but PKI still relies on cert authorities which have been compromised before
More seriously: there are cryptographically sound schemes (like CT) that address CA compromise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do understand that banning something is a form of regulation, correct? I don't know how much more explicit I can be with a phrase like "regulate into the dirt."
Normally if the policy outcome you wish for is for X to be non-existent, then it would be more precise and explicit to say "we should ban X". The word regulate implies to some degree that we want X to exist, just in a way that is more constrained for better outcomes. Think about the mechanical meaning of the word regulate. To try to ban something under the guise of regulation makes it seem like you are wishing for a…
But then again, what if what I mean by ban is a "partial ban." Opportunities for misinterpretation abound!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Smart contracts, DAOs, payments, self-sovereign identity, tokenization of real world assets, a few security use-cases, operating markets for prediction and asset-trade outside the control of external authorities (libertarian wet dream stuff), insurance and legal arbitration outside of the control of external authorities (more wet dreaming, but it’s happening), supply chain / provenance of assets… All of these could p…
I'm not aware of any serious supply chain or asset provenance efforts that rely on cryptocurrencies or DeFi. Lots of serious work uses Merkle constructions, but it would be a remarkable distortion to spin something like Certificate Transparency as a form of DeFi.
Plenty of supply chain use cases already exist using private chains/ledgers — this will skew more toward public chains or hybrid solutions as demands for transparency amp up.