Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 41 posts

Re: The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

#31

Post by rvz »

smt88 wrote: post #11
devoutsalsa wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because some cryptos goes to zero doesn’t mean all crypto has zero value.

> Just because some cryptos goes to zero doesn’t mean all crypto has zero value. That's true. Crypto has zero value because it has no utility. It's like a Pokemon card: it only has value if people have assigned value to it. You can't make anything with it, and it doesn't give you any legal right to a future cash flow (like a stock or a promissory note does). Let me predict your response: "The same is true of fiat!" Y…

> That's true. Crypto has zero value because it has no utility.

So is that why Stripe, Moneygram, Skiff, Namecheap, TransferGo, Porkbun, FIDE World Chess, etc are still using cryptocurrencies or blockchain? Maybe they chose the ones that are useful and ignored the low effort scam tokens?

I don't think very absolute statements work well these days.

Re: The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

#32

Post by rvz »

admax88qqq wrote: post #17

I love crypto conversations on HN between the pro and the anti crypto crowd. It's rare to see two groups of people deliberately misunderstanding each other so fiercely.

The problem here is due to both extremes having some form of agenda.

Many of the pro-crypto crowd have their investments tied in and believe that it will takeover the current system and some of the anti-crypto crowd are at companies that directly compete against cryptocurrencies [0] and hide and obscure that fact in the discussion and will only 'debate' with people who either agree with them or with those who are new to it all and believe that all cryptocurrencies will be wiped out 100% guaranteed.

The first clue is that both of them are incorrect.

> It's rare to see two groups of people deliberately misunderstanding each other so fiercely.

It really is and the letter does seem to show that, and both extreme camps are going to be very disappointed.

A good example is that NY bill [1] about banning 'certain' proof-of-work (PoW) mining. Not only cryptocurrencies using proof-of-stake or other consensus methods are not affected, this ban is not an absolute ban and it can still be done via renewable methods. It only bans PoW using carbon methods. That is what the extreme crypto-skeptics won't tell you and maybe that is why they learned from this failed petition [2] in the UK and now the deadline to sign their new letter is much shorter.

So you see both extreme camps will be disappointed with achieving their very utopian goals at banning everything or destroying the current system with a new reserve currency.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31616385

[1] https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/A7389

[2] https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/601629

Re: The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

#33

Post by zer01 »

smt88 wrote: post #29
PretzelPirate wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't make anything with it There are blockchains that exist to provide utility by enabling execution of decentralized applications. Not all blockchains are focused on just payments. You may think that decentralized applications don’t provide utility, but that would be a personal view, not an objective fact.

"dApps" or whatever they're called are a ghost town. None currently exist that are truly decentralized or have a value greater than traditional applications. Decentralization is also possible and functions better with tokens (e.g. Bittorrent).

There’s a pretty clear logical contradiction in claiming definitively that no protocols are actually decentralized or work better than their centralized counterparts in crypto world while also signaling that you’re so unfamiliar with it that you barely know what a dApp is.

Re: The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

#34

Post by zer01 »

YossarianFrPrez wrote: post #13

Many crypto enthusiasts at some point argue that a) stocks and fiat currencies are shared social fictions, so b) what's the big difference between them and crypto? There was a meme that went around a few years ago which said something to the effect of "Your parents don't understand crypto because they think money is real." There is some truth to this argument. Stock prices can diverge wildly from fundamentals, and I…

The theory generally goes that what convinces people to use the USD is that it’s backed by the full faith (and more importantly, full military force) of the US government. The Breton Woods Agreement and after getting off the gold standard the “petro-dollar” solidified the USD as the reserve currency for nearly the past 100 years.

The flip side is that unfortunately the stability of the USD is in the hands of politicians and other stewards of the country, which is an immense power to wield, and highly susceptible to corruption and misaligned incentives.

The idea behind cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin is that the code and protocol are simply open source computer code. China can’t arbitrarily decide that they have more bitcoins than they actually have, even if they dedicate an enormous amount of power and influence to try to do so. It provides a tool by which people can transfer value even with hostile adversaries. There’s also a fixed supply that will ever exist, and while deflationary money clearly has issues when it’s the only currency used, as a counterbalance to politically-driven inflationary money it seems like a useful hedge, even more so than gold (we have estimations for how much gold exists but we can’t ever say with certainty - but you can search literally the entire galaxy for more bitcoins and you won’t find them).

Re: The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

#35

Post by zer01 »

giaour wrote: post #27
FrancoisT wrote: post #19

I'm no expert and I find both positive and disconcerting points in cryptocurrencies so I am not sided on this issue. What is perplexing me is the fact that more or less every discussion on the topic is centered on the dollar price (or another government currency) of the cryptocurrency in question. I'm curious to be presented a counterargument but if it was a real currency and not a speculative asset (not to criticize…

It's difficult (but not impossible) to find niches where cryptocurrencies are being used as currencies. They are more often described and used by enthusiasts as securities or investments, so it's this aspect that dominates discussion today. Outside of criminal activity (including "positive" criminal activity like evading the capital controls of authoritarian regimes), there's not much to recommend cryptocurrency as a…

Anecdotally I’ve personally seen a lot of “Bitcoin accepted here” signs while traveling around America. It’s not ubiquitous, but it is there. Hell, I bought a plane ticket with Bitcoin way back in 2014 for a family member to come see me.

I’m not sure if you’ve ever heard of the “lightning network” but it uses some really clever cryptography which allows people to send/recv Bitcoin almost instantly, with finalized settlement done on-chain as a normal transaction when the payment channel closes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_Network

The other thing about payment finality is that thanks to blockchains with smart contracts (so not really on Bitcoin) things like escrow become pretty simple to conduct. You can write programs to enforce exactly how an exchange should work (“only release payment after proof has been posted to the chain”), and both parties can have confidence that no one is getting taken advantage of because they’ve agreed to immutable rules beforehand - to me that’s a super powerful primitive to build neat stuff with.

Re: The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

#36

Post by zer01 »

smt88 wrote: post #10
immigrantheart wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um..bitcoin is still $29k, not 0, and so many other cryptos still have value noted in USD out there. Sure, criticism schimisicm. Proof is in the pudding.

> Proof is in the pudding. That's exactly what I said. The pudding was a crash. It proved that cryptocurrencies are speculative assets without intrinsic value and that they aren't a hedge against any other speculative assets or fiat currency (in contrast to, for example, gold).

Netflix is also down 66% YTD, Tesla down 41% while BTC is down 37% over the same span.

Clearly Tesla and Netflix were speculative assets without intrinsic value too by that logic.

Re: The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

#37

Post by smt88 »

zer01 wrote: post #36
smt88 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Proof is in the pudding. That's exactly what I said. The pudding was a crash. It proved that cryptocurrencies are speculative assets without intrinsic value and that they aren't a hedge against any other speculative assets or fiat currency (in contrast to, for example, gold).

Netflix is also down 66% YTD, Tesla down 41% while BTC is down 37% over the same span. Clearly Tesla and Netflix were speculative assets without intrinsic value too by that logic.

The overvaluation of tech stocks was absolutely speculative.

Re: The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

#38

Post by smt88 »

zer01 wrote: post #33
smt88 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"dApps" or whatever they're called are a ghost town. None currently exist that are truly decentralized or have a value greater than traditional applications. Decentralization is also possible and functions better with tokens (e.g. Bittorrent).

There’s a pretty clear logical contradiction in claiming definitively that no protocols are actually decentralized or work better than their centralized counterparts in crypto world while also signaling that you’re so unfamiliar with it that you barely know what a dApp is.

I know what a dApp is and have built one on Ethereum. I don't know what the new fad for describing the benefit of crypto is.

People only talk about DeFi now, and dApps may have rebranded as Web3.

Re: The crypto-skeptics’ voices are getting louder

#39

Post by smt88 »

PretzelPirate wrote: post #23
smt88 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I mean any asset is vulnerable to being worth $0 at any moment. Absolutely, totally wrong. Let's look at some of the most common assets. - Houses: > your previously valuable house could actually be worthless due to a structural defect Wrong. If you buy a new house, you likely have a builder's warranty. If you buy an existing house, you get an inspection. Unless the house is very inexpensive and the inspector is tot…

> Stocks: Legally entitle you to profits of a company If I own Meta stock, how do I get my share of their profits? They don’t pay dividends.

If Meta is liquidated, you are owed money (depending on where you are in line).
Post reply on HN