Ahh proof of stake, the nail in the coffin of decentralization. What did you say? the more you have of the capital the more you influence the system? what a novel concept! Monterey and legal systems based on structures that are at least partially built to take care of the needs of people of similar culture and geographic area? YUCK! Machine enforced plutocratic system where early adopters and syndicates have absolute…
> the more you have of the capital the more you influence the system That's not how PoS works, though?
Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
321–330 of 338 posts
Re: Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you misunderstood me. This year Russians got de facto banned from many services, cannot use paid features of Github (Copilot or sponsoring projects), are blocked by freelancer marketplaces, etc. I am not risking using TransferWise to transfer money home (to a non-sanctioned individual's account in a non-sanctioned bank) out of fear of losing my account forever. This is because Western companies interpret sancti…
Yes, I totally misunderstood you, apologies. I agree with everything you said, except this: >>However, blanket financial anonymity at scale is not an acceptable workaround Blanket financial anonymity is the only way to prevent circumstances like today's, where entire nationalities are locked out of the global financial system, and power becomes more concentrated over time.
Implementing this anonymity to allow regular guys help their families in Russia, who are now dealing with 4x price hike on basic goods, will help kleptocrats (the very guys causing that hike in the first place) finance their wars and further entrench themselves in power. Don't you see how this ultimately hurts those it ostensibly aims to help?
Regular guys will send home hundreds of USD, kleptocrats will launder billions.
Financial anonymity at scale exacerbates these asymmetries by helping those with the most money/power the most. Thinking otherwise is hoping they are clueless and don't employ teams of savvy people specifically to figure out various financing workarounds.
Re: Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I totally misunderstood you, apologies. I agree with everything you said, except this: >>However, blanket financial anonymity at scale is not an acceptable workaround Blanket financial anonymity is the only way to prevent circumstances like today's, where entire nationalities are locked out of the global financial system, and power becomes more concentrated over time.
It's not the answer, you may have missed the other part of what I wrote. Implementing this anonymity to allow regular guys help their families in Russia, who are now dealing with 4x price hike on basic goods, will help kleptocrats (the very guys causing that hike in the first place) finance their wars and further entrench themselves in power. Don't you see how this ultimately hurts those it ostensibly aims to help? R…
Those in the centers of power don't need to launder money. They write the laws, so their income is not illicit.
Re: Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, but this presupposes that the particular tool in question is a "bad tool", and the basis of that presupposition elsewhere in this thread is very strongly implied to be "tool is used by bad guys therefore it's bad unless I specifically benefit from it".
Eh, that wasn’t my read. More that it seems to be exclusively used by bad people. The lack of people manually verifying the _nature_ of a transaction and not just that someone claimed a transaction occurred means everything you’re doing is, well, pointless. It is (highly optimistically) a libertarian political movement that is deeply misinformed about how free markets and trust actually work. Cryptocurrency has zero…
Re: Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not the answer, you may have missed the other part of what I wrote. Implementing this anonymity to allow regular guys help their families in Russia, who are now dealing with 4x price hike on basic goods, will help kleptocrats (the very guys causing that hike in the first place) finance their wars and further entrench themselves in power. Don't you see how this ultimately hurts those it ostensibly aims to help? R…
Those with the most power can legalize everything they do. The monopoly on violence wielded by the government tends to concentrate power. Mass-surveillance of financial transactions, or conversely, lack of private money, extends the reach of the government, and with it, the ability of the most powerful to extract resources from the general population. Those in the centers of power don't need to launder money. They wr…
Oh yes they do. Read about all the ways dictators and their friends wash ill-gained riches in the West to buy real estate, enjoy lavish lifestyle, finance activities that undermine democracies and further their own agenda, etc. Sanctions exist for a reason.
You can't have anonymity without enabling crime and laundering. In a digital world where you need less to be physically present to profit from a crime, I want law enforcement to be able to seize criminal's funds.
If you think your government abuses that power try electing a different one, if you are in a democracy you can. If you want lawless anarchy I'm not with you, we had something like that in Russia in the 90s and it's not fun.
Re: Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, but this presupposes that the particular tool in question is a "bad tool", and the basis of that presupposition elsewhere in this thread is very strongly implied to be "tool is used by bad guys therefore it's bad unless I specifically benefit from it".
Eh, that wasn’t my read. More that it seems to be exclusively used by bad people. The lack of people manually verifying the _nature_ of a transaction and not just that someone claimed a transaction occurred means everything you’re doing is, well, pointless. It is (highly optimistically) a libertarian political movement that is deeply misinformed about how free markets and trust actually work. Cryptocurrency has zero…
So I'm a bad person, then? Are the migrant workers sending money back to their families bad people? Are the refugees using it to bring their life savings with them bad people? Are the people currently subject to those bad regimes and unable to escape bad people?
At best, the belief that "it seems to be exclusively used by bad people" is blatantly ignorant of reality. At worst, it's saying the quiet part out loud: that as far as the legacy financial system (and the supporters thereof) is concerned, these people are just as "bad" (read: worth shunning from the benefits of said system), with the only difference being that said system is able to exploit them and their labor while it pretends they don't exist.
> Cryptocurrency has zero effective solutions for this.
Because there's no problem to be solved in the first place. There are many issues with cryptocurrency, but "wah nation-states can't arbitrarily censor transactions wah" ain't one of 'em.
Re: Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
Forking it is the real threat. If some entity does end up controlling 67% or doing something the community does not agree with, people will just stop using the chain. This already happened once with Ethereum.
Yes, but etherium forked in favor of the stakeholders.
Re: Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
#328Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well said, agree with all of that. I have hope for systems that allow for the easy, anonymous (to outside observers, at least) build up of networks for the kind of information exchange you rightly claim to be the most important aspect of creating good systems in practice. It doesn’t solve that information bottleneck problem, but I think the more efficient structures that lead to transactional bottlenecks and are nece…
>but I think the more efficient structures that lead to transactional bottlenecks and are necessary in things like Bitcoin are technical problems that can and I think have been worked out in currencies like Monero That might be true, but the structure doesn't appear to have any technical considerations behind it. Following this comment: >At the end of the day I am more and more convinced that all of this money and po…
The actual people using Monero are unknown. That’s the point. To say it is centralized behind a group of criminals is incorrect. It has been extensively used to get money into places like Venezuela where the state is hostile, and for all kinds of positive services where people simply value privacy. See http://monerica.com
The fact that criminals also use Monero is a feature, not a bug, and proves that it works in the most hostile environments. The fact that it enforces the fourth amendment is a good thing, and it forces law enforcement to target criminals specifically rather than enabling blanket surveillance.
Anyone who wants tools to prevent the state from abusing power has ample reason to use Monero, and given the way politics has been infringing on banking rights in Canada, that is bound to be a growing number.
Regardless of what you think of the Canadian protestors, the real question is what do you think of the right to privacy and our ability to ensure our rights in the USA, given our constitution. If we do not trust people to transact privately then lets just repeal the fourth amendment and be honest about what rights we do and don’t have.
I happen to believe the right to privacy is fundamental and that to remove it is to create a panopticon. I believe law enforcement has ample means to go after crime without violating financial privacy, and believe it is equally if not more important to prevent abuse of law enforcement powers given the tendency for corruption, political use, and lack of effectiveness that has plagued all of human history.
Re: Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, that wasn’t my read. More that it seems to be exclusively used by bad people. The lack of people manually verifying the _nature_ of a transaction and not just that someone claimed a transaction occurred means everything you’re doing is, well, pointless. It is (highly optimistically) a libertarian political movement that is deeply misinformed about how free markets and trust actually work. Cryptocurrency has zero…
> More that it seems to be exclusively used by bad people. So I'm a bad person, then? Are the migrant workers sending money back to their families bad people? Are the refugees using it to bring their life savings with them bad people? Are the people currently subject to those bad regimes and unable to escape bad people? At best, the belief that "it seems to be exclusively used by bad people" is blatantly ignorant of…
Re: Ethereum Proof-of-Stake
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
> More that it seems to be exclusively used by bad people. So I'm a bad person, then? Are the migrant workers sending money back to their families bad people? Are the refugees using it to bring their life savings with them bad people? Are the people currently subject to those bad regimes and unable to escape bad people? At best, the belief that "it seems to be exclusively used by bad people" is blatantly ignorant of…
Can you prove any of those things is actually happening with the sort of regularity you’re implying? Preferably without linking to coinbase articles?
https://coinflip.tech/blog/how-cryptocurrency-is-aiding-ukra...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerhuang/2020/10/19/dissident...
Your turn: prove your assertion that cryptocurrencies "seem" to be used exclusively by bad people.