Here's how I see it: Crypto as an investment - Not your keys, not your coin. Crypto as a currency - I can't directly buy food, water, shelter, transportation, energy, or anything fundamental with it. I know acceptance is growing, but 10+ years later, crypto still has extremely limited acceptance for daily goods and services. It is almost exclusively held as an investment.
This is not an investment because there is no asset behind it. (no production) It is a speculative vehicle.
Is this the end of crypto?
201–210 of 448 posts
Re: Is this the end of crypto?
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't hold Bitcoin. I use it for cross-continent transactions. I buy it from people in my city using a local FB group or (way in the past) Localbitcoins.com and then send it to the recipient. They usually use Localbitcoins to convert it to their own currency AFAIK. The fees (transfer and exchange) are much lower this way - usually less than 0.5% all things considered. Compared to $100+ fee to just transfer the mone…
How long does it take for a typical transaction to finalize?
Re: Is this the end of crypto?
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But in any case, what is "using" bitcoin? > Is it purchasing bitcoin? ...how do I do that? I'd need to rely on the two mining companies, right? And the exchanges? Or not? Transacting on the Bitcoin network: sending BTC from one party to another. There are more than two mining companies, otherwise Bitcoin's security model fails (see 51% attack). Of course, centralized exchanges are... centralized. > And can I use bi…
We are largely in agreement as you concede my points. But you want to retain this word as applied, eg., to bitcoin. The sound of rain falling is neither "centralised" nor "decentralised". It isnt the kind of thing which could be either *in the relevant sense of the word*. When we talk about centralisation in economics and politics we arent talking about where databases are. Bitcoin is as centralised *a system* as any…
Concede would mean that I changed my mind. I didn't. You said some true things but which are irrelevant to your original claim.
> When we talk about centralisation in economics and politics we arent talking about where databases are.
Perfectly agree (as I thought I had made abundantly clear in my previous comments). I'm sure for example that Paypal has databases all over the world and yet it is not "decentralized" in this context (in the economical/political sense).
Centralization in this context refers to who is in charge. A centralized economy is one that is managed by centralized planners. A central bank has central bankers in control. Paypal has executives in control. There is no centralized entity that controls Bitcoin.
Re: Is this the end of crypto?
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's a fair point. But the problem is Crypto is an investment playground by people from rich countries and legitimate uses of it in countries like say Venezuela is an extremely small part of total transactions.
I'm from Argentina but live in the UK: in 2020 my mom needed an urgent oncological treatment and the only method I had to transfer the money was using a cryptocurrency. I really don't like to talk about this stuff but when people here in HN keep making arguments like "oh who needs this stuff, I can send money to my friends with the Monzo app" it really makes me feel like my problems as someone from the third world do…
Re: Is this the end of crypto?
#205Here's how I see it: Crypto as an investment - Not your keys, not your coin. Crypto as a currency - I can't directly buy food, water, shelter, transportation, energy, or anything fundamental with it. I know acceptance is growing, but 10+ years later, crypto still has extremely limited acceptance for daily goods and services. It is almost exclusively held as an investment.
We're getting there and you can already use our product at 50k+ stores in the US.
Even in this market, merchants are still interested. We launched new ones this week.
Comparing us to Visa or Paypal we are rinky dinky af, no denying that. But we are definitely growing.
Your lens of investment vs currency is also very US based. Consider countries that frequently experience huge rates of inflation. Non-fiat money can be valuable for them.
Re: Is this the end of crypto?
#206Re: Is this the end of crypto?
#207When Crypto was young it was this cool new technology that mostly interesting because of the underlying tech. But even back then it was mostly valuable for buying drugs online and other illegal stuff. Now it's that and a way to scam people of their life savings. I do hope it dies out, it should have been heavily regulated from the get go. Way too many people saw these high production commercials with their favorite c…
When bitcoin first came onto the scene I personally knew a guy who was running a website to act as an exchange. It was small because bitcoin itself at that time was very small. Then bitcoin had its very first dip and it became unprofitable to mine bitcoins. When that happened he shuttered the website and kept everyone's bitcoins. I knew of bitcoin early on due to this guy, but even then I had no interest and consider…
Re: Is this the end of crypto?
#208> The disappointment is that, 14 years after the Bitcoin blockchain was invented, little of this promise has been realised. Crypto’s frenzy drew in talent from bright graduates to Wall Street professionals, and capital from vc firms, sovereign-wealth and pension funds. Vast quantities of money, time, talent and energy have been used to build what amount to virtual casinos. Efficient, decentralised versions of mainstr…
Bitcoin absolutely needs exchanges. Sure, it's a self contained decentralized system that could keep churning along without needing anything but computation and the internet, but the day you can't exchange btc for fiat is the day bitcoin goes back to 2010, when it was a curiosity that isn't useful for much of anything. The only reason crypto is interesting to anyone except the most true of true believers is that you can exchange it for real money. What is the point of it without exchanges?
Re: Is this the end of crypto?
#209When Crypto was young it was this cool new technology that mostly interesting because of the underlying tech. But even back then it was mostly valuable for buying drugs online and other illegal stuff. Now it's that and a way to scam people of their life savings. I do hope it dies out, it should have been heavily regulated from the get go. Way too many people saw these high production commercials with their favorite c…
There's a bigger paradigm here that I believe few people understand and that I will desperate attempt to explain. I may be about to write a word salad, but here's hoping.
When the Internet was young, before e-commerce was a thing, it was a delightful space where you could publicly post your e-mail address and never worry about the repercussions. If you ran a server and a hacker gained access, it was on you to improve your security.
Eventually, commerce found the Internet and everything changed. Once money was involved, bad actors started to get involved. This is when we started to experience the delights of e-mail spam, a problem we never really fully solved. And something changed about how we handle those hackers. Now that money is involved, if a hacker gains access to your system, instead of being responsible for your own server you can just call the police. And wow, did they crack down on hackers in the early days. They were bad at catching them, but when they did the punishments were disproportionate. It made things safe enough for commerce to grow, but it didn't make us nor the Internet much "better" in the long run. Rather, it put us in a rut.
Compare that with introduction of Bitcoin - which was money from the moment it was created. Because Bitcoin was about money since the beginning, it also attracted those bad actors from the beginning. However, the Bitcoin paradigm is different. Instead of being connected to the existing financial system, it's a self-contained Internet-native system where the responsibility of security is put (to some degree) in the user's hands. But we users are a bit lazy, especially after being hand-fed dumbed-down UX for decades. That makes us vulnerable because we trust instead of verify. But Bitcoin teaches us to learn, to understand, and hopefully to be more responsible.
I believe that Bitcoin and it's derivative technologies have created something akin to a bug zapper. It attracts bad actors like nothing ever has before. And the only viable retort is to improve technology and educate - the opposite of the traditional system where we give the state a monopoly on violence and then ask them to fix it for us.
If you look over the history of cryptocurrency, you'll see a history of rising and falling value and popularity tied to hacks, exploits, crimes, scams, etc. Often, the news declares the end of the entire enterprise. Yet, each time, the scene not only comes back - it comes back stronger.
What I see is greed and wealth attempting to exploit Bitcoin the way the traditional system gets exploited - but always failing in the long run. And with each failure, the wealth in play gets absorbed into Bitcoin. Meanwhile, we continue to harden and improve Bitcoin and the ecosystem around it. In my mind, it's like a worm that is slowly eating the world's wealth through an ongoing interaction with bad actors. I do not believe it can nor should be stopped.
So this idea that crypto is inherently a scam is the result of scammers being drawn to crypto. It's easy for the public to believe this. But Bitcoin and things like it are, in my opinion, the medicine we need to move through this and on to something else.