21–30 of 121 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've also been fascinated by bitcoin but never made the leap. The problem I always come back to is that it isn't a currency, a store of value, private, and I disagree with bitcoin's approach to decentralization. (A long list, I know. Every couple years I get the itch then rediscover all my complaints). Attempting to create a decentralized currency based on anything other than a supply-constrained natural resource is…
but most national currencies have long since abandoned of the idea of being backed by physical resources, and have shifted towards promises, belief, and trust. are you saying that de-centralization introduces unique aspects that make physical backing a necessity?
Bitcoins are clearly negative sum game (resources used, GPUs burned, CO2 emitted, money changed hands). Wish we could do less of it.
I’m just curious - if you were to try making a decentralized currency as a fun project, what mechanism would you use instead? I’m someone who doesn’t really use it, but was fascinated with it before “blockchain” became a buzzword. edit: proof-of-work. I have been out of the loop for years :) My next question is are there downsides to proof-of-stake, and why has bitcoin not moved towards it?
For people who want proof-of-stake there are plenty of coins doing that. Etherium is probably the best known most established option.
But no coin really solves the other big challenge of crypto-currency: barely anyone uses them as currency. Most of those that do do it for illegal purposes: ransomware payments, marketplaces for illegal goods and services (including the malware SaaS providers), illegal money movements etc. But for the vast majority of people it's more like digital gold than like digital cash: an investment vehicle that derives its value from its limited supply.
As an investment it doesn't actually create economic value (unlike investing in real companies), so you need to have a pretty positive view of the other use cases to judge the overall impact as positive
His "fortune" is mostly ownership of Binance which is now under the thumb of the US government. If—as widely theorized—Binance's secret ingredient is crime then it's not going to be worth what it once was.
Binance far and away dominates non-United States volume of crypto trading. If you think that Coinbase, a publicly traded US company, has real volume and earns a fee for that, then it's not hard to understand why Binance has real revenues and value.
His "fortune" is mostly ownership of Binance which is now under the thumb of the US government. If—as widely theorized—Binance's secret ingredient is crime then it's not going to be worth what it once was.
I'm pretty sure that he also has personal BTC stash. Maybe not billions though.
His "fortune" is mostly ownership of Binance which is now under the thumb of the US government. If—as widely theorized—Binance's secret ingredient is crime then it's not going to be worth what it once was.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m just curious - if you were to try making a decentralized currency as a fun project, what mechanism would you use instead? I’m someone who doesn’t really use it, but was fascinated with it before “blockchain” became a buzzword. edit: proof-of-work. I have been out of the loop for years :) My next question is are there downsides to proof-of-stake, and why has bitcoin not moved towards it?
Why do we need a so-called decentralized currency anyway? I'd be less antagonistic if its major use case wasn't money laundering.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corralito
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_currency_controls_(2...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/316750/inflation-rate-in...
https://hongkongfp.com/2023/12/15/hong-kong-govt-amends-nati...
https://www.ibanet.org/article/5584f623-6456-4287-8c34-1907b...
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/20/americas/canada-trucker-p...
Bitcoins are clearly negative sum game (resources used, GPUs burned, CO2 emitted, money changed hands). Wish we could do less of it.
At least the broader crypto ecosystem mostly moved over to proof-of-stake, even if Bitcoin will probably always be proof-of-work, so at least most of their Ponzi schemes aren't boiling the oceans in the process anymore. Small victories.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure that he also has personal BTC stash. Maybe not billions though.
Most likely multiple anonymous wallets of different cryptos. The real question is whether anyone else has access to them... if yes I expect there to be nothing left.