Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#111

Post by joeyrideout » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:08 PM UTC

nickles wrote: post #99

joeyrideout wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention that pegs always fail in the land of financial markets anyhow [1]. Interest rate pegs, currency pegs, pegs to commodities e.g. gold tend to collapse in the long run because they create a "perfect trade". When the value of two separate things eventually diverge due to external market forces, you can take advantage of the peg by trading the less valuable item for the more valuable item at the historical…

> Not to mention that pegs always fail in the land of financial markets anyhow... In the context of Facebook being pegged to a basket of international currencies, the peg to each will need to be reevaluated frequently as the currencies fluctuate and arbitrage opportunities increasingly cost the peg-guarantor money to uphold the peg. Assuming that Facebook is the sole issuer and redeemer of the coin, this is a nonissu…

I am aware of his past and still believe that he is the best in the world at what he does. His historical and financial insight is unmatched.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#112

Post by CaptainZapp » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:08 PM UTC

VRay wrote: post #37

cycrutchfield wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when they buy things, are those things denominated in fiat currency or in bitcoin?

I guess Bitcoin is turning out to be the Esperanto of money

Somehow I don't think that you mean that as a compliment.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#113

Post by AgentME » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:08 PM UTC

nosuchthing wrote: post #38

toomuchequate wrote: post #13

If it is pegged to USD, there is no investment potential. It is just as bad as cash. The idea behind bitcoin is that you don't need to rely on the US government for storing value. There are 21,000,000 BTC ever ever, you can't print more. That article did not address this at all. This is the most compelling reason to buy bitcoin.

No one should have to buy Bitcoin when you can mine it, oh wait it's all being printed in warehouses owned by wealthy capital holders. Surely this is Satoshi's design goal. Also don't worry about the exchanges operating out of obscure off shore islands, they probably arn't operating fractional reserves.

Bitcoin mining wasn't invented just to be an egalitarian "everyone can earn money from their computer" sort of thing. The decentralized design that Bitcoin uses needs people to do lots of processing work, the people doing this work need to be incentivized somehow to keep doing that, and then somehow the units of the new currency need to be distributed out, presumably in a way fairer than just starting Satoshi out with a large balance. Mining solves these issues.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#114

Post by jrvxo » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:10 PM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #83

I think Facebook's reputation will be enough to relegate this thing to the ash heap. The only people who are going to be interested in Facebook coins are some subset of cryptocurrency enthusiast who can find value in moving their cryptocurrency into a coin that will have more onramps to spendable money. For everyone else, it's going to be viewed as yet another digital money app you have to hook up to your bank accoun…

Facebook's reputation outside HN is not bad. In fact I'd argue that in undeveloped countries it's pretty, pretty good.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#115

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:11 PM UTC

ForHackernews wrote: post #81

buboard wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's really mind boggling to me they take $1 at all. Why? Banks have a myriad ways to make money instead of taxing consumers (and overwhelmingly the small fish). It's 2019 and cash has 0 cost to transfer.

In the UK, the Faster Payments Service enables near-instant transfers (usually a few minutes) that are typically free to the consumer. This network has been operating for more than a decade. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payments_Service

[deleted]

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#116

Post by Bombthecat » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:14 PM UTC

runeks wrote: post #25

The reason for Bitcoin’s design is precisely because a centralized/pegged alternative was tried and failed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecash Facebook’s currency is not a successor of Bitcoin, it’s an inferior reincarnation of a failed predecessor.

I doubt it will fail. Facebook is too big to not gain traction from users... Also, they are big enough to push ads every where..

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#117

Post by dralley » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:14 PM UTC

thecupisblue wrote: post #94

rdiddly wrote: post #70

I can grasp the idea that Facebook would want to capture more payments like WeChat does; what I can't figure is how having their own cryptocurrency would add anything. Whom does it appeal to? I doubt Facebook wants the drug dealer/money launderer market segment for example. (I also doubt it'll be secure or anonymous enough to satisfy those people.) And it's no good for speculators, if it's pegged. Seems like at best…

They're using cryptocurrency because - off the top of my head in no particular order: 1. Hype 2. It gives "credibility" to their currency 3. they can be regulated as a crypto-currency that way. 4. It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency. 5. It locks the users in to their partners because it's more friction to get money. 6. Easier to obtain the data on how users spe…

>It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency.

This is only true in the US, where the inter-bank financial system runs on mainframes and 40 year old code.

The British banking system decided a while ago that they were going to update their bank communication system, and now they can send sums between bank accounts at different banks within 10 seconds.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#118

Post by Bombthecat » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:15 PM UTC

jrvxo wrote: post #114

root_axis wrote: post #83

I think Facebook's reputation will be enough to relegate this thing to the ash heap. The only people who are going to be interested in Facebook coins are some subset of cryptocurrency enthusiast who can find value in moving their cryptocurrency into a coin that will have more onramps to spendable money. For everyone else, it's going to be viewed as yet another digital money app you have to hook up to your bank accoun…

Facebook's reputation outside HN is not bad. In fact I'd argue that in undeveloped countries it's pretty, pretty good.

That too! This coin could be the second naira..

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#119

Post by travisjungroth » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:15 PM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #107

hanniabu wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as the stock market can only have 1 AAPL ticker, there can only be 1 BTC. Is it possible that in the future that BTC can have a change in emission and cap? Yes. I don't agree with that part of the parents statement. But there is in no way for there to be more than 1 BTC chain.

Stocks and cryptocurrency are not at all the same thing, I assume people think this way only because they can both be summarized as a number that moves up and down over time. Apple is a company located in the physical world that owns raw materials and a business process that transforms raw materials into value. It makes no sense to have another Apple ticker because the point of a stock is to track the value of that p…

It’s an interesting argument that a cryptocurrency designation is more political than a corporation!

I argue that they’re about the same. A corporation is largely numbers in computers and how people feel about them. A cryptocurrency is numbers in computers and how people feel about therm.

Typing this out makes me appreciate gold a bit more. Gold is gold, whether we give it a different name or not. It’s not pure thought-stuff like a corporation. The problem is it only has whatever value we give it, so I’m certainly not arguing it has inherent value or is a better currency.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#120

Post by hackinthebochs » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:24 PM UTC

driverdan wrote: post #109

thecupisblue wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're using cryptocurrency because - off the top of my head in no particular order: 1. Hype 2. It gives "credibility" to their currency 3. they can be regulated as a crypto-currency that way. 4. It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency. 5. It locks the users in to their partners because it's more friction to get money. 6. Easier to obtain the data on how users spe…

All of those things except #1 can be accomplished with a standard virtual currency and a DB. There's no reason to use a blockchain.

I'd much rather buy a virtual currency (pegged or not) than values in Facebook's database. A cryptocurrency gives you a certain baseline level of reliability over value and function that values in a centrally controlled database do not. It remains to be seen how much control Facebook will ultimately have over their cryptocurrency, so this point may be moot.