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

Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

currentaffairs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 341 posts

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#141

Post by cuteboy19 »

MildlySerious wrote: post #76
throwaway4good wrote: post #18

I think the best criticism against crypto currency is that it is essentially “regulatory arbitrage”. Things are allowed inside crypto that is not allowed in the normal world of finance. Ie stable coins: promising people 20% on their savings account by running an obscured ponzi. Ie pump and dump. Ie insider information. Insiders on exchanges buying up coins they know are going to be listed. Etc etc. (And proof of work…

The only thing crypto does is to make these things available to regular people who aren't rich already. They're happening either way.

You think poor people don't already have a buffet of scams, MLMs and ponzis to chose from?

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#142

Post by jeffrwells »

chalst wrote: post #138
wlll wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm rather mistrustful of people that are this forthy about being against a new technology. I don't really give a crap about what people do or don't do with new technology, ultimately what people want to spend their time and money on is up to them. However, "Crypto" is different. If all it was was just the unbelievably irritating crypto bros rug pulling, ponzi scheming, wash trading, ugly NFT shilling and hacking a…

I don't see any cryptocoins that I regard as a success, but I am watching three that might be a success: 1. Filecoin: It was well-motivated from the start, to provide a cheap way to get counterparties (by default, a multiple of six) to pin content in IPFS. I don't regard it as a proven technology yet, but it's usable as it stands; 2. Brave's BATs: Brave annoys me with its cryptocoin boosterism, but in principle this…

In the case of Brave, genuinely curious:

Is there any reason this needs to be on a public blockchain? What are the benefits? Why is this a better solution than Brave keeping points/payments data in their own database?

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#143

Post by scaramanga »

fastball wrote: post #106
jakupovic wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is Musk an expert in? Besides being a rich school boy?

Highly automated car manufacturing and rockets for starters.

Not to mention ridding Gotham city of crime.

Sorry, damn, that was Bruce Wayne.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#144

Post by Gordonjcp »

basisword wrote: post #113
wlll wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm rather mistrustful of people that are this forthy about being against a new technology. I don't really give a crap about what people do or don't do with new technology, ultimately what people want to spend their time and money on is up to them. However, "Crypto" is different. If all it was was just the unbelievably irritating crypto bros rug pulling, ponzi scheming, wash trading, ugly NFT shilling and hacking a…

>> 1) a very serious climate crisis 2) a cost of living crisis where people can't afford energy to cook and heat (in the UK at least) and 3) a war that would likely be brought to a stop sooner if we could phase out Russian gas sooner. All of these things are the result of bad governing, not crypto. Maybe banning crypto would help them (I don’t believe that) but banning lots of other things would also help. What we re…

You don't think that the 1MWh or so of electricity used (estimates vary from 2MWh down to 700kWh, depending on what you read, so I pick a value in the low end of the middle) is pushing up the price of energy?

Let's reframe those values slightly - every bitcoin transaction uses about as much electricity as it costs to run my house for nearly six months.

Are you sure that's not having an adverse effect on energy prices?

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#145

Post by fartcannon »

wlll wrote: post #104
Havoc wrote: post #44

>help me make it die in a fire I'm rather mistrustful of people that are this forthy about being against a new technology. If it really is that devoid of merit it'll die on its own. I also think it is a rather fundamental failure to see the big picture. Not efficient? Well neither was the Ford model T. Newer generations are getting better. Similarly somehow existing systems seem to get a free pass for things that are…

> I'm rather mistrustful of people that are this forthy about being against a new technology. I don't really give a crap about what people do or don't do with new technology, ultimately what people want to spend their time and money on is up to them. However, "Crypto" is different. If all it was was just the unbelievably irritating crypto bros rug pulling, ponzi scheming, wash trading, ugly NFT shilling and hacking a…

Where are all these crypto bros that everyone seems so upset about?

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#146

Post by nemo44x »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #17

Just remembered a couple of years ago I mentioned to a couple of friends that once the Feds zero interest rate policy ends cyrpto will collapse.

Half the Nasdaq is down a whole lot more than BTC. I don’t think BTC is the most sensitive asset w/r/t interest rates and the market is proving that.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#147

Post by Gordonjcp »

lordofgibbons wrote: post #10

I will gladly stop using Monero if someone can tell me how to privately transact over the internet without CC companies (and others) spying on me and selling my data. Until there is a better solution, I'll keep using it.

Your "data" is not worth anything. No-one is spying on you. You are not interesting.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#148

Post by Gordonjcp »

McDyver wrote: post #75
edent wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand this privacy argument - but I'm wondering what the practical downside is of this "spying"? I've been using credit cards online for decades and I am yet to encounter anything negative from doing so. I get that my credit card provider knows that I'm buying £X of goods from merchant Y. But unless that merchant is very specific, the card company doesn't know what I've bought. And, if it did... so what? Perha…

It's good you live somewhere where hiding your sexuality is not an issue. But, for argument's sake let's say you can be put in jail or killed for your sexuality. You want to buy something from a specific store that caters exclusively to your sexual preferences. The CC company sells that to your government (or another entity wanting to enforce that), then you are arrested or killed, or you family harassed.

> But, for argument's sake let's say you can be put in jail or killed for your sexuality.

Maybe don't live in a shithole country then. Use some of your money to move somewhere sensible.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#149

Post by ephbit »

> WEAVER: Yes. So let’s take the cost of a transaction. The cost of a transaction in cryptocurrency systemically is the amount being used to protect it. I could build a system that would have the same throughput as Bitcoin, three to seven transactions per second, but with a centralized trusted entity. In fact, not even a centralized trusted entity. Ten trusted entities, only six of which need to be honest, because I use a majority vote system. I could do it on ten computers that look like this, that would burn as much power as a light bulb.

Okay, so Mr Weaver can conjure some "ten trusted entities" by simply wishing them into existence.

Either he doesn't understand why one cannot simply create a "trusted entity" out of thin air .. which would mean, he's not actually an expert who anyone should listen to .. or he consciously makes a lazy attempt at formulating an argument that superficially sounds reasonable, while not having any substance.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#150

Post by tromp »

prepend wrote: post #124
peyton wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So far no-one has been able to point me at a single thing that public public blockchains do that either is worth doing and is only possible using blockchain tech, or is better (more power efficient, faster) than using pre-existing technology. Using privacy coins I can donate money to causes I believe in (eg WikiLeaks) without fear of reprisal and with the knowledge that the funds will reach their recipient. If you…

This is a good use case for crypto, but it’s ruined by all the speculation and boom/bust. I don’t need $30,000k Bitcoin to support Wikileaks and my blogger. $10 Bitcoin works perfectly for this. But people hype and fraud coins to heights they shouldn’t be and make it useless for actual use. I think Eth is a good idea. I like smart contracts. But Etherium doesn’t need to be $3k and transactions shouldn’t be $10. $1 Et…

> I don’t need $30,000k Bitcoin

> Etherium doesn’t need to be $3k

The reason they're priced so high is because most of the supply has gone to early adopters (and its creators in case of the 70% premined Ethereum) leaving late adopters in fear of missing out and fighting over crumbs.

> we can just pick dogecoin

Dogecoin admittedly has higher inflation, but still had early miners getting 50x more reward than current ones. If you want to deter speculation, it makes more sense to just have a fixed reward, i.e. a pure linear emission, that maintains a high inflation for the first few decades.

Post reply on HN