Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is an improvement over gold though, which has an insane cost to move from the us to china.
Crypto had the ability to improve on both gold and cash though.
[deleted]
Crypto Fooled Us Once. It Will Fool Us Again
171–175 of 175 posts
Re: Crypto Fooled Us Once. It Will Fool Us Again
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Settlement times on dollars is generally 3 days at best. If I do a card payment the merchant knows they'll get the money inside a few seconds. Same if I use cash, or a bank transfer.
"knows they'll get the money" is different than actually has the money. And they don't know, there could be a chargeback, the credit card company could decide their business is illegitimate and withhold funds, the federal government could intervene and stop the funds. It is absolutely not the same as cash or bitcoin.
Sure, but the risk is low enough that Aldi is happy to let me take my food out of the store within a second or two of tapping my card. For the _extreme_ vast majority of life, that's plenty.
Re: Crypto Fooled Us Once. It Will Fool Us Again
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you assume I don't know how Bitcoin works? Because I'm not using sat/byte, which would only confuse the casual reader? My point was that for regular payments that regular people do Bitcoin is simply too expensive for. The average transaction amount is indeed very useful to backup that statement.
I assume you don't know how bitcoin works because you are using the same arguments against it that most ignorant people use. The fact that you do know about it and you are still boiling things down to those explanations/arguments is even more discouraging to me. This is hacker news, we don't need to boil things down for the casual reader here, this audience wants to understand the detailed nuances and their implicati…
So my argument, that Bitcoin is too expensive which you even agree with, is wrong because "ignorant people" use it?
It's amazing the amount of mental gymnastics Bitcoin maximalists come up with.
Re: Crypto Fooled Us Once. It Will Fool Us Again
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume you don't know how bitcoin works because you are using the same arguments against it that most ignorant people use. The fact that you do know about it and you are still boiling things down to those explanations/arguments is even more discouraging to me. This is hacker news, we don't need to boil things down for the casual reader here, this audience wants to understand the detailed nuances and their implicati…
So my argument, that Bitcoin is too expensive which you even agree with, is wrong because "ignorant people" use it? It's amazing the amount of mental gymnastics Bitcoin maximalists come up with.
Let me try and say it more simply:
Your argument is kinda like saying, "this 1 ton pickup uses too much gas."
My argument is kinda like saying, "this 1 ton pickup uses too much gas, if all you are doing is driving yourself around town. But if you really need to haul some cargo, it's a great vehicle."
Is that mental gymnastics? If so then I guess I'm guilty.
Re: Crypto Fooled Us Once. It Will Fool Us Again
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've drifted off-course. We were talking about whether or not double spends are possible in Bitcoin and now you're arguing about how banks deal with fraud refunds. peace!
It prevents double spends under a set of assumptions. One of the assumptions it makes is that the Bitcoin code on your device faithfully implements the system in the paper. It doesn't claim to be the thing that causes that assumption to be valid; you have to ensure that using separate means.
Therefore, Bitcoin code has to have been always free of bugs (malicious or accidental). That has not been the case and will not be the case. The assumption doesn't hold, and double spends are therefore possible.