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

It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 225 posts

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#181

Post by smokeyj »

turc1656 wrote: post #167
smokeyj wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> money derives its value from 2 sources: 1) the actual goods and services (GDP) that it represents and 2) the fact that government demands taxes be paid in it. This is historically and factually inaccurate. Currencies typically originated as highly marketable commodities that are naturally scarce and fungible - salt, gold, silver, cigarettes in jail, etc.

sorry, i should have qualified that i was referring to FIAT money. otherwise, it would have no intrinsic value. The examples you give are all physical items that have intrinsic value because they can be used for something other than being money. what i said was directed at fiat only since that is what all modern economies use. without the 2 factors i described, fiat is nothing but useless paper with weird stuff print…

> The examples you give are all physical items that have intrinsic value because they can be used for something other than being money

One could argue that's the definition of real money - but to say Bitcoin isn't real money is to move the goal post when what you mean is Bitcoin isn't a traditional fiat currency. There's no debate there.

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#182

Post by anarcat »

jstanley wrote: post #20
zajd wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting article. But none of the problems described are actually with fiat currency. I see criticisms of the Fed, Banks, Credit Card Companies, Credit Unions. All the problems were due to issues with exchanges and intermediaries and with handling USD. It seems the actual fiat currency part worked fine.

The difference is it's perfectly possible to use Bitcoin on your own without dealing with intermediaries. But you can't send cash over the internet.

you can send cash over snail mail, who needs the internet anyways?

heck, you can transfer huge piles of cash with paper checks, which cost around 75¢ around here, try to beat those kind of fees...

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#183

Post by rgbrgb »

imagist wrote: post #143
shawnb576 wrote: post #42

You can't separate the currency from the ecosystem for anything but academic purposes. The ecosystem is a mess. A commonly cited benefit of crypto-currencies is that they'll eliminate friction and fees in the system, and I think this is only because the systems don't exist. People want security, verifiability, and reversibility when dealing with money. There has to exist companies to do this whether they are Citibank…

Your analogy between Citibank and Coinbase is telling. Citibank is, well, a bank. Coinbase is a currency exchange, and more analogous to those Forex booths you see in airports. There are Bitcoin banks, but putting your Bitcoin into a bank loses the decentralization benefits. Admittedly holding onto your own BTC requires more security than many people are capable of implementing, but better and better solutions are be…

my impression was that the main use of coinbase is as a hosted wallet (bank) for your coins.

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#184

Post by AsyncAwait »

rgbrgb wrote: post #183
imagist wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your analogy between Citibank and Coinbase is telling. Citibank is, well, a bank. Coinbase is a currency exchange, and more analogous to those Forex booths you see in airports. There are Bitcoin banks, but putting your Bitcoin into a bank loses the decentralization benefits. Admittedly holding onto your own BTC requires more security than many people are capable of implementing, but better and better solutions are be…

my impression was that the main use of coinbase is as a hosted wallet (bank) for your coins.

It has that functionality too, but is indeed mainly an exchange.

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#185

Post by james0001 »

smokeyj wrote: post #175
dragontamer wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is currency ever a good store of value? If you're a billionaire you're certainly not storing it in fiat. What? Do you change all of your savings into stocks or bonds each month? Currency is the best short-term store of value. And "short term" means anything I plan to use in the next 6 months (My emergency fund will last 6 months without me being forced to touch my bonds or stocks, giving me breathing room for when…

I never suggested storing your savings in bitcoin. I'm saying the future of storing value is in commodities and equities represented on a blockchain - along with a real time settlement layer allowing people to charge and pay in any denomination of their hearts desire. Heck, you could even pay in certificates of USD represented on the Blockchain if you like.

Hey smokey, you seem to have a good grasp of practical blockchain applications. Was wondering if you think it is feasible to use Blockchain for organic agricultural commodities? The idea being that the transparency blockchain can bring could help more accurately price organic ag commodities, which still are undervalued at that level (no transparency in this market, still getting lumped in with regular ag commodities). Just curious, like a organic commodities exchange using blockchain for significantly faster settlement and ability to audit the identity of a commodity (quantity, quality, location/logistics). Wondering if you think blockchain could have a use in something like that?

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#186

Post by dragontamer »

smokeyj wrote: post #175
dragontamer wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is currency ever a good store of value? If you're a billionaire you're certainly not storing it in fiat. What? Do you change all of your savings into stocks or bonds each month? Currency is the best short-term store of value. And "short term" means anything I plan to use in the next 6 months (My emergency fund will last 6 months without me being forced to touch my bonds or stocks, giving me breathing room for when…

I never suggested storing your savings in bitcoin. I'm saying the future of storing value is in commodities and equities represented on a blockchain - along with a real time settlement layer allowing people to charge and pay in any denomination of their hearts desire. Heck, you could even pay in certificates of USD represented on the Blockchain if you like.

Without the value aspect of it, what would incentivize people to perform proof of work?

Work costs money: like electricity isn't free at the scale of the BTC Network. It costs thousands of dollars of electricity to run those BTC mining rigs to verify the ledger.

----------

If you're saying the future of "blockchains" is just a cryptographically signed ledger, without any proof of work or BTCs being assigned, I think I can agree with you on that.

But at the moment, "blockchain" is the new cloud. No one really knows what a "blockchain" is anymore, aside from a new electronic ledger of some kind. BTC is clearly a blockchain, but a lot of the "blockchain-based technologies" are nothing like BTC at all.

A lot of these "blockchains" are just centralized banks electronically verifying transactions. Like a notarized bill of sale, except the 'notarized' portion is electronic. Proof of work and all that stuff just don't exist in a lot of the "blockchain" solutions coming out.

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#187

Post by eridius »

smokeyj wrote: post #181
turc1656 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sorry, i should have qualified that i was referring to FIAT money. otherwise, it would have no intrinsic value. The examples you give are all physical items that have intrinsic value because they can be used for something other than being money. what i said was directed at fiat only since that is what all modern economies use. without the 2 factors i described, fiat is nothing but useless paper with weird stuff print…

> The examples you give are all physical items that have intrinsic value because they can be used for something other than being money One could argue that's the definition of real money - but to say Bitcoin isn't real money is to move the goal post when what you mean is Bitcoin isn't a traditional fiat currency. There's no debate there.

I think the implication is that BTC has very little intrinsic value. Well, the BTC itself actually has zero intrinsic value, the only intrinsic value in the ecosystem is the blockchain (although the value of the blockchain itself is dependent upon the perceived value of BTC, as its ability to prove data existed at a point in time only works if a sufficient number of people are actually mining blocks, and people mine blocks in order to get BTC).

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#188

Post by quirkafleeg »

3pt14159 wrote: post #180
imagist wrote: post #134

The new title is worse than the first. Sure, it's easier and cheaper to wire USD to another country than it is to exchange USD for BTC, send BTC, and then exchange BTC to USD. Just like it's cheaper to wire USD to another country than it is to exchange USD for literally anything , send that literally anything, and then exchange that literally anything to USD. If you insist on using BTC as a transfer mechanism for USD…

My question is why aren't there transfer companies that just use Bitcoin as an alternative to Swift? Like, you want to send $50 USD to me. You give person A $50, he sends person B $50 worth of Bitcoin, and person B gives me $50 worth of USD. Why do you even need to know about Bitcoin at all? Why isn't it just a cheap(ish) financial resolution layer?

AIUI, it's because the expensive part is not basically updating an internal database when money changes hands (no sending of BTC required), the expensive part is, to take WU as an example, operating half a million brick and mortar locations in 200+ countries.

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#189

Post by eridius »

3pt14159 wrote: post #180
imagist wrote: post #134

The new title is worse than the first. Sure, it's easier and cheaper to wire USD to another country than it is to exchange USD for BTC, send BTC, and then exchange BTC to USD. Just like it's cheaper to wire USD to another country than it is to exchange USD for literally anything , send that literally anything, and then exchange that literally anything to USD. If you insist on using BTC as a transfer mechanism for USD…

My question is why aren't there transfer companies that just use Bitcoin as an alternative to Swift? Like, you want to send $50 USD to me. You give person A $50, he sends person B $50 worth of Bitcoin, and person B gives me $50 worth of USD. Why do you even need to know about Bitcoin at all? Why isn't it just a cheap(ish) financial resolution layer?

This is basically how Stellar works (https://www.stellar.org). It has its own coin, but that coin is meant to be used basically as the grease on the wheels of transferring money rather than as the money itself.

Re: It’s easier and cheaper to use bank wires than Bitcoin

#190

Post by smokeyj »

james0001 wrote: post #185
smokeyj wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never suggested storing your savings in bitcoin. I'm saying the future of storing value is in commodities and equities represented on a blockchain - along with a real time settlement layer allowing people to charge and pay in any denomination of their hearts desire. Heck, you could even pay in certificates of USD represented on the Blockchain if you like.

Hey smokey, you seem to have a good grasp of practical blockchain applications. Was wondering if you think it is feasible to use Blockchain for organic agricultural commodities? The idea being that the transparency blockchain can bring could help more accurately price organic ag commodities, which still are undervalued at that level (no transparency in this market, still getting lumped in with regular ag commodities)…

One problem with organic produce is the shelf-life making speculation potentially tricky. I could see a role for futures and prediction markets to hedge risk and better find the market rate. Check out Augur for example https://www.augur.net/
Post reply on HN