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

One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 299 posts

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#191

Post by lake_vincent »

Yizahi wrote: post #141
lake_vincent wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is more likely is that you would wake up in a world where Bitcoin may not exist, but is completely dominated by crypto nonetheless. Within a generation or two, I predict that all asset ownership will be crypto-backed. Property. Automobiles. Artwork. Securities. And of course, currency. Fiat itself will become a cryptocurrency once more millennials are in charge. I reserve judgement as to whether or not this will…

Could you please describe in your own words how an asset can be "crypto backed", and exactly what operations/interactions are improved by this?

I mean, it is not that hard to imagine, right? A car title becomes an NFT. Whoever owns the NFT owns the car. Same with a house. Or a horse. I'm not a crypto expert, but that is a relatively trivial use case for NFTs.

As for how this scales? I have no idea. I'm just speculating that it's gonna happen somehow. I mean, hell, look at this post - a nation adopted Bitcoin. You think that's the last time a government will experiment with crypto? China is already developing their own fiat cryptocurrency. You think it's just gonna stop?

I don't necessarily want this to happen, nor am I advocating for it. It's just a prediction, so I'm now sure how to answer your questions.

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#192

Post by jonny_eh »

redox99 wrote: post #172
thehappypm wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is sending Bitcoin really any cheaper than using something like Western Union? More convenient maybe.. but also more dangerous

Yes About 1.50 USD bitcoin fee transfer[1][2], no fees for deposits or withdrawals on FTX for both BTC and USD (for > 0.01BTC, around 200 USD)[3]. And 0.07% taker, 0.02% maker fees for trades [4] [1] https://ycharts.com/indicators/bitcoin_average_transaction_f... [2] Could be avoided or greatly reduced if using other cheaper cryptos [3] https://help.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034865571-Blockcha... [4] https://help.…

Compared to what?

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#193

Post by redox99 »

Spellman wrote: post #162
hailwren wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even so, this scheme only makes a little sense. A better approach might have been for the government to have set up a USD-based remittance program of its own. This is just not true. Crypto as foreign remittance has been proven and is working quite well in Argentina. What you really don't want as a layperson in Latin America, is for really any third party -- but especially government third parties, to have control o…

Not really. Argentina is explicitly all about using crypto to get access to US Dollars. And they're all going through intermediaries, some who don't even control their own wallets and are just using available crypto exchanges. So that's a lot of 3rd parties, just not the Argentinian government. https://www.freethink.com/technology/crypto-argentina-black-...

> Argentina is explicitly all about using crypto to get access to US Dollars.

Kind of. It is very complex and I could write an essay, but to put it short, if you receive let's say a SWIFT transfer in USD, EUR, whatever, it will be forcibly converted to ARS (local currency) at an unfair rate: if you tried to buy back USD with the ARS you received, you could only get half of the original amount. It's almost like a 50% tax on any international wire.

Anyway people use crypto for much more than bypassing that. Some are interested in holding crypto, some are interested in holding stable coins, some to arbitrage, and so on. To be clear crypto is not used in day to day transactions (buying coffee) in any shape or form.

> And they're all going through intermediaries

I'm not sure what you mean by this? People here use both Binance/CeXes and hardware wallets the same way it's used in any other country. And unlike other countries, here (because there was already a massive black market for physical US bills) you can very easily trade face to face relatively large amounts (1k-100k USD) of US bills for USDT/USDC. Which is cool because it's the true decentralized way to on-ramp/off-ramp crypto.

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#194

Post by WHATDOESIT »

cuteboy19 wrote: post #150
WHATDOESIT wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, and isn't it the same for BTC then? In the city where I live, there's tons of Bitcoin ATMs everywhere - and people using them, pretty clearly to go around their everyday business, as if it was a bank ATM.

Differences: 1. No one needs btc for education tourism etc. So there is no underlying demand that the general btc holder can middleman onto 2. You aren't supposed to hodl any kind of forex pair hoping it goes up forever. Also I forgot to stress that forex is trading and not investment

These people I see around here need to go to a BTC ATM to have cash for the coffee stand right next to it. What's so different? The scale, OK, but anything else? Actually, people are buying land/houses and cars with BTC here, also the largest local web shop (a large EU seller too) - the local Amazon let's say - accepts it, and they claim it's used for a small but not insignificant chunk of the sales.

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#195

Post by ridgered4 »

cool_dude85 wrote: post #71
SkipperCat wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% agree. The early days of Silk Road showed the true value of Bitcoin. It was a great untraceable currency. Perfect for buying drugs (no moral judgement, just saying what happened). Then, around 2016, CNBC “discovered” crypto and so much investor money and mania jumped in. Now it’s just a value store for dreamers. The fact that the word HODL exists kinda proves that point.

Personally, I like for my untraceable currency not to have a permanent, public ledger showing every transaction I make.

Yes, my understanding of bitcoin is that it is not untraceable at all since the transactions can be followed back to their source, but it was widely perceived as such by dark markets for a number of years. I guess maybe if you mined it yourself (no longer really feasible for an individual?) or somehow purchased it with cash it might be.

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#196

Post by redox99 »

jonny_eh wrote: post #192
redox99 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes About 1.50 USD bitcoin fee transfer[1][2], no fees for deposits or withdrawals on FTX for both BTC and USD (for > 0.01BTC, around 200 USD)[3]. And 0.07% taker, 0.02% maker fees for trades [4] [1] https://ycharts.com/indicators/bitcoin_average_transaction_f... [2] Could be avoided or greatly reduced if using other cheaper cryptos [3] https://help.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034865571-Blockcha... [4] https://help.…

Compared to what?

I was going to calculate it on WU but their webserver banned me for some reason [1]. So there goes the centralized experience lol.

[1] Access Denied You don't have permission to access "http://www.westernunion.com/us/en/send-money/app/price-estim..." on this server.

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#197

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

koonsolo wrote: post #189
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we think like this why wouldn't I invest 1% of my portfolio in lottery tickets? At worst lose 1%, at best x1,000,000 upside?

The reward/risk ratio of lottery tickets is very well known. And it's obviously not in your favor. So it's basically a no brainer not to invest in them. Things like startups for example also have a very high risk rate, but also potential high payouts. There it actually makes sense since the ratio is way better.

> And it's obviously not in your favor.

Yeah, but that payout ratio - millions to one! Bitcoin will never pay out at that level - I don't know if it ever did.

I find it interesting you're arguing that an unknown ratio is preferable to a known one. Bitcoin has a known current cost, but entirely unknown chances and payouts over an unknown duration. There's little reason to assume that Bitcoin will make another massive jump other than optimism that there will be a new wave of true believer bag holders. I know the lottery is going to be drawn each week and I know the cost and the odds, as well as the minimum payout, and the current payout is updated as we get closer to the drawing.

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#198

Post by jandrese »

jonny_eh wrote: post #192
redox99 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes About 1.50 USD bitcoin fee transfer[1][2], no fees for deposits or withdrawals on FTX for both BTC and USD (for > 0.01BTC, around 200 USD)[3]. And 0.07% taker, 0.02% maker fees for trades [4] [1] https://ycharts.com/indicators/bitcoin_average_transaction_f... [2] Could be avoided or greatly reduced if using other cheaper cryptos [3] https://help.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034865571-Blockcha... [4] https://help.…

Compared to what?

Western Union.

https://www.westernunion.com/us/en/send-money/app/price-esti...

I just tried it myself and it says they will charge $60 to send $1000 to the US.

Also, they add this disclaimer:

2 In addition to the transfer fee, Western Union also makes money from currency exchange. When choosing a money transmitter, carefully compare both transfer fees and exchange rates. Fees, foreign exchange rates and taxes may vary by brand, channel, and location based on a number of factors. Fees and rates subject to change without notice.

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#199

Post by fdsffaef334 »

jonny_eh wrote: post #192
redox99 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes About 1.50 USD bitcoin fee transfer[1][2], no fees for deposits or withdrawals on FTX for both BTC and USD (for > 0.01BTC, around 200 USD)[3]. And 0.07% taker, 0.02% maker fees for trades [4] [1] https://ycharts.com/indicators/bitcoin_average_transaction_f... [2] Could be avoided or greatly reduced if using other cheaper cryptos [3] https://help.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034865571-Blockcha... [4] https://help.…

Compared to what?

No post body was provided.

Re: One year on, El Salvador’s Bitcoin experiment has proven a failure

#200

Post by treis »

jonny_eh wrote: post #192
redox99 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes About 1.50 USD bitcoin fee transfer[1][2], no fees for deposits or withdrawals on FTX for both BTC and USD (for > 0.01BTC, around 200 USD)[3]. And 0.07% taker, 0.02% maker fees for trades [4] [1] https://ycharts.com/indicators/bitcoin_average_transaction_f... [2] Could be avoided or greatly reduced if using other cheaper cryptos [3] https://help.ftx.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034865571-Blockcha... [4] https://help.…

Compared to what?

Xoom (Paypal) says $8 to send $200 so 4%. Percentage goes down as the transaction increases in size. At $1,000 it's $16.

The bigger problem is KYC laws. Kind of hard to satisfy them as an illegal immigrant. Suspect that they're getting screwed by the additional middle man willing to break the KYC laws.

Post reply on HN