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

Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

meta.wikimedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 401 posts

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#211

Post by xtracto »

cycomanic wrote: post #98

I find many of the replies here fascinating. On one hand whenever there is talk about government regulating some industry or actor a large portion of commenter here reply that if you don't agree with the practice don't use them, no regulation needed. Now an organisation does exactly that, they decide that they don't want to use a "service" that they ethically disagree with, and lots of replies call it pointless virtu…

I dont think they really care about the environment. If they did, they would accept PoS or similar environmentally friendly cryptos. That way they would be promoting their use instead of the old inefficient PoW ones.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#212

Post by danamit »

topranks wrote: post #201
mardifoufs wrote: post #37

Honestly the reasoning is weird. Don't get me wrong, I think crypto currencies are for the most part a scam, a ponzi scheme or a platform for pump and dumps. Yet the whole thing just does not make sense imo. It's one thing to be against crypto, but refusing it when you are a charity for the most asinine moral purity tests is absurd. This 100% reminds me of the almost cultist like extremely negative reaction to anythi…

- It’s not significant in terms of the funds it brings in. - Crypto has been on a 10+ year long quest for “adoption”. So far it’s been fairly pathetic. Organisations who accept it provide a focal point for crypto advocates to point to, legitimising it and luring more retail investors into the Ponzi. - The environmental impact is massive, which makes accepting it ethically dubious and does not align with the Wikimedia…

I worked and got paid in crypto in the past, which made me able to move out. Also I used crypto to pay for services, I just bought a GPU (for gaming, current one broke, I do not mine crypto) with crypto that's still shipping.

I won't call the adoption pathetic, it is just that you are not in the circle of adoption/need. Just like I see people mentioning services here that they say they cannot live without and I do not care if they close tomorrow and I have no idea what those services do.

Crypto is a needed option, it can be made to be more environmentally friendly. I personally *often* do not (and cannot) benefit from the global banking system despite all the waste it produce from electricity to wasted manpower to the carbon footprint of material for buildings and offices.

Crypto as many other technologies have use cases, believe in the use case, don't be dogmatic. This is no different from "we only need Java in the world why other languages exist?".

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#213

Post by emptyparadise »

Mindwipe wrote: post #52

Ah, another Wikipedia policy designed to exclude sex workers from financial services. I notice this wasn't even raised in the RFC.

How would a sex worker cash out their crypto if all major cryptocurrency exchanges do KYC?

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#214

Post by lxgr »

charcircuit wrote: post #74
dehrmann wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like, if they continued to hold those bitcoins, speculating in the market, rather than feed those funds into running Wikipedia? You don't usually donate to charities so they can speculate with that money.

From the linked page only 0.08% of revenue came from cryptocurrency. It's likely that without that 0.08% margin Wikipedia could still be kept running (which is part of the reason why taking cryptocurrency donations was removed). >You don't usually donate to charities so they can speculate with that money. Similarly one wouldn't want your donation to just sit somewhere reducing in value due to inflation. If you donate…

Is Wikimedia hoarding cash? If so, I’d hope that they would have some kind of money management in place (adhering to the same ethical standards as for payments, as otherwise this move would be quite hypocritical); if not, inflation does not matter.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#215

Post by 0xRolex »

Liquid_Fire wrote: post #117
0xRolex wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, do they really check who donated fiat comes from and refuse donations when it comes from, let's say, anyone involved in anything against their values ?

Checking this may be impractical. But for crypto donations, you don't need to check - you _know_ that it was generated in an environmentally-unfriendly way (at least for the currencies currently accepted).

Since cross chain activity is made available that's not true, I could do 100% of my money on avalanche or solana and bridge some only to donate

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#218

Post by tome »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #132
unicornmama wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you chose to unbank yourself :) I have transacted millions in crypto and wire transfers. Banking with crypto is like the 1970s - exorbitant fees. To do anything useful with it I have to offramp to fiat which drum rolls ends with a wire transfer.

I once wanted to lend money to my brother only to discover that my bank imposes monthly caps on money transfers "for your safety". Cryptocurrencies never do such dumb shit.

This seems unlikely, given that people buy houses with money transfers.

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#219

Post by rapind »

flotzam wrote: post #128
bb88 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly the reasoning is weird. Don't get me wrong, I think crypto currencies are for the most part a scam, a ponzi scheme or a a platform for pump and dumps. and > Yet the whole thing just does not make sense imo. It's one thing to be against crypto, but refusing it when you are a charity for the most asinine moral purity tests is absurd. It seems like the first paragraph you said would be enough of a reason to n…

>> I think crypto currencies are for the most part a scam > enough of a reason to not accept it. Not if that's simply another instance of Sturgeon's law ("90% of everything is crap"): https://nitter.net/mycoliza/status/1451992293532004355

I mean, they aren’t going to accept a donation of SlapChop’s either…

Re: Wikipedia RFC to stop accepting cryptocurrencies passes by majority vote

#220

Post by Liquid_Fire »

0xRolex wrote: post #215
Liquid_Fire wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Checking this may be impractical. But for crypto donations, you don't need to check - you _know_ that it was generated in an environmentally-unfriendly way (at least for the currencies currently accepted).

Since cross chain activity is made available that's not true, I could do 100% of my money on avalanche or solana and bridge some only to donate

Aren't you just moving the work to someone else, who had to mine a Bitcoin block for your donation transaction to go through?
Post reply on HN