231–240 of 401 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Monero and Monero related projects, like Haveno. Its probably one of the most used cryptocurrencies for normal transactions, as most darkweb marketplaces use it.
> normal transactions ... darkweb marketplaces For some abnormal definition of "normal", ok.
> A community discussion at the administrators' noticeboard has placed all pages with content related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, broadly construed, under indefinite general sanctions, effective 14:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> reasons that are all solved with education Reasons like "risk to the movement’s reputation for accepting cryptocurrencies", solvable with education, sure. People who use cryptocurrencies, NFTs, and other related stuff all have a vested interest in it succeeding. That has led to a lot of people who have annoyingly strong opinions about it. Things like "educating others" by cryptobro-splaining all over things is not…
> ...vested interest in it succeeding. That has led to a lot of people who have annoyingly strong opinions about it. Cryptobro-splainer here. Having been involved from the beginning, I can tell you that detractors (especially vocal ones) are far more invested than proponents. Imagine declaring bitcoin dead in 2014, and then again the next year, and then the next... and while this is going on you can't help but calcul…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Monero and Monero related projects, like Haveno. Its probably one of the most used cryptocurrencies for normal transactions, as most darkweb marketplaces use it.
The highest transaction fee in the last 100 transactions has been 4c. That's not a lot but very far from "feeless". Monero mines blocks every 2 minutes; hardly "instant". A full confirmation takes ~20 minutes. Source: https://www.monero.how/how-long-do-monero-transactions-take
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> required prospective donors to provide an obscene amount of personal data Yes, that’s known as KYC laws, which are required if you’re a payment processor of any kind.
Seems more like preemptive overcompliance. Plenty of reputable charities accept anonymous donations just fine, whether it's cryptocurrency or cash by mail.
They also oppose having ads on Wikipedia. Personally I don't see much difference between banners asking for donations and ads. I understand there are "bad" ads (privacy violating or ones causing conflict of interest), but not all of them are like this. Same with cryptocurrencies - some of them are "scam", but not all of them. It's strange that Wikipedia sees world as black and white.
This is great news, it is pretty pointless to use cryptocurrencies at all anyway since for Wikipedia: > Crypto was around 0.08% of our revenue last year, and it remains one of our smallest revenue channels. Remember that Wikipedia is one of the top 10 websites on the planet, I'm also assuming that other websites trying to accept crypto have even smaller percentages rendering cryptocurrencies as payment useless, not t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Man, there's a baby in that bathwater Wiki RFC are throwing out. There are projects that are fair, were fairly distributed, that work and are secure, that are feeless and instant, all while being truly decentralized. Everything that Bitcoin promised to be and wasn't. So, when the scams die out the best projects willl still exist. It doesn't matter how much of their own face Wikipedia cuts off, but it's sad to see the…
> There are projects that are fair, were fairly distributed, that work and are secure, that are feeless and instant, all while being truly decentralized Name two?
Block lattice tech is very cool. It's been around for over 6 years now, but even here, people seem not to realize that it exists and is fully functional.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
- 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 no…
If in a few years the whole world adopts crypto for payments, then perhaps they should review that.
Until then I'm not sure it's in Wikimedia's interests to be a pioneering "early adopter/supporter" of crypto payments, given the legitimate ethical concerns.