251–260 of 736 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm in EU, you in US? Send me $50.000 in the weekend through your bank. Let's see how fast it goes. I'll send you any amount you want with Nano: Try to beat that!
It'll presumably take more than one second to convert it to a usable currency, i.e. Euros. How often do you need $50k without being able to wait a business day?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We have forgotten why we used cryptocurrencies in the first place. The original promise of cryptocurrency was to become independent from banks. Lots of things evolve and change and their original intent is twisted. It’s ok. Life goes on.
> Lots of things evolve and change and their original intent is twisted. It’s ok. Life goes on. Maybe, but that doesn't mean that a technology is still useful after it's lost its unique selling proposition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>These are insane fees ripe for disruption. The disruption is already well underway. The only thing that slowed down DEX's eating of a bigger part of the market share is the current high fees on Ethereum.
DEX's are certainly nice, but at least for the time being if you have any significant volume of trading the the actual swap fees on the DEX will eat more of your gains than a centralized exchange will. Before factoring in Ethereum gas prices. Somewhere like Uniswap (most popular DEX on Ethereum) takes 0.3% of every trade plus price impact issues. At $50k volume, maker fees on Coinbase Pro are 0.15%, and your limit or…
The bigger benefit for the time being is that it allows you to trade pairs that aren't even yet on exchanges (Coinbase is famously slow to add anything, and still doesn't even have multiple top 10 projects). There is also nothing stopping DEXs from partially lowering the fees in the future as the technology stabilizes.
Of course, I don't expect them to eat all of CEX's business but an increasing portion of it and it is a pretty significant disruption.
> Hodl: A term used in the crypto community for holding a crypto asset through ups and downs, rather than selling it. I appreciate the glossary
Many have forgotten why we used cryptocurrencies in the first place. The original promise of cryptocurrency was to become independent from banks. In the end CoinBase (like every exchange) is a great product, but just a bank. It's centralized, hackable, has economies of scale, etc.
> We have forgotten why we used cryptocurrencies in the first place. The original promise of cryptocurrency was to become independent from banks. Who is “we”? Outside of criminal enterprises, no one has ever used Bitcoin for anything other than speculation and the occasional novelty purchase.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don’t speak for everyone there, “we” don’t all have the same reason. I like Bitcoin as a diversification for being a “better version of gold” - it has the scarcity and you can physically own it but it is much easier to store and send anywhere in the world if needed. These properties also mean that in a pinch, if you live in an unstable society or one facing high inflation it can work as an alternative financial syste…
> I like Bitcoin as a diversification for being a “better version of gold” - it has the scarcity ... Why do we repeat the claim of Bitcoin scarcity when we all know it's just a promise and nothing more, there is no technical limitation? All it takes to "print" more Bitcoins is for the majority of miners to agree to make a fork that will allow for more. And that will happen at one point. As for Gold, good luck trying…
Biggest barrier to more gold is technology. There's a ton of it in space.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I like Bitcoin as a diversification for being a “better version of gold” - it has the scarcity ... Why do we repeat the claim of Bitcoin scarcity when we all know it's just a promise and nothing more, there is no technical limitation? All it takes to "print" more Bitcoins is for the majority of miners to agree to make a fork that will allow for more. And that will happen at one point. As for Gold, good luck trying…
> And that will happen at one point. Why?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, admittedly it's not quite there yet but by the end of march 100% of blocks will be produced by independent stake pool operators. The number of current pools is somewhat misleading - switching between them is frictionless, more will keep being added, and there are rules in place so they can't grow too much (staking rewards decrease quickly) and the average # of ADA per wallet is dropping ( I should've really sai…
> there are rules in place so they can't grow too much (staking rewards decrease quickly) I think this refers to the k factor, that puts the "soft limit" on decentralization. This I see as a barrier to entry: Ethereum 2.0 is 32ETH and that's it. Cardano has no monetary fee, but has eventual competition between pools, which is variable, likely ongoing cost. Barrier to entry is less defined, and could at some point gro…
What does it matter here if they have a harder time when none of them are incentivized to even grow to 1%? Even if they do grow, there's plenty of incentive for stakers to move to new ones on the spot. This might mean that e.g. pools will increase their costs due to the risk and stakers will earn a bit less but they still won't grow beyond a point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Satoshi's wallets have 1.1 million bitcoins, which are worth $56.4 billion at today's price. That would place Satoshi Nakamoto among the 25 wealthiest people on the planet.
The question is why that fact alone would affect the value of this company's shares. Just identifying him doesn't mean he'd liquidate.
True, but it is not a super unlikely outcome either. Identification alone could also result in a loss of trust in the system of Satoshi turned out to be, say, a government.
Could go the opposite way too. It's an unknown that is worth calling out.