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

Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 665 posts

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#261

Post by PragmaticPulp »

blackearl wrote: post #257
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When a company sells more shares, they money they raise from selling those shares contributes to the value of the company. If a company sells 100,000 shares at a dollar each, the company is now worth $100,000 more because they now have another $100,000 on their balance sheet. No value is lost in this process. > This is why a stock will tank when a company talks about diluting their existing shares by creating new sha…

Value is lost to existing shareholders who have the value of their shares diluted. Everything you're saying may seem logical, but economics is often illogical and any 1:1 $:stock sales still tank the share price.

> Value is lost to existing shareholders who have the value of their shares diluted.

You're confusing percentage dilution with absolute diluation.

The shares represent the value of the company. The value of the company has increased by the amount of money raised. Each share represents a lower percentage of the company, but this is offset by the fact that the value of the company has increased by the amount of money raised. The shares have not been diluted on an absolute value scale.

Owning 10% of a company worth $1mm is the same value as owning 5% of a company worth $2mm.

If you own 10% of a $1mm company that raises another $1mm by selling more shares, you now own 5% of a 2mm company. Your percentage ownership is diluted, but your value has not been stolen.

This is basic pre- and post-investment math. Shareholders are diluted on a percentage basis, but not on an absolute basis.

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#262

Post by LockAndLol »

I thought Session(1), a signal fork, was ridiculous for adding a crypto currency, but now Signal is doing it too?

I don't want this stuff in my messenger. It's supposed to send messages, not money. This is just going to accelerate my departure from Signal - or at least the official client.

1: https://getsession.org/

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#263

Post by fwip »

chrisco255 wrote: post #244
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is incorrect. Stock represents actual ownership of a scarce resource (a company). That company would have value whether or not it was explicitly sold as a stock. The value doesn’t come from the stock. Cryptocurrency removes the underlying asset and simply sells shares of artificial scarcity. It’s only as valuable as what people decide to trade it at, because it doesn’t represent ownership of anything other than…

> This is incorrect. Stock represents actual ownership of a scarce resource (a company). That company would have value whether or not it was explicitly sold as a stock. The value doesn’t come from the stock. Depending on the voting rights embedded in the share, your ownership is likely meaningless. It doesn't guarantee you rights to dividends necessarily and even if it does, the company can just choose to never issue…

It's both provably scarce and artificially scarce.

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#264

Post by selsta »

AfouToPatisa wrote: post #182
raspyberr wrote: post #131

Super sad that they didn't choose Monero.

Multiple reasons why MOB over monero but I will state only the most practical one, using the stellar consensus a tx takes 3-5sec. With monero that's more like 1-2mins if Im not mistaken which is a big no-no for the usecase of instant mobile private payments. Fees are also super low w/ mob (0.01) TLDR: UX

XMR transaction can show up instantly once they are in the mempool, a user does not have to wait for a confirmation to see a transaction. Obviously there are uses where you want to wait for confirmations, but for the use case of sending money to friends it isn't necessary.

Fees are also in a similar range (0.01).

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#265

Post by mbesto »

josh2600 wrote: post #210
mbesto wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does a decentralized communication system need a defi based payment system that has the requirement of a CEO to run it?

I don't run anything related to the protocol. The protocol governed by the MobileCoin Foundation, an independent board of directors. The foundation makes recommendations about how the network might behave, but ultimately it's up to the node operators to decide what code they run.

So what organization are you the CEO of? Is it a for-profit entity? What is that entities relation to the protocol?

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#266

Post by akvadrako »

MithrilTuxedo wrote: post #227
Geee wrote: post #83

There are 250 million units of mobilecoin, and majority of them are owned by the founders. Only 37.5 million have been distributed. With current price ($65), they're worth $14B already. This makes the project a scam and impossible for it to work as a reliable money that holds value. Bitcoin had no pre-mine and has been fairly distributed from the start.

Agreed. I was half expecting this was going to be using Monero, one of the more popular privacy-oriented cryptocurrencies I know of that's already being used. E.g. the only cryptos I've seen people accepting on dark web markets are Bitcoin and Monero.

Monero is clearly the most practical secure coin as evidenced by it's popularity on the darknet. But I think what MobileCoin offers is speed.

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#267

Post by fblp »

josh2600 wrote: post #174
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The founding organization owns 85% of the total market cap of a coin? That should be raising red flags for everyone involved. There is no valid reason for the vast majority of what is supposedly a currency to be owned by the company that created it. Imagine if PayPal launched but required everyone to transact in fractional shares of PayPal to get anything done. Oh and by the way, those shares are majority owned by th…

The majority of the MobileCoins are available for purchase for non-us persons at https://www.buymobilecoin.com right now.

There is only a "contact us" link on that page.

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#268

Post by PragmaticPulp »

chrisco255 wrote: post #244
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is incorrect. Stock represents actual ownership of a scarce resource (a company). That company would have value whether or not it was explicitly sold as a stock. The value doesn’t come from the stock. Cryptocurrency removes the underlying asset and simply sells shares of artificial scarcity. It’s only as valuable as what people decide to trade it at, because it doesn’t represent ownership of anything other than…

> This is incorrect. Stock represents actual ownership of a scarce resource (a company). That company would have value whether or not it was explicitly sold as a stock. The value doesn’t come from the stock. Depending on the voting rights embedded in the share, your ownership is likely meaningless. It doesn't guarantee you rights to dividends necessarily and even if it does, the company can just choose to never issue…

> your ownership is likely meaningless

That's not true. The shares still represent a claim on the underlying company.

If someone wants to acquire the company, they have to compensate you for the shares that you hold.

Companies can't simply wave a magic wand and steal value from shareholders. There's more to stock ownership than voting rights.

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#269

Post by thaumasiotes »

doggosphere wrote: post #259
lottin wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin rates worse than North Korea in terms of wealth distribution as measured by the Gini coefficient. [1] [1] https://blog.dshr.org/2018/10/gini-coefficients-of-cryptocur...

A system which is 12 years old, of which many people have not heard about, don't understand, or may not even care to understand. In some countries its illegal to use. Most countries have unfriendly tax treatment (capital gains on your coffee purchase). Can't be paid in it. Can't yet pay your federal taxes in it. Uncertain if the government will one day ban it.

> Most countries have unfriendly tax treatment (capital gains on your coffee purchase).

That's definitely unfriendly tax treatment. Is it different from the tax treatment that applies to national currencies?

Re: Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cryptocurrency

#270

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

Again, Signal shows there's some undercurrents going on constantly in the organization and bringing private and ethical messaging solution to the public is not the sole goal. Another affirmation for those who kept on recommending Matrix/GNU Jami/XMPP instead.

At this point, if you really need this broad functionality Signal are aiming to provide, why not Status.im? At least their tech is cool.

Post reply on HN