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

Why I’m Cryptophobic

bvp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 455 posts

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#421

Post by silentsea90 »

clintonwoo wrote: post #406
silentsea90 wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing personal but your view of Govt is very very trust based, while mine is of skepticism. Executive order 6102[1] where the US Govt seized Gold from rank and file citizens is an example of the State's power when they chose to exercise it. This was back in the day when USD was pegged and the Govt didn't have money. So no, not just criminals, in fact, holding gold was criminal. BTC being seizure proof is critical a…

I'm not actually born/raised in US, only moved here 5 years ago. Thanks for the response as I wasn't aware of the gold seizures. I would still say based on the practicality if you look at any cryptocurrency it would falter under the load of transactions as large as the whole US for example. So it's a bit early to bet the farm on any one of them. Also if a govt will support cryptocurrency they will create their own on…

The govt can create their own but would you trust them? Central bank digital currencies are simply a Blockchain version of fiat and comes with the same list of problems - centralized issuance (ie infinite printing), but much worse eg. Govt adding code to control how you spend - which can help control spending during inflationary times and absolutely kills any notion of a free market. What the govt wants isn't always what happens especially in the west.

Lightning network on Bitcoin already supports a higher throughput than visa

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#422

Post by throwaway413 »

aaaaaaaaata wrote: post #415
throwaway413 wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind elaborating please? I am not following your point. I understand cash has this same issue. Assets do not - they provide an actual value to the physical world - which is what my point was in the above statement. A crypto t shirt can still provide value as a t shirt, regardless of the value of the coins it holds. I’ll admit it’s a reach, but just to illustrate the point.

Bitcoin is the same value-add as cash because you can basically redeem it anywhere now, with few speedbumps if any due diligence is done.

This doesn’t really address the point. As I said above, yes cash and crypto have this same flaw, they are useless without the ability to trade it. What is a dollar good for? Wrapping a stick of gum? That was the point. True utility value.

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#423

Post by j0hnyl »

mjburgess wrote: post #4

There needs to be some basic economics here.. Money has value because of the value of the economic transactions in which its conducted. Government-backed currencies are forced to have value in the sense they force people to use it for their taxes. The US, additionally, forces the world to use it for oil trades. Value is in those economic transactions. A currency is just a "liquifying" of that value, to make it easier…

Uh... BTC transactions are happening all the time?

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#424

Post by olalonde »

LtWorf wrote: post #390
olalonde wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Debit/credit card transactions are done through centralized systems. Bitcoin transactions can also be done at scale on those same centralized systems (aka "off-chain transactions").

Then you are back to having a bank… Then what's the point?

Your money can't be debased. You can withdraw your money from your bank (digitally).

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#425

Post by jrm4 »

aaaaaaaaata wrote: post #413
jrm4 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've perfectly hit why "Smart Contracts" are perhaps literally the worst named thing in tech. They're not smart, and they're not contracts. In real life, the things we "Contracts" are not the the execution of the transaction itself, they are the written statement that attempts to describe the intent of the parties and most importantly -- what you do if things go wrong. Despite what I've said above, I will definitel…

They're definitely contracts, just programming ones, not legal.

While I'm generally not a language prescriptivist, I gotta say no here. In real life, up until now, AFAIK we have NEVER used the word "contract" to refer to the underlying act that the contract is about. We've ALWAYS used it to refer to the associated documentation/statements of intent about the humans involved.

"Building a house" is not a contract. It's an act.

They're NOT CONTRACTS. They're automated transaction robots.

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#426

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

jrm4 wrote: post #425
aaaaaaaaata wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're definitely contracts, just programming ones, not legal.

While I'm generally not a language prescriptivist, I gotta say no here. In real life, up until now, AFAIK we have NEVER used the word "contract" to refer to the underlying act that the contract is about. We've ALWAYS used it to refer to the associated documentation/statements of intent about the humans involved. "Building a house" is not a contract. It's an act. They're NOT CONTRACTS. They're automated transaction ro…

> up until now

I gave up telling people not to call cryptocurrency "crypto" — I would suggest suggesting a better term, or expect to be disappointed/it to continue.

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#427

Post by jrm4 »

aaaaaaaaata wrote: post #426
jrm4 wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm generally not a language prescriptivist, I gotta say no here. In real life, up until now, AFAIK we have NEVER used the word "contract" to refer to the underlying act that the contract is about. We've ALWAYS used it to refer to the associated documentation/statements of intent about the humans involved. "Building a house" is not a contract. It's an act. They're NOT CONTRACTS. They're automated transaction ro…

> up until now I gave up telling people not to call cryptocurrency "crypto" — I would suggest suggesting a better term, or expect to be disappointed/it to continue.

Again, different -- This isn't a mere choice of word thing. It's that uninformed people are making harmful, and perhaps even stupid, choices because they are relying on an effectively false phrase -- where the "real version" of the thing is essentially a safety mechanism, and overzealous tech bro types absolutely incorrectly believe that their thing can replace the real thing.

Now, as a lawyer, I could just sit back and wait for the f**ups to happen and get paid cleaning them up -- and I might -- but also, I like the idea of warning people as well.

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#428

Post by LtWorf »

aaaaaaaaata wrote: post #419
LtWorf wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gold works when the internet is down :)

So does handing over a physical wallet. Also, nobody quits MasterCard et al because it relies on the internet...the transactions are cached, and the few problems when things come back online are dealt with as a standard "doing business" item — everywhere from insurance agencies to corner stores.

I do carry cash for when mastercard is down. Because I tend to get in a bad mood if I can't eat due to internet issues (or any other issue).

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#429

Post by clintonwoo »

silentsea90 wrote: post #421
clintonwoo wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not actually born/raised in US, only moved here 5 years ago. Thanks for the response as I wasn't aware of the gold seizures. I would still say based on the practicality if you look at any cryptocurrency it would falter under the load of transactions as large as the whole US for example. So it's a bit early to bet the farm on any one of them. Also if a govt will support cryptocurrency they will create their own on…

The govt can create their own but would you trust them? Central bank digital currencies are simply a Blockchain version of fiat and comes with the same list of problems - centralized issuance (ie infinite printing), but much worse eg. Govt adding code to control how you spend - which can help control spending during inflationary times and absolutely kills any notion of a free market. What the govt wants isn't always…

Sure but what if the US govt decided to launch a 51% attack on btc anyway?

I don't argue that blockchain tech will keep improving. I just say if it's going to be a currency of the future why do we have to spend money on it now? Won't we be able to create parallel blockchains to increase token supply? It's not an intrinsically valued asset, like buying a stock (which some have returned more money than speculative bitcoin purchasing). Why should the bitcoin believers tell everybody to buy it if there's nobody accepting it for payments?

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#430

Post by naveen99 »

clintonwoo wrote: post #429
silentsea90 wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The govt can create their own but would you trust them? Central bank digital currencies are simply a Blockchain version of fiat and comes with the same list of problems - centralized issuance (ie infinite printing), but much worse eg. Govt adding code to control how you spend - which can help control spending during inflationary times and absolutely kills any notion of a free market. What the govt wants isn't always…

Sure but what if the US govt decided to launch a 51% attack on btc anyway? I don't argue that blockchain tech will keep improving. I just say if it's going to be a currency of the future why do we have to spend money on it now? Won't we be able to create parallel blockchains to increase token supply? It's not an intrinsically valued asset, like buying a stock (which some have returned more money than speculative bitc…

A 51% attack is on specific counterparties, not the entire network. counterparties have other ways to punish such an attack: 1. Refuse repeat business, 2. Decrease credit rating etc.
Post reply on HN