451–460 of 470 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's not actually happening, if you look at the amount of money invested in cryptocurrencies and their transaction volume for goods and services compared to fiat currencies.
Very few people watched videos online in 1999, but some people predicted video sites like Youtube back then already. Traditional media called them crazy. Nowadays, people are using barely anything else than the internet for watching videos.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And I don’t mind. So long as they don’t flush the climate down the toilet or affect the mainstream system in any way such as by reducing tax revenue.
You'd have to be blind to not see that the "mainstream system" is the one flushing the climate down the toilet. Bitcoin is just a byproduct of the "mainstream system". It was created by it. It's like the waste product that comes out when refining toxic ancient sludge into oil. And Bitcoin will never go away until the "main stream system" itself dies.
Bitcoin can simply be banned. It’s not that complicated. Note that the ban wouldn’t be on the tech itself, mining or possession. It would simply be a ban at the points of contact with the regular economy. Basically you can’t exchange currency, goods or services for BTC.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very few people watched videos online in 1999, but some people predicted video sites like Youtube back then already. Traditional media called them crazy. Nowadays, people are using barely anything else than the internet for watching videos.
The blockers back then were bandwidth and CPU/GPU power to watch online videos. As soon as the technology made it practical it took off like lightning. Bitcoin payments don’t have any such fundamental blockers. Anyone with a smartphone can send or receive Bitcoin easy. Yet acceptance of Bitcoin for payments has not taken off at all. If anything it’s declined in recent years.
This is true when it comes to businesses accepting crypto for non-financial products or services. Even though there are scalability, security and UX issues with crypto, I don't think that the main blockers for business adoption are technological or that people don't want to use it, but related to business risk.
Crypto regulation has tightened over the last couple of years. Depending on local laws, businesses have to follow KYC and AML laws, complicated bookkeeping procedures, check received coins for a potential history of criminal activity and more. It looks like the regulatory risk for accepting crypto payments seems much higher than just using a commercial third party gateway. That's probably why crypto fintech companies are exploding, while many other businesses cannot deal with the complexity.
For the near-term future, I would expect that many of the third-party gateways allow you to use your existing coins, while they deal with most of that complexity and export relevant tax data for you. Many people now own crypto assets, so a subset of them will want or have to use them.
Maybe we will see a push for more crypto-friendly regulation, once regular use of crypto through middlemen is normalized and only then direct use of p2p crypto can really bloom.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems like a fair solution that could have the same impact - if the pollution tax is high enough and the mining profits are low enough then mining would no longer be profitable. At a minimum it at least makes sure people are "cleaning up after themselves" by paying to mitigate the damage they cause
Exactly, and then its not limited to just bitcoin, but any process that creates pollution (coal power, dirty manufacturing, forest removal, etc). If pollution stops being free, the market will finally be incentivized to reduce it.
I haven't actually seen the numbers before but this is pretty absurd:
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/02/Glo...
> Globally, subsidies remained large at $4.7 trillion (6.3 percent of global GDP) in 2015 and are projected at $5.2 trillion (6.5 percent of GDP) in 2017
> coal and petroleum together account for 85 percent of global subsidies
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The blockers back then were bandwidth and CPU/GPU power to watch online videos. As soon as the technology made it practical it took off like lightning. Bitcoin payments don’t have any such fundamental blockers. Anyone with a smartphone can send or receive Bitcoin easy. Yet acceptance of Bitcoin for payments has not taken off at all. If anything it’s declined in recent years.
> If anything it’s declined in recent years. This is true when it comes to businesses accepting crypto for non-financial products or services. Even though there are scalability, security and UX issues with crypto, I don't think that the main blockers for business adoption are technological or that people don't want to use it, but related to business risk. Crypto regulation has tightened over the last couple of years.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And how do much armaments do you have on hand and how do you plan to deliver it to your guerillas?
None, yet, for lack of a cause as well as a guerilla army to fight for it. Should I ever get the urge to find a cause and an army I know I'll go long on tools of war and short on digital currencies. As stated, an SD card full of hitcoins will hit no harder than a card without such a load, i.e. not at all. Any digital currency which relies on an internet connection suffers from this problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
None, yet, for lack of a cause as well as a guerilla army to fight for it. Should I ever get the urge to find a cause and an army I know I'll go long on tools of war and short on digital currencies. As stated, an SD card full of hitcoins will hit no harder than a card without such a load, i.e. not at all. Any digital currency which relies on an internet connection suffers from this problem.
thing is, you can't fully block internet connectivity in your country. Unless you want to destroy it fast, of course. And if you don't completely block all internet access, people will find ways to send a transaction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly, and then its not limited to just bitcoin, but any process that creates pollution (coal power, dirty manufacturing, forest removal, etc). If pollution stops being free, the market will finally be incentivized to reduce it.
This is totally how I feel, and it's even worse than that - we're still subsidizing fossil fuels, so we're not only NOT taxing the pollution, we're actually helping to make it cheaper for companies to do. I think step 1 should be stopping all the subsidies. I haven't actually seen the numbers before but this is pretty absurd: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/02/Glo... > Globally, subsidies remain…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If anything it’s declined in recent years. This is true when it comes to businesses accepting crypto for non-financial products or services. Even though there are scalability, security and UX issues with crypto, I don't think that the main blockers for business adoption are technological or that people don't want to use it, but related to business risk. Crypto regulation has tightened over the last couple of years.…
It amuses me how cryptocurrency boosters invariably point to other actors being the reason why relative adoption is low, instead of looking within to its own weaknesses, like the user experience sucking. It always has to be someone else's fault.
But back to the point, do you think the external factors that I mentioned do not count?
I mean darknet markets prefer monero over paypal, since they are ignoring regulation anyway and need an anonymous payment method..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It amuses me how cryptocurrency boosters invariably point to other actors being the reason why relative adoption is low, instead of looking within to its own weaknesses, like the user experience sucking. It always has to be someone else's fault.
I don't know what you are talking about. Many people are working on inherent problems, such as UX issues, blockchain trilemma, regulatory integration and so on. That does not mean that there are no external factors too. Why can't we have a discussion about crypto without labeling people as some kind of dishonest idiots? But back to the point, do you think the external factors that I mentioned do not count? I mean dar…
Because 99% of crypto boosters make the other 1% look bad. Admit and address the money laundering, scamming, cult behavior, and planet-destroying aspects of it first, then let's talk.