4 ms·
I've always found it ironic how companies like Coinbase are indirectly contributing to their own destruction with every passing transaction that's not purely ba
by Uptrenda 11y ago
I've always found it ironic how companies like Coinbase are indirectly contributing to their own destruction with every passing transaction that's not purely based around Bitcoin. This is of course: assuming that Bitcoin gets as big as a lot of people think it will. If it does: their increased focus on centralization and traditional fintech services (which is completely incompatible with the philosophy behind Bitcoin) is like shorting the entire currency on a long position, and will eventually be unsustainable. But I guess if they're right: all they're doing is profiting from the hype. If we look at what Bitcoin actually is, companies like Coinbase couldn't be further apart from what they're actually selling (philosophy, economics, and technologically) so I consider them nothing more than a bunch of hypocrites.
I wonder what it's like working for a company that's so obviously full of shit? How would you reconcile the obvious contradictions in what you're doing every day? I guess it would be kind of like working at the ministry of truth and then getting paid directly in lies.
- colordrops 11y agoBitcoin is a protocol, not a philosophy. Can you explain how accepting Bitcoin through Visa transactions is a bad thing besides spreading FUD? Bitcoin is decentralized and Visa adoption doesn't change that. I'm not a fan of Coinbase but your argument is unfounded.
- mithaler 11y agoBy this logic, Coinbase basically can't win. If they do what they need to do to allow Bitcoin to become popular -- that is, make it as pleasant to use as a bank with credit and debit cards -- they essentially become a bank, thus earning the scorn of the Bitcoin community. But if they don't, Bitcoin remains a niche product that no one besides a few ideological supporters with axes to grind will ever use.
- zekevermillion 11y agoThis is a false dichotomy. Bitcoin is a useful protocol for other things besides consumer payments. It is also possible that even if Coinbase's value proposition is 99% as an exchange, there may still be some value to its users in providing a convenient device for extracting $ from their btc balances. Someday I could see Coinbase as a sort of wrapper around multi-currency wallets. Users may have btc, ltc, $, and various other digital assets which they (stupidly or not) wish to leave in one repository.
- s73v3r 11y agoBut if they do that, they will potentially grow the Bitcoin community, and beyond those that scorn any kind of institution.
- adrianmacneil 11y agoAs someone who used to work at Coinbase, hopefully I can shed some light on this. First of all, Bitcoin should not be seen primarily as a currency, but as a protocol. Therefore, bitcoin does not need to increase in value for it to be successful, and in the long term the price is irrelevant. Bitcoin can be used as a medium of exchange without regard to the price, and many people at Coinbase believe in this future (rather than bitcoin becoming a widely used currency held directly by end users, at least in the near future). Secondly, many people at Coinbase believe deeply in the decentralized (and potentially anonymous/privacy-focused) aspects of using bitcoin as a currency (myself included). However, bitcoin cannot be successful as a currency unless it is easy to exchange between bitcoin and your local currency, and bitcoin won't gain worldwide acceptance until it is easy to (a) exchange bitcoin and (b) spend bitcoin. Therefore, Coinbase's primary goal is to make buying and selling bitcoin as easy as possible, so that we can enable a future where financial privacy is optional (versus today, where it is basically inescapable).
- pharrington 11y agoThis is the value proposition as far as I can see. If I'm not a speculator, but am using bitcoin to exchange goods, the only thing it adds are ways to be tracked.
- mirimir 11y ago> ... so that we can enable a future where financial privacy is optional (versus today, where it is basically inescapable). This is a typo, right? Financial privacy today is basically impossible, not inescapable. Tracking is basically inescapable, unless one uses cash. And using cash is becoming virtually illegal.