3 ms·
So as a non-cryptocurrency suppporter, what's the point then? Making things distributed necessarily makes it slower and harder/more expensive to regulate (let a
by banachtarski 9y ago
So as a non-cryptocurrency suppporter, what's the point then? Making things distributed necessarily makes it slower and harder/more expensive to regulate (let alone operate). Not to mention the high volatility which is the primary thing that gives a currency any value (hence, why the US Dollar is considered the reserve currency of the world: its stability). At some point, a duck is a duck. This duck is a fun experiment and someone discovered how to combine proof of work (old concept) with quorums (old concept) and a distributed ledger (old concept) that altogether gave the illusion of something unique and usable. I'm seeing worse usability on all fronts, no endgame in sight (except to move to a new currency when transaction fees get high), little to no regulation, and a worser world in general. It's also ecologically irresponsible (centralized currencies will _always_ be more efficient by definition).
I don't care that I can make a quick buck by preying on people's FOMO, the whole movement is fueled by seemingly emotional, albeit baseless, arguments and bravado.