5 ms·

I think that is a really bad line of logic. There are lots of things that have been around for a long time and make some people plenty of money that are bad thi

by slivym 8y ago

I think that is a really bad line of logic. There are lots of things that have been around for a long time and make some people plenty of money that are bad things. Pyramid schemes fit your definition - should I start buying in? The opposite way to pose this is: Cryptocurrencies have been around for 9+ years, and there has been literally 0 use for it apart from conning rubes on the internet. The important thing to ask is whether it has a purpose and has it delivered on that purpose. There's really only one theoretical purpose that it's meant to serve - being free from tyrannical government. Well that kind of worked when capital fled into it from China - but there's also been crack downs. It also doesn't explain the US fascination. I think there comes a point where 9 years in, you have to ask: What purpose does cryptocurrency serve beyond enriching people who are already invested.

briandear 8y ago
Who cares? If people want to play in Bitcoin, what difference does it make. Nobody is being forced.
- axoltl 8y ago
  Did you read the article? I believe it highlights the difference it makes.
  - hackerman12345 8y ago
    It'll force us to fix our infrastructure and be prepared for the future, sounds like a good thing.
    - stordoff 8y ago
      Preparing the infrastructure for uses that it was never intended, and most people will never use, doesn't sound like a good thing to me -- it sounds like a waste of money.
- adsfasdfsad111 8y ago
  i love reading comments about bitcoin on HN. They are just oozing of bitterness cause they don't understand it and missed the boat lol
- Analemma_ 8y ago
  > Who cares? If people want to play in Bitcoin, what difference does it make. The externalities. This very thread is about how Bitcoin is messing up power grids and will soon be responsible for a non-negligible percentage of Earth's entire power usage (and the attendant pollution). It's not consequence-free fun.
Sir_Substance 8y ago
>Cryptocurrencies have been around for 9+ years, and there has been literally 0 use for it apart from conning rubes on the internet. That's weird, I've been using it to buy stuff off amazon and aliexpress. Am I a conned rube? Does that mean Visa is conning rubes as well?
- acdha 8y ago
  > That's weird, I've been using it to buy stuff off amazon and aliexpress. How? Neither company seems to accept Bitcoin directly.
  - bdcravens 8y ago
    Purse.io lets you buy from Amazon
    - acdha 8y ago
      Is Amazon accepting the Bitcoin or is that just a way to convert it into real money first? If the seller doesn't know, it doesn't count as Bitcoin usage — just another Visa transaction.
      - Sir_Substance 8y ago
        >If the seller doesn't know, it doesn't count as Bitcoin usage — just another Visa transaction. You've got some strong arms on you my friend, moving those goal posts so far so fast. I pay with bitcoin. Stuff arrives in the mail. I am using bitcoin.
        acdha 8y ago
        That’s as accurate as saying that Amazon accepts payments in stock if I sell some before making a purchase. The fact that you paid a different company to convert your Bitcoin into some real currency is a separate transaction. It doesn’t mean that Amazon has any exposure or investment in the Bitcoin world - just that they take credit cards like everyone else.
bdcravens 8y ago
I'm not arguing necessarily for its utility or intrinsic worth, just that it's entrenched and far from the inevitable house of cards that detractors wish for. Call it gambling if you will. What is the intrinsic value of a game of blackjack? None, yet an entire industry is propped up by it.
SimbaOnSteroids 8y ago
>What purpose does cryptocurrency serve beyond enriching people who are already invested. Limited scope and obviously doesn't justify the money that is swirling in crypto right now. However, if we want digital things to be non-fungible we're probably going to need something like a block chain. Cryptokitties(as beanie-baby-esque as they are) and the implementation of the ERC-271 token come to mind. Again I realize cryptokittes are not really a great example other than proof of concept, but imagine with me for a second a fine art market where all the art is digital, this requires a decentralized non-fungible token, maybe digital house or car keys would be another thing where we want to limit the number of people with access to the thing, again if we don't want to trust someone like say equifax, with control over that we're going to want a decentralized non-fungible token. I realize these aren't necessarily the best examples of non-fungible assets we might want one day. However it seems absurd to me that moving forward society won't at some point demand some digital asset that is non-fungible. If that assumption holds true then some form of cypto-currency is going to be necessary to provide such an asset.

by slivym 8y ago

briandear 8y ago

Who cares? If people want to play in Bitcoin, what difference does it make. Nobody is being forced.

axoltl 8y ago
Did you read the article? I believe it highlights the difference it makes.
- hackerman12345 8y ago
  It'll force us to fix our infrastructure and be prepared for the future, sounds like a good thing.
  - stordoff 8y ago
    Preparing the infrastructure for uses that it was never intended, and most people will never use, doesn't sound like a good thing to me -- it sounds like a waste of money.
adsfasdfsad111 8y ago
i love reading comments about bitcoin on HN. They are just oozing of bitterness cause they don't understand it and missed the boat lol
Analemma_ 8y ago
> Who cares? If people want to play in Bitcoin, what difference does it make. The externalities. This very thread is about how Bitcoin is messing up power grids and will soon be responsible for a non-negligible percentage of Earth's entire power usage (and the attendant pollution). It's not consequence-free fun.

Sir_Substance 8y ago

>Cryptocurrencies have been around for 9+ years, and there has been literally 0 use for it apart from conning rubes on the internet. That's weird, I've been using it to buy stuff off amazon and aliexpress. Am I a conned rube? Does that mean Visa is conning rubes as well?

acdha 8y ago
> That's weird, I've been using it to buy stuff off amazon and aliexpress. How? Neither company seems to accept Bitcoin directly.
- bdcravens 8y ago
  Purse.io lets you buy from Amazon
  - acdha 8y ago
    Is Amazon accepting the Bitcoin or is that just a way to convert it into real money first? If the seller doesn't know, it doesn't count as Bitcoin usage — just another Visa transaction.
    - Sir_Substance 8y ago
      >If the seller doesn't know, it doesn't count as Bitcoin usage — just another Visa transaction. You've got some strong arms on you my friend, moving those goal posts so far so fast. I pay with bitcoin. Stuff arrives in the mail. I am using bitcoin.
      - acdha 8y ago
        That’s as accurate as saying that Amazon accepts payments in stock if I sell some before making a purchase. The fact that you paid a different company to convert your Bitcoin into some real currency is a separate transaction. It doesn’t mean that Amazon has any exposure or investment in the Bitcoin world - just that they take credit cards like everyone else.

bdcravens 8y ago

I'm not arguing necessarily for its utility or intrinsic worth, just that it's entrenched and far from the inevitable house of cards that detractors wish for. Call it gambling if you will. What is the intrinsic value of a game of blackjack? None, yet an entire industry is propped up by it.

SimbaOnSteroids 8y ago

>What purpose does cryptocurrency serve beyond enriching people who are already invested. Limited scope and obviously doesn't justify the money that is swirling in crypto right now. However, if we want digital things to be non-fungible we're probably going to need something like a block chain. Cryptokitties(as beanie-baby-esque as they are) and the implementation of the ERC-271 token come to mind. Again I realize cryptokittes are not really a great example other than proof of concept, but imagine with me for a second a fine art market where all the art is digital, this requires a decentralized non-fungible token, maybe digital house or car keys would be another thing where we want to limit the number of people with access to the thing, again if we don't want to trust someone like say equifax, with control over that we're going to want a decentralized non-fungible token. I realize these aren't necessarily the best examples of non-fungible assets we might want one day. However it seems absurd to me that moving forward society won't at some point demand some digital asset that is non-fungible. If that assumption holds true then some form of cypto-currency is going to be necessary to provide such an asset.