4 ms·

This isn't a "blockchain" discussion, this is a discussion about an application of blockchain. It's clear that this isn't just a cryptocurrency, but a bank usin

This isn't a "blockchain" discussion, this is a discussion about an application of blockchain. It's clear that this isn't just a cryptocurrency, but a bank using the cryptocurrency label to avoid regulation - thats why it needs to be stopped. You should read the comments in this and the announcement article (still on front page since yesterday) as it seems you are confused.

seibelj 7y ago
A week ago the pitchfork commenters would say anyone that uses blockchain is clearly an idiot because a centralized database is superior in every way. Suddenly everyone is agreeing that blockchain technology has value! I’m just so shocked
- icebraining 7y ago
  Your shock comes from the misconception that the two are incompatible. The crucial point here is that FB is creating a currency they control. It can still be true that FB are idiots for using a blockchain instead of a database.
- Lewton 7y ago
  The other thread is full of people lambasting Facebook for using a blockchain when it’s not really needed since it’s a centralized currency in practice
- snarf21 7y ago
  No, the issue as GP says is that they are using crypto as a label to avoid regulation. They are using a "but it is a decentralized blockchain" argument to try to avoid all the regulations they can't/don't want to meet. This whole association is really just a new banking conglomerate. That wouldn't pass muster without full compliance. This is just the normal "try to skirt the laws" startup mentality so you can create exploitable margin over your competitors that actually follow the rules.
buboard 7y ago
How is it different from USDT and other stablecoins in that respect? Must USDT be stopped?
- supermatt 7y ago
  you mean the coin that was unable to pay out funds (and doesn't guarantee they will)? that has refused to show proof of its reserves? that lends its reserve funds to “partners” to cover up missing funds in their reserves? that has recently admitted that there is only 0.74 dollars in the reserve for every dollar invested? How is that "stable"? yeah, that kind of shit must be stopped. you disagree?
  - buboard 7y ago
    > yeah, that kind of shit must be stopped. you disagree? Actually i don't disagree. And look, facebook coin has addressed all these issues from the get-go.
    - supermatt 7y ago
      If you read the white paper - heck, even if you just read the comments here - you would see that Libra doesn't solve these issues at all. It just gives that power to facebook and partners - as well as the ability to earn (in perpetuity) commissions, interest, etc on user invested funds. There is nothing for the consumer here, this is just another way to make money by becoming a bank in everything but name (and regulation). Sure we can "trust" (this is central to current proof of stake systems) that facebook et al won't do anything nefarious, but I'm not sure we should be trusting facebook at all, let alone with our money.
      - buboard 7y ago
        It solves the issues you mentioned, but it creates other issues with being overcentralized. David marcus of facebook says that in the future they may change or decentralize the platform, but we can't take their promise of course. > There is nothing for the consumer here, i disagree on that, i could use it to earn micropayments from facebook users tomorrow, this can be pretty impactful. > by becoming a bank in everything but name (and regulation). Cryptocurrencies are regulated, even though their status is still not well defined, and this will actually pressure the US SEC to set their standards more rigorously. KIK is already trying to push for that. I don't have a problem with facebook becoming a bank, it's not like banks have a stellar reputation either.

seibelj 7y ago

A week ago the pitchfork commenters would say anyone that uses blockchain is clearly an idiot because a centralized database is superior in every way. Suddenly everyone is agreeing that blockchain technology has value! I’m just so shocked

icebraining 7y ago
Your shock comes from the misconception that the two are incompatible. The crucial point here is that FB is creating a currency they control. It can still be true that FB are idiots for using a blockchain instead of a database.
Lewton 7y ago
The other thread is full of people lambasting Facebook for using a blockchain when it’s not really needed since it’s a centralized currency in practice
snarf21 7y ago
No, the issue as GP says is that they are using crypto as a label to avoid regulation. They are using a "but it is a decentralized blockchain" argument to try to avoid all the regulations they can't/don't want to meet. This whole association is really just a new banking conglomerate. That wouldn't pass muster without full compliance. This is just the normal "try to skirt the laws" startup mentality so you can create exploitable margin over your competitors that actually follow the rules.

buboard 7y ago

How is it different from USDT and other stablecoins in that respect? Must USDT be stopped?

supermatt 7y ago
you mean the coin that was unable to pay out funds (and doesn't guarantee they will)? that has refused to show proof of its reserves? that lends its reserve funds to “partners” to cover up missing funds in their reserves? that has recently admitted that there is only 0.74 dollars in the reserve for every dollar invested? How is that "stable"? yeah, that kind of shit must be stopped. you disagree?
- buboard 7y ago
  > yeah, that kind of shit must be stopped. you disagree? Actually i don't disagree. And look, facebook coin has addressed all these issues from the get-go.
  - supermatt 7y ago
    If you read the white paper - heck, even if you just read the comments here - you would see that Libra doesn't solve these issues at all. It just gives that power to facebook and partners - as well as the ability to earn (in perpetuity) commissions, interest, etc on user invested funds. There is nothing for the consumer here, this is just another way to make money by becoming a bank in everything but name (and regulation). Sure we can "trust" (this is central to current proof of stake systems) that facebook et al won't do anything nefarious, but I'm not sure we should be trusting facebook at all, let alone with our money.
    - buboard 7y ago
      It solves the issues you mentioned, but it creates other issues with being overcentralized. David marcus of facebook says that in the future they may change or decentralize the platform, but we can't take their promise of course. > There is nothing for the consumer here, i disagree on that, i could use it to earn micropayments from facebook users tomorrow, this can be pretty impactful. > by becoming a bank in everything but name (and regulation). Cryptocurrencies are regulated, even though their status is still not well defined, and this will actually pressure the US SEC to set their standards more rigorously. KIK is already trying to push for that. I don't have a problem with facebook becoming a bank, it's not like banks have a stellar reputation either.