6 ms·
I won’t call you dumb, but you can only stretch an analogy so far. And some weirdos trading pizza arcade tokens like they are real money is not at all the same
by bongobongo 7y ago
I won’t call you dumb, but you can only stretch an analogy so far. And some weirdos trading pizza arcade tokens like they are real money is not at all the same as one of the richest companies in the world trying to disrupt the global currency market for gain. Since you asked—that’s the difference, that’s what has got people “upset.”
- lammalamma25 7y agoFair enough. I definitely see the potential downside of them doing this. It seems like people are saying this is bad because of who is doing it though. Not what is being done. I find it a tough spot because I think something like Libra (A nation-less currency) is a really good idea. But it will take some sort of large fiat backing to happen. IMO the decentralized model isn't really working.
- grenoire 7y agoIt is a situation where the who is the what. It's the way forward to a dystopian sci-fi trope: Corporate-owned and minted money that transcends national fiat currencies. The implications of which have again been extensively discussed in aforementioned media.
- mtnGoat 7y agoNationless doesn't really exist in this case, whether they like it or not Facebook is still regulated by national laws of the jurisdiction they are incorporated in. As you are seeing now with US regulators considering stepping in. If they were supporting crypto they'd work with one of the x000 existing crypto currencies. Not sure they are adding any value by creating Libra aside for gaining control. And that ultimately is what bothers me.