3 ms·

> - Facebook built this, yes, but they do not have full control. In both governance and validation, they have 1 vote of 28 (currently, the number is supposed to

> - Facebook built this, yes, but they do not have full control. In both governance and validation, they have 1 vote of 28 (currently, the number is supposed to go to 100 by launch). Will Facebook have the largest deployed Libra wallet? Yes, at least initially. Can anybody make a Libra wallet? Yes. The Ethereum hack and the subsequent actions have already put holes into the decentralized - no one controls anything - argument. In Ethereum's case we at least had two chains existing because everyone can run whatever chain they want. With Libra, a corporate product, you can bet that though it looks like Facebook doesn't have any significant influence, covertly they will control the largest vote share. If not, there is no point for them to build this product. > This isn't a data play, it's very clearly a play at getting a bunch of people in developing markets that can only pay with cash right now the ability to pay online. The rise of mobile banking through e-wallets like WeChat Pay, upcoming Whatsapp Pay, Google Pay, Paytm etc are already breaking down the barriers to banking. People often don't need banking accounts to use these ewallet products.

carlosdp 7y ago
> If not, there is no point for them to build this product. The second point you mentioned literally disproves this point. There's a massive opportunity for making money if Libra works exactly like they say it does. Google Pay and friends can't move into emerging markets because they depend on banking infrastructure that doesn't exist there. WeChat maybe could, but that's a scary thought, so I'm glad this alternative will exist.
- thisisit 7y ago
  First of all, I like that you skirted around the fact that the point made was about Facebook's control and not the product's existence. Still, how does it disprove the point? Most ewallets are designed to solve the fact that there is no banking infrastructure in developing countries. Libra will still need the same infrastructure to get people to buy those coins. > WeChat maybe could, but that's a scary thought, so I'm glad this alternative will exist. People who use WeChat everyday don't care. It seems sometimes SV fails to understand what they care about and what their customers want are two different things.
  - dwild 7y ago
    > Libra will still need the same infrastructure to get people to buy those coins. Go try to offer Paypal to people in developing countries! Libra is a cryptocurrency. I can sell it, you can sell it, anyone can sell it. You can't sell Paypal "currency" in developing countries (well you could, but they would either need an account with wrong informations or use your account directly for the transaction, which in both case doesn't make sense) but you certainly can sell Libra currency pretty easily. That's the beauty of it. If Libra takes off, Facebook won't have to build infrastructure anywhere, simply because it will be simple (and relatively profitable) for anyone to build infrastructure anywhere and act as a middlemen.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - carlosdp 7y ago
    I didn't skirt around it. Your argument was hand wavy and essentially saying "they must be in control because why else would they do it?" My counter-point is the reason is very clear, and very upfront in their materials. > Most ewallets are designed to solve the fact that there is no banking infrastructure in developing countries. Um...no? Most ewallets are designed by extreme Libertarians that believe that we would be better off without government regulation, or that government collapse and somehow them having Bitcoin will make them safe.
    - thisisit 7y ago
      So, you consider a concrete example where Ethereum, a coin which was touted as a decentralizated and later exhibited centralization by trying to stop the Ethereum hack by changing the code as "hand wavy"? So let me ask you directly without any hand waving - how will Facebook or anyone handle a big Libra hack without trying to centralize the power? > Most ewallets are designed by extreme Libertarians that believe that we would be better off without government regulation, or that government collapse and somehow them having Bitcoin will make them safe. What are you talking about? I have given examples of ewallets like Paytm and Wechat Pay which work without bank accounts and you start talking about Bitcoin. sigh I give up.

carlosdp 7y ago

> If not, there is no point for them to build this product. The second point you mentioned literally disproves this point. There's a massive opportunity for making money if Libra works exactly like they say it does. Google Pay and friends can't move into emerging markets because they depend on banking infrastructure that doesn't exist there. WeChat maybe could, but that's a scary thought, so I'm glad this alternative will exist.

thisisit 7y ago
First of all, I like that you skirted around the fact that the point made was about Facebook's control and not the product's existence. Still, how does it disprove the point? Most ewallets are designed to solve the fact that there is no banking infrastructure in developing countries. Libra will still need the same infrastructure to get people to buy those coins. > WeChat maybe could, but that's a scary thought, so I'm glad this alternative will exist. People who use WeChat everyday don't care. It seems sometimes SV fails to understand what they care about and what their customers want are two different things.
- dwild 7y ago
  > Libra will still need the same infrastructure to get people to buy those coins. Go try to offer Paypal to people in developing countries! Libra is a cryptocurrency. I can sell it, you can sell it, anyone can sell it. You can't sell Paypal "currency" in developing countries (well you could, but they would either need an account with wrong informations or use your account directly for the transaction, which in both case doesn't make sense) but you certainly can sell Libra currency pretty easily. That's the beauty of it. If Libra takes off, Facebook won't have to build infrastructure anywhere, simply because it will be simple (and relatively profitable) for anyone to build infrastructure anywhere and act as a middlemen.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- carlosdp 7y ago
  I didn't skirt around it. Your argument was hand wavy and essentially saying "they must be in control because why else would they do it?" My counter-point is the reason is very clear, and very upfront in their materials. > Most ewallets are designed to solve the fact that there is no banking infrastructure in developing countries. Um...no? Most ewallets are designed by extreme Libertarians that believe that we would be better off without government regulation, or that government collapse and somehow them having Bitcoin will make them safe.
  - thisisit 7y ago
    So, you consider a concrete example where Ethereum, a coin which was touted as a decentralizated and later exhibited centralization by trying to stop the Ethereum hack by changing the code as "hand wavy"? So let me ask you directly without any hand waving - how will Facebook or anyone handle a big Libra hack without trying to centralize the power? > Most ewallets are designed by extreme Libertarians that believe that we would be better off without government regulation, or that government collapse and somehow them having Bitcoin will make them safe. What are you talking about? I have given examples of ewallets like Paytm and Wechat Pay which work without bank accounts and you start talking about Bitcoin. sigh I give up.