5 ms·

Yes, avoiding banks for international wire transfer and avoiding a banks for storing money are use cases that some people use crypto for. But these are not worl

Yes, avoiding banks for international wire transfer and avoiding a banks for storing money are use cases that some people use crypto for. But these are not world changing to my original point, you could have done that with physical moving money or putting it under your bed.

vineyardmike 5y ago
There is no world changing feature needed to make it a valid and useful system. even you could agree that while you could ship cash across the ocean, crypto is way easier and frankly more secure. Existing solutions never stop people from inventing new ones. Again, plenty of DeFi applications are way more accessible than fiat counterparts and that’s a unique feature that probably can’t exist elsewhere - better availability of certain types loans for trading, ability to earn income from providing liquidity to exchanges, decentralized exchanges without third parties. Not all defi is particularly useful or better than fiat counterparts, eg a crypto mortgage will not likely exist anytime soon.
- gitfan86 5y ago
  Sounds like we are on the same page. You could build a trading platform on top of a NoSQL database instead of a distributed database. If people used that platform and found value in it, it would be valid. I don't know if you read the article but the last paragraph is what inspired my original comment. FTA in quotes below. "If crypto and DeFi are truly that great for innovation now, isn't it kind of ironic that after nine months of work, I'm starting to realize that my project's challenges don't lie within technology but are made of legal uncertainty?" Unfortunately people are getting the idea that crypto technology is revolutionary and jumping in with unrealistic expectations.
alexatalktome 5y ago
Dude, are you trying to miss the point to score internet argument wins? This man is writing large, thoughtful explanation -complete with concessions and limits- that is not hyped and not biased and you’re latching on to minor details and using that as a reason to poo-poo the logic? You’re petty arguing against a calm factual explanation. They’re not even good arguments. “You could have done that by putting it under your bed” is so silly and intellectually dishonest. Try to imagine the other side here, and at least consider the possibility that there is room for additional value beyond your world view. At least try to see the other side even if you won’t want to see from the other side.
- gitfan86 5y ago
  I certainly appreciate that he makes concessions and thoughtfully explains his side. But my point is pretty simple, as I said in the beginning crypto isn't a world changing technology. It has marginal use cases like being cheaper for some specific countries that to do wire transfers. I never said it was never going to have any use cases ever. I'm more than happy to learn about more use cases as they appear. But nothing new has been presented here. As far as intellectual dishonest goes, storing your wealth in physical items that are in your physical possession is something that people actually do. I personally don't do that, but the reality is that some people don't trust banks and they don't trust a network of computers. To say that it is dishonest to point out that there were already alternatives to banks seems inaccurate.

vineyardmike 5y ago

There is no world changing feature needed to make it a valid and useful system. even you could agree that while you could ship cash across the ocean, crypto is way easier and frankly more secure. Existing solutions never stop people from inventing new ones. Again, plenty of DeFi applications are way more accessible than fiat counterparts and that’s a unique feature that probably can’t exist elsewhere - better availability of certain types loans for trading, ability to earn income from providing liquidity to exchanges, decentralized exchanges without third parties. Not all defi is particularly useful or better than fiat counterparts, eg a crypto mortgage will not likely exist anytime soon.

gitfan86 5y ago
Sounds like we are on the same page. You could build a trading platform on top of a NoSQL database instead of a distributed database. If people used that platform and found value in it, it would be valid. I don't know if you read the article but the last paragraph is what inspired my original comment. FTA in quotes below. "If crypto and DeFi are truly that great for innovation now, isn't it kind of ironic that after nine months of work, I'm starting to realize that my project's challenges don't lie within technology but are made of legal uncertainty?" Unfortunately people are getting the idea that crypto technology is revolutionary and jumping in with unrealistic expectations.

alexatalktome 5y ago

Dude, are you trying to miss the point to score internet argument wins? This man is writing large, thoughtful explanation -complete with concessions and limits- that is not hyped and not biased and you’re latching on to minor details and using that as a reason to poo-poo the logic? You’re petty arguing against a calm factual explanation. They’re not even good arguments. “You could have done that by putting it under your bed” is so silly and intellectually dishonest. Try to imagine the other side here, and at least consider the possibility that there is room for additional value beyond your world view. At least try to see the other side even if you won’t want to see from the other side.

gitfan86 5y ago
I certainly appreciate that he makes concessions and thoughtfully explains his side. But my point is pretty simple, as I said in the beginning crypto isn't a world changing technology. It has marginal use cases like being cheaper for some specific countries that to do wire transfers. I never said it was never going to have any use cases ever. I'm more than happy to learn about more use cases as they appear. But nothing new has been presented here. As far as intellectual dishonest goes, storing your wealth in physical items that are in your physical possession is something that people actually do. I personally don't do that, but the reality is that some people don't trust banks and they don't trust a network of computers. To say that it is dishonest to point out that there were already alternatives to banks seems inaccurate.