3 ms·

It's all explained in https://youtu.be/xCHab0dNnj4 https://youtu.be/xCHab0dNnj4 — the ONE and ONLY thing a public blockchain is useful for is censorship-resista

It's all explained in https://youtu.be/xCHab0dNnj4 https://youtu.be/xCHab0dNnj4 — the ONE and ONLY thing a public blockchain is useful for is censorship-resistant payments. Which might include good things (donation to your favorite whistleblower or buying weed or whatever) but definitely WILL include bad things — for example it is uniquely well-suited for paying ransoms, hence the ransomware explosion! Again, this is the ONLY thing. It is horrendously bad in every way, there's just no other choice for this kind of usage.

dorgo 5y ago
Aren't "censorship-resistant payments" part of "not based on trust" thing - which gp excluded as legitim explanation?
- floatboth 5y ago
  These are different, and both are very important technical terms. It's not correct to exclude them. "Not based on trust" is the precise reason why proof-of-work mining exists.
PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
> censorship-resistant payments ... that are useless unless you can also buy something you need with the contents of your cryptowallet. Which is a big if, although clearly the answer is sometimes "yes".
- floatboth 5y ago
  You can buy actual money on the exchanges, so you "can" "buy" anything. That's why the assholes who write ransomware accept bitcoin.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    But if you do that, the payment is no longer "censorship resistant", because the exchanges deal in government controlled currency.
bko 5y ago
What about the ability to hold your savings in a currency that's prohibited by your government? Places with high inflation often have capital controls that make it illegal to hold foreign currency. You see your savings get cut in half every year and there's nothing you can do about it. It would be great if there was a political solution where governments don't impose capital controls on their people. But in the mean time, crypto allows you options to hold a more stable currency (e.g. stable coin), or at least one that doesn't only go in one direction.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

dorgo 5y ago

Aren't "censorship-resistant payments" part of "not based on trust" thing - which gp excluded as legitim explanation?

floatboth 5y ago
These are different, and both are very important technical terms. It's not correct to exclude them. "Not based on trust" is the precise reason why proof-of-work mining exists.

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago

> censorship-resistant payments ... that are useless unless you can also buy something you need with the contents of your cryptowallet. Which is a big if, although clearly the answer is sometimes "yes".

floatboth 5y ago
You can buy actual money on the exchanges, so you "can" "buy" anything. That's why the assholes who write ransomware accept bitcoin.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  But if you do that, the payment is no longer "censorship resistant", because the exchanges deal in government controlled currency.

bko 5y ago

What about the ability to hold your savings in a currency that's prohibited by your government? Places with high inflation often have capital controls that make it illegal to hold foreign currency. You see your savings get cut in half every year and there's nothing you can do about it. It would be great if there was a political solution where governments don't impose capital controls on their people. But in the mean time, crypto allows you options to hold a more stable currency (e.g. stable coin), or at least one that doesn't only go in one direction.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]