3 ms·
That doesn't follow though. Your thesis is "the problem it solves is making money" but then in the second paragraph you say the problem is already solved in oth
by shatteredgate 5y ago
That doesn't follow though. Your thesis is "the problem it solves is making money" but then in the second paragraph you say the problem is already solved in other ways that don't involve any web3 or cryptocurrency.
Maybe you could revise it to "The problem it solves is making money without the government knowing what you're doing" but that seems like the type of statement that would attract tax cheats, ransomware distributors, and other criminals, and it's also not really true of cryptocurrency anyway; most governments have already made moves to regulate cryptocurrency.
- maxwell 5y agoIf your problem is rodent infestation, yeah, you can use mouse traps. And people can make "better" mouse traps, depending on preferences around cruelty, from glue boards to Havaheart. But rat poison is cheaper, simpler, and more effective, specifically second-generation anticoagulants [1]. They're alternatives, with trade-offs. The problem with rat poison and most blockchains are the environmental externalities. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29527251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29527251
- shatteredgate 5y agoTo me the problem with blockchains is that they don't actually do anything except cause environmental externalities. That seems to be their entire purpose, done in the service of keeping the currency deflationary so the early investors continue getting richer off of new participants. I've read countless articles and technical papers about them and, aside from the whole ponzi scheme aspect, I still can't understand why anyone would choose it over any other distributed database that doesn't require transaction fees and a proof-of-something system to keep the system online.