2 ms·

It's not just me though, almost everyone can see for what it is right now. A digital Las Vegas casino, where everyone is 'hodling', trying to get rich by losin

It's not just me though, almost everyone can see for what it is right now. A digital Las Vegas casino, where everyone is 'hodling', trying to get rich by losing their money while not using it for payments at all.

yellowapple 5y ago
Okay. That doesn't change the fact that some of us do see it and use it as more than just gambling - and if we're doing so in a way without negative externalities (e.g. via proof-of-stake or literally anything other than proof-of-work), then it seems entirely irrational to want to ban it on the sole basis of "I don't like it therefore nobody should use it".
- colesantiago 5y ago
  > Okay. That doesn't change the fact that some of us do see it and use it as more than just gambling Still doesn't change the fact that it's all a house of cards based on waste and still exhibits a ponzi scheme (Proof of Stake is still bad) with no value. I can't think of any other usecases out there other than scams, ransomware, money laundering and illicit trade on darknet markets. Is that what you mean by other usecases? What does crypto do better that the current system can't do? I cannot think of any in crypto that the current system already does better. I can see that Monero is a complete success story where Bitcoin failed in its original vision. But then again it can't get out of being used outside of darknet markets, so it is generally unusable and banned by most companies, exchanges and fiat off-ramps. It is possible for this to go to ALL cryptocurrencies.
  - yellowapple 5y ago
    > Still doesn't change the fact that it's all a house of cards based on waste That ain't a fact; again, proof-of-stake exists and is used for no less than 3 of the top 10 cryptocurrencies. > and still exhibits a ponzi scheme [...] with no value Just because you refuse to see the value in something doesn't mean it's "a ponzi scheme with no value". > Proof of Stake is still bad Care to quantify how? > I can't think of any other usecases out there other than scams, ransomware, money laundering and illicit trade on darknet markets. Really? You're incapable of thinking how it might be used for licit trade? Or for decentralized finance applications? Or for arbitrary computing, in the case of e.g. Ethereum and Cardano? The technology has already been used for these things. > What does crypto do better that the current system can't do? Sending and receiving money electronically with minimum fees, maximum speed, and no limitations on how much or how little of your money you can send or receive. No, I ain't talking about Bitcoin; I'm talking about the countless other cryptocurrencies that have made transaction costs and speeds an actual priority - you know, almost as if blockchains are a new technology and not done evolving. Hell, even if we do talk about Bitcoin in that context, its "slow" transaction settlement time is still considerably faster than those of credit card networks; I'm sure you've noticed that when a credit card transaction is "accepted" it still takes a day or more to actually move out of "pending" status and fully reflect on your card statement, whereas with Bitcoin the same level of assurance (if not more) happens within 10 minutes on average. > It is possible for this to go to ALL cryptocurrencies. It doesn't need to; not every single cryptocurrency needs to succeed at its goals for the concept of cryptocurrency to be useful or beneficial to society.
    - colesantiago 5y ago
      So PayPal, WorldRemit, M-Pesa, Paytm and Transferwise doesn't fix this already? 13 years and still no progress. I see no coin that is accepted widely that does anything you just proposed that is decentralised. Your argument is still at cost to the planet and other people's money in this MLM scheme that we cannot deny exists. Proof of Stake is pointless and defeats the point of decentralisation as many of these coins claim to be with venture capitalists and whales holding most of the coins. Also most of these blockchains are pretty much beta, just don't work and scale at all. You might as well use the current system instead. We both can see that DeFi applications are mostly scams [0] leading to people losing their money or having an expensive and pointless refund process when it all goes wrong. [1] [0] https://rekt.news/ https://rekt.news/ [1] https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/24/22800995/constitutiondao-refund-progress-steep-gas-fees-cryptocurrency https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/24/22800995/constitutiondao...
      - yellowapple 5y ago
        > So PayPal, WorldRemit, M-Pesa, Paytm and Transferwise doesn't fix this already? These are by and large wrappers around the existing systems; they "fix" it the same way things like Lightning fix Bitcoin's transaction speed (for example): by offloading off the main network. > 13 years and still no progress. Credit cards have had a 20-or-so year head start, and they only recently (i.e. around the same time as the advent of cryptocurrency) started to significantly evolve beyond magnetic stripes. Wire transfers are even worse off in terms of evolutionary speed. 13 years is still young. > Your argument is still at cost to the planet Not with proof of stake. > and other people's money in this MLM scheme By this logic literally every asset bought and sold in a market is an "MLM scheme". > Proof of Stake is pointless It only seems that way if you're deliberately ignorant of its vast advantages over both proof of work and centralized systems - particularly, the sheer lack of a "cost to the planet" and the ability to scale without ever needing to incur such an externalized cost. > and defeats the point of decentralisation as many of these coins claim to be with venture capitalists and whales holding most of the coins There are proof-of-stake blockchains like Cardano that actively penalize centralization and encourage decentralization (specifically by adjusting stake rewards such that any stake pool above some equilibrium becomes unprofitable). > Also most of these blockchains are pretty much beta But not all; again, 3 of the top 10 are already proof-of-stake, with billions of dollars' worth of currency being transacted every day. Some are still being actively developed; that doesn't make them "beta", just like how Linux is both production-ready and still actively developed. > just don't work and scale at all The users of them - and the billions of dollars transacted through them - beg to differ. And we're still in the early stages; there is still plenty of room for scalability to improve: https://iohk.io/en/blog/posts/2021/09/17/hydra-cardano-s-solution-for-ultimate-scalability/ https://iohk.io/en/blog/posts/2021/09/17/hydra-cardano-s-sol...

yellowapple 5y ago

Okay. That doesn't change the fact that some of us do see it and use it as more than just gambling - and if we're doing so in a way without negative externalities (e.g. via proof-of-stake or literally anything other than proof-of-work), then it seems entirely irrational to want to ban it on the sole basis of "I don't like it therefore nobody should use it".

colesantiago 5y ago
> Okay. That doesn't change the fact that some of us do see it and use it as more than just gambling Still doesn't change the fact that it's all a house of cards based on waste and still exhibits a ponzi scheme (Proof of Stake is still bad) with no value. I can't think of any other usecases out there other than scams, ransomware, money laundering and illicit trade on darknet markets. Is that what you mean by other usecases? What does crypto do better that the current system can't do? I cannot think of any in crypto that the current system already does better. I can see that Monero is a complete success story where Bitcoin failed in its original vision. But then again it can't get out of being used outside of darknet markets, so it is generally unusable and banned by most companies, exchanges and fiat off-ramps. It is possible for this to go to ALL cryptocurrencies.
- yellowapple 5y ago
  > Still doesn't change the fact that it's all a house of cards based on waste That ain't a fact; again, proof-of-stake exists and is used for no less than 3 of the top 10 cryptocurrencies. > and still exhibits a ponzi scheme [...] with no value Just because you refuse to see the value in something doesn't mean it's "a ponzi scheme with no value". > Proof of Stake is still bad Care to quantify how? > I can't think of any other usecases out there other than scams, ransomware, money laundering and illicit trade on darknet markets. Really? You're incapable of thinking how it might be used for licit trade? Or for decentralized finance applications? Or for arbitrary computing, in the case of e.g. Ethereum and Cardano? The technology has already been used for these things. > What does crypto do better that the current system can't do? Sending and receiving money electronically with minimum fees, maximum speed, and no limitations on how much or how little of your money you can send or receive. No, I ain't talking about Bitcoin; I'm talking about the countless other cryptocurrencies that have made transaction costs and speeds an actual priority - you know, almost as if blockchains are a new technology and not done evolving. Hell, even if we do talk about Bitcoin in that context, its "slow" transaction settlement time is still considerably faster than those of credit card networks; I'm sure you've noticed that when a credit card transaction is "accepted" it still takes a day or more to actually move out of "pending" status and fully reflect on your card statement, whereas with Bitcoin the same level of assurance (if not more) happens within 10 minutes on average. > It is possible for this to go to ALL cryptocurrencies. It doesn't need to; not every single cryptocurrency needs to succeed at its goals for the concept of cryptocurrency to be useful or beneficial to society.
  - colesantiago 5y ago
    So PayPal, WorldRemit, M-Pesa, Paytm and Transferwise doesn't fix this already? 13 years and still no progress. I see no coin that is accepted widely that does anything you just proposed that is decentralised. Your argument is still at cost to the planet and other people's money in this MLM scheme that we cannot deny exists. Proof of Stake is pointless and defeats the point of decentralisation as many of these coins claim to be with venture capitalists and whales holding most of the coins. Also most of these blockchains are pretty much beta, just don't work and scale at all. You might as well use the current system instead. We both can see that DeFi applications are mostly scams [0] leading to people losing their money or having an expensive and pointless refund process when it all goes wrong. [1] [0] https://rekt.news/ https://rekt.news/ [1] https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/24/22800995/constitutiondao-refund-progress-steep-gas-fees-cryptocurrency https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/24/22800995/constitutiondao...
    - yellowapple 5y ago
      > So PayPal, WorldRemit, M-Pesa, Paytm and Transferwise doesn't fix this already? These are by and large wrappers around the existing systems; they "fix" it the same way things like Lightning fix Bitcoin's transaction speed (for example): by offloading off the main network. > 13 years and still no progress. Credit cards have had a 20-or-so year head start, and they only recently (i.e. around the same time as the advent of cryptocurrency) started to significantly evolve beyond magnetic stripes. Wire transfers are even worse off in terms of evolutionary speed. 13 years is still young. > Your argument is still at cost to the planet Not with proof of stake. > and other people's money in this MLM scheme By this logic literally every asset bought and sold in a market is an "MLM scheme". > Proof of Stake is pointless It only seems that way if you're deliberately ignorant of its vast advantages over both proof of work and centralized systems - particularly, the sheer lack of a "cost to the planet" and the ability to scale without ever needing to incur such an externalized cost. > and defeats the point of decentralisation as many of these coins claim to be with venture capitalists and whales holding most of the coins There are proof-of-stake blockchains like Cardano that actively penalize centralization and encourage decentralization (specifically by adjusting stake rewards such that any stake pool above some equilibrium becomes unprofitable). > Also most of these blockchains are pretty much beta But not all; again, 3 of the top 10 are already proof-of-stake, with billions of dollars' worth of currency being transacted every day. Some are still being actively developed; that doesn't make them "beta", just like how Linux is both production-ready and still actively developed. > just don't work and scale at all The users of them - and the billions of dollars transacted through them - beg to differ. And we're still in the early stages; there is still plenty of room for scalability to improve: https://iohk.io/en/blog/posts/2021/09/17/hydra-cardano-s-solution-for-ultimate-scalability/ https://iohk.io/en/blog/posts/2021/09/17/hydra-cardano-s-sol...