6 ms·

Right, because cash has never afforded anonymity... always good enough for the government agencies. This is an entirely boring and tired trope. How about the s

Right, because cash has never afforded anonymity... always good enough for the government agencies. This is an entirely boring and tired trope. How about the simple ability to transfer value across international borders, free of extraneous % fees imposed by unnecessary middlemen? That alone is enough of a use case to justify adoption. Banks have reaped rewards unearned for long enough. Those capable and responsible enough to manage their affairs can do so

01acheru 5y ago
Uhm... there is something called law in most of the world which kind of regulate how and why you can or cannot send money across international borders, I will never understand that "crypto let us do it better than banks". You can send 10BTC to me, you're from Azerbaijan and I'm from France, all cool and nice until I want to cash out on that 10BTC... do you think I can receive 380k EUR on my bank without some government agency knocking on my door and accusing me of money laundering, asking me where this money comes from, asking me to pay taxes on it? If you are forbidden by law from sending money from A to B you cannot send it, either because you cannot send from A, you cannot receive in B, a mix of the two or whatever. You can send me crypto but since I cannot buy food with crypto I need to cash out sooner or later so that's end game. If you can send money from A to B it's way cheaper and more secure to send it using our current banking system. And BTW you pay a fee to turn money into crypto, in many cases you pay a fee to send crypto and lastly you pay another fee to turn that crypto back into money, sending crypto is not free.
- chii 5y ago
  > If you are forbidden by law from sending money from A to B you cannot send it the crypto-dream (which, i admit is a nice outcome) is that no entity _could_ make such a transaction forbidden under a new regime of crypto finance. And it is true that today, some gov'ts can have an outsized effect over people that would not be under their juristiction - such as people in iran being sanctioned by the US. Unfortunately, crypto is hardly being used this way, nor will it be in the near to medium term future.
- upsidesinclude 5y ago
  Maybe you'd like to read my post again? Criminality is a trope. Many people that you don't interface with, because they are low stature and status, transfer monies internationally. Pakistanis, Indians, Filipinos in the UAE, South Americans in the US. These people all send money in small amounts. Paying a percentage to a bank on an electronic transfer is idiotic. Why does a bank earn more money for the same service relative to the amount transferred? Why would YOU agree to such a ridiculous term of service? Crypto is increasingly transactable, making conversion irrelevant. Not to mention all the ways we already achieve this be it through PayPal or venmo or Linepay, in-game currencies, reward points.... on and on. It seems you just have a negative view of the technology or a vested interest in the established world of finance. If you are unable to see ANY value in the technology it is because you lack imagination or chose to ignore it
  - 01acheru 5y ago
    > It seems you just have a negative view of the technology or a vested interest in the established world of finance I have neither. BTW half of my family lives in South America and I'm in Italy, we have no problem in sending money back and forth and it is cheaper to use a bank than exchanging via crypto. Also I cannot ask my 85 years old grandma to join Coinbase or Kraken or whatever, but she has a bank account and it works pretty neatly (and yet again, it's waaaaay cheaper than Coinbase fees for example) That "Filipinos in the UAE" is bullshit. Their problem is not about crypto vs banks, their primary problem is the UAE.
jayd16 5y ago
That's just tax evasion and/or smuggling.
epolanski 5y ago
> Banks have reaped rewards unearned for long enough. They are getting paid for a service, ridiculously low fees generally. Do you know how much does it costs you an international bank transfer? Between 0 and 0.6% if you're unlucky. > That alone is enough of a use case to justify adoption. No, it's not, it's the usual niche use case problem no one I know ever cared for. When was the last time you heard "I want to send money to my aunt in India but those goddamn banks are so expensive!!!!"

01acheru 5y ago

Uhm... there is something called law in most of the world which kind of regulate how and why you can or cannot send money across international borders, I will never understand that "crypto let us do it better than banks". You can send 10BTC to me, you're from Azerbaijan and I'm from France, all cool and nice until I want to cash out on that 10BTC... do you think I can receive 380k EUR on my bank without some government agency knocking on my door and accusing me of money laundering, asking me where this money comes from, asking me to pay taxes on it? If you are forbidden by law from sending money from A to B you cannot send it, either because you cannot send from A, you cannot receive in B, a mix of the two or whatever. You can send me crypto but since I cannot buy food with crypto I need to cash out sooner or later so that's end game. If you can send money from A to B it's way cheaper and more secure to send it using our current banking system. And BTW you pay a fee to turn money into crypto, in many cases you pay a fee to send crypto and lastly you pay another fee to turn that crypto back into money, sending crypto is not free.

chii 5y ago
> If you are forbidden by law from sending money from A to B you cannot send it the crypto-dream (which, i admit is a nice outcome) is that no entity _could_ make such a transaction forbidden under a new regime of crypto finance. And it is true that today, some gov'ts can have an outsized effect over people that would not be under their juristiction - such as people in iran being sanctioned by the US. Unfortunately, crypto is hardly being used this way, nor will it be in the near to medium term future.
upsidesinclude 5y ago
Maybe you'd like to read my post again? Criminality is a trope. Many people that you don't interface with, because they are low stature and status, transfer monies internationally. Pakistanis, Indians, Filipinos in the UAE, South Americans in the US. These people all send money in small amounts. Paying a percentage to a bank on an electronic transfer is idiotic. Why does a bank earn more money for the same service relative to the amount transferred? Why would YOU agree to such a ridiculous term of service? Crypto is increasingly transactable, making conversion irrelevant. Not to mention all the ways we already achieve this be it through PayPal or venmo or Linepay, in-game currencies, reward points.... on and on. It seems you just have a negative view of the technology or a vested interest in the established world of finance. If you are unable to see ANY value in the technology it is because you lack imagination or chose to ignore it
- 01acheru 5y ago
  > It seems you just have a negative view of the technology or a vested interest in the established world of finance I have neither. BTW half of my family lives in South America and I'm in Italy, we have no problem in sending money back and forth and it is cheaper to use a bank than exchanging via crypto. Also I cannot ask my 85 years old grandma to join Coinbase or Kraken or whatever, but she has a bank account and it works pretty neatly (and yet again, it's waaaaay cheaper than Coinbase fees for example) That "Filipinos in the UAE" is bullshit. Their problem is not about crypto vs banks, their primary problem is the UAE.

jayd16 5y ago

That's just tax evasion and/or smuggling.

epolanski 5y ago

> Banks have reaped rewards unearned for long enough. They are getting paid for a service, ridiculously low fees generally. Do you know how much does it costs you an international bank transfer? Between 0 and 0.6% if you're unlucky. > That alone is enough of a use case to justify adoption. No, it's not, it's the usual niche use case problem no one I know ever cared for. When was the last time you heard "I want to send money to my aunt in India but those goddamn banks are so expensive!!!!"