6 ms·

>>Let’s start with this: Venmo is a free service to transfer dollars, and bitcoin transfers are not free. Is the author really unaware of the horror stories of

>>Let’s start with this: Venmo is a free service to transfer dollars, and bitcoin transfers are not free. Is the author really unaware of the horror stories of Venmo and PayPal freezing customer accounts? Articles like this want a return to serfdom, under the control of officialdom. There is no other conceivable reason why someone would not want people to have at least the option of taking custody over their own money, in a form more useful than physical cash.

pornel 5y ago
You may not be realizing that PayPal's primary business is fraud detection and dispute resolution, not merely moving money. PayPal is layer above money transfers, providing insurance and reversibility of transactions that cryptocurrencies themselves don't have, and most don't want to have.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  PayPal is the closest thing to the cryptocurrency experience in traditional banking. The layer below it - banks and wire transfers - is even more susceptible to financial censorship.
defaultprimate 5y ago
>Articles like this want a return to serfdom, under the control of officialdom Ironic thing to state given the reality of hash power distribution and supply of bitcoin that actually moves compared to the total >in a form more useful than physical cash. Something that is never used equivalently to physical cash cannot be more useful than it. Basically nothing is priced in bitcoin or crypto
Nextgrid 5y ago
Maliciously freezing accounts is a result of bad regulation. Overbearing regulation that on one hand encourage companies to be extremely risk-averse and prone to many false positives, and on the other hand not enough consumer-focused regulation that would allow consumers recourse in case things go wrong (false positive or outright malicious theft of funds). Both can be resolved without blockchain.
- fsflover 5y ago
  > Maliciously freezing accounts is a result of bad regulation. No, it isn't: https://web.archive.org/web/20160221002005/http://minifree.org/paypal https://web.archive.org/web/20160221002005/http://minifree.o....
timeon 5y ago
> Is the author really unaware of the horror stories of Venmo and PayPal freezing customer accounts? Can as example coinbase do the same? > want a return to serfdom From my point of view serfdom is the (block)chain. Only people with enough stake or those who pays are in control.
- Qasaur 5y ago
  >From my point of view serfdom is the (block)chain. Only people with enough stake or those who pays are in control. I disagree with this but even if one assumes this to be the case, I'd much rather prefer a monetary system subject to the control of free market forces rather than the modern monetary system which is subject to a small group of unelected and unaccountable technocrats operating under the feeble assumption of central bank independence and whose power is extended through coercion and not voluntary association.
  - kemotep 5y ago
    If crypto replaces fiat can you really say it is voluntary still if you need to pay your taxes in bitcoin or whatever currency your government wants to collect to pay for things?
  - goesnowhere 5y ago
    Look up wildcat banking. Being "subject to the control of free market forces" is not a good thing for working class folks who only hold onto currency.
    - CryptoPunk 5y ago
      Wildcat banking is a trope https://www.alt-m.org/2021/07/06/the-fable-of-the-cats/ https://www.alt-m.org/2021/07/06/the-fable-of-the-cats/
- bko 5y ago
  > For instance, you can't use Venmo if you're under 18 (sorry, kids). And several Venmo users told BuzzFeed News that the company suspended their accounts and held their funds after they wrote silly captions to friends or tried to sell something to a friend — like a used computer. [0] Lots more examples in the article. Also they regularly kick off sex workers [1] [0] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/leticiamiranda/people-are-getting-kicked-off-venmo-for-breaking-its-very https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/leticiamiranda/people-a... [1] https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/paypal-and-venmo-are-shutting-out-sex-workers-putting-lives-and-livelihoods-at-risk/ https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/paypal-and-venmo-are-...
smt88 5y ago
> There is no other conceivable reason why someone would not want people to have at least the option of taking custody over their own money You're attacking a straw man here. The author doesn't argue for eliminating the blockchain or crypto assets. His thesis is that blockchain hasn't gained significant traction (for anything other than speculation, especially as people panic about USD inflation) because people don't want to decentralize trust. They inherently like institutions and want institutions they can trust. > in a form more useful than physical cash Literally the whole point of the article is to argue that Bitcoin (and other crypto "currency") is less useful than cash and less appealing to consumers. He is also arguing that this is inherent to the technology itself and will never change. Nothing is ever going to replace fiat if it's deflationary, and no one is going to "invest" (i.e. buy and keep) a digital fiat replacement unless it's deflationary. It's a catch-22 that digital assets can't solve.
fnord77 5y ago
we've steadily moved away from serfdom under centralized government and banking for centuries. yet suddenly because of the actions of a couple private companies, we're going to suddenly go back to serfdom? This makes no sense. it's impossible to go back to serfdom - the economy is too large and diverse and people are too literate. sorry, but this is just a doomer fantasy at best
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  Serfdom was abolished long before central banking emerged in the US. The institutions created since the creation of the Federal Reserve, like a vast regulatory apparatus that closes off economic opportunities for the masses, and income taxation that abolishes privacy rights while seriously diminishing private property rights, have taken society toward serfdom.
latexr 5y ago
> There is no other conceivable reason why Perhaps there is no other reason you can (or are willing to) conceive, but that does not make it fact. A major issue with cryptocurrency and blockchain discussions is that vocal proponents speak as if they’re arbiters of truth with perfect knowledge of the the world and everyone who doesn’t subscribe to their view is an envious dunce. They speak in insults and talking points and seem to be more interested in sounding superior than having a conversation. Humility and openness to be wrong are sorely lacking, but both are needed for a good-faith dialogue.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  The only fundamental difference inherent to the respective designs of blockchains and traditional banking, is censorship resistance through genuine self-custody. The former is designed to provide this quality, and the latter is not. So yes, I maintain people opposed to blockchain on principle - as opposed to problematic elements within the contemporary blockchain space - oppose individual liberty, which I characterize as desiring for the population to be under a technocratic form of serfdom.
  - defaultprimate 5y ago
    >blockchain on principle - as opposed to problematic elements within the contemporary blockchain space The problems are impossible to decouple from "blockchain on principle" because the problems are intrinsic to the data structure itself, not "contemporary" approaches to the data structure implementation. I am probably aligned with you politically (if not more radical in my libertarian sentiments), and I can sympathize with the stated goals of the crypto space/bitcoin whitepaper. The problem is that the technology and computer science behind it fails completely to deliver on these goals from both an abstract and practical perspective.
    - CryptoPunk 5y ago
      >>The problems are impossible to decouple from "blockchain on principle" because the problems are intrinsic to the data structure itself, not "contemporary" approaches to the data structure implementation. If that is indeed the belief, then I concede that is an example of someone opposed to blockchains in principle, for a reason that is not an illiberal political agenda. In any case, I like to think I am pretty well informed on blockchain technology, and I can't think of a single problem that currently afflicts the space, that cannot be solved through engineering a solution that does not involve moving away from the general blockchain architecture, or more generally, a solution that does not involve moving away from autonomous ledgers that use cryptoeconomics to maintain consensus.

pornel 5y ago

You may not be realizing that PayPal's primary business is fraud detection and dispute resolution, not merely moving money. PayPal is layer above money transfers, providing insurance and reversibility of transactions that cryptocurrencies themselves don't have, and most don't want to have.

CryptoPunk 5y ago
PayPal is the closest thing to the cryptocurrency experience in traditional banking. The layer below it - banks and wire transfers - is even more susceptible to financial censorship.

defaultprimate 5y ago

>Articles like this want a return to serfdom, under the control of officialdom Ironic thing to state given the reality of hash power distribution and supply of bitcoin that actually moves compared to the total >in a form more useful than physical cash. Something that is never used equivalently to physical cash cannot be more useful than it. Basically nothing is priced in bitcoin or crypto

Nextgrid 5y ago

Maliciously freezing accounts is a result of bad regulation. Overbearing regulation that on one hand encourage companies to be extremely risk-averse and prone to many false positives, and on the other hand not enough consumer-focused regulation that would allow consumers recourse in case things go wrong (false positive or outright malicious theft of funds). Both can be resolved without blockchain.

fsflover 5y ago
> Maliciously freezing accounts is a result of bad regulation. No, it isn't: https://web.archive.org/web/20160221002005/http://minifree.org/paypal https://web.archive.org/web/20160221002005/http://minifree.o....

timeon 5y ago

> Is the author really unaware of the horror stories of Venmo and PayPal freezing customer accounts? Can as example coinbase do the same? > want a return to serfdom From my point of view serfdom is the (block)chain. Only people with enough stake or those who pays are in control.

Qasaur 5y ago
>From my point of view serfdom is the (block)chain. Only people with enough stake or those who pays are in control. I disagree with this but even if one assumes this to be the case, I'd much rather prefer a monetary system subject to the control of free market forces rather than the modern monetary system which is subject to a small group of unelected and unaccountable technocrats operating under the feeble assumption of central bank independence and whose power is extended through coercion and not voluntary association.
- kemotep 5y ago
  If crypto replaces fiat can you really say it is voluntary still if you need to pay your taxes in bitcoin or whatever currency your government wants to collect to pay for things?
- goesnowhere 5y ago
  Look up wildcat banking. Being "subject to the control of free market forces" is not a good thing for working class folks who only hold onto currency.
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    Wildcat banking is a trope https://www.alt-m.org/2021/07/06/the-fable-of-the-cats/ https://www.alt-m.org/2021/07/06/the-fable-of-the-cats/
bko 5y ago
> For instance, you can't use Venmo if you're under 18 (sorry, kids). And several Venmo users told BuzzFeed News that the company suspended their accounts and held their funds after they wrote silly captions to friends or tried to sell something to a friend — like a used computer. [0] Lots more examples in the article. Also they regularly kick off sex workers [1] [0] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/leticiamiranda/people-are-getting-kicked-off-venmo-for-breaking-its-very https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/leticiamiranda/people-a... [1] https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/paypal-and-venmo-are-shutting-out-sex-workers-putting-lives-and-livelihoods-at-risk/ https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/paypal-and-venmo-are-...

smt88 5y ago

> There is no other conceivable reason why someone would not want people to have at least the option of taking custody over their own money You're attacking a straw man here. The author doesn't argue for eliminating the blockchain or crypto assets. His thesis is that blockchain hasn't gained significant traction (for anything other than speculation, especially as people panic about USD inflation) because people don't want to decentralize trust. They inherently like institutions and want institutions they can trust. > in a form more useful than physical cash Literally the whole point of the article is to argue that Bitcoin (and other crypto "currency") is less useful than cash and less appealing to consumers. He is also arguing that this is inherent to the technology itself and will never change. Nothing is ever going to replace fiat if it's deflationary, and no one is going to "invest" (i.e. buy and keep) a digital fiat replacement unless it's deflationary. It's a catch-22 that digital assets can't solve.

fnord77 5y ago

we've steadily moved away from serfdom under centralized government and banking for centuries. yet suddenly because of the actions of a couple private companies, we're going to suddenly go back to serfdom? This makes no sense. it's impossible to go back to serfdom - the economy is too large and diverse and people are too literate. sorry, but this is just a doomer fantasy at best

CryptoPunk 5y ago
Serfdom was abolished long before central banking emerged in the US. The institutions created since the creation of the Federal Reserve, like a vast regulatory apparatus that closes off economic opportunities for the masses, and income taxation that abolishes privacy rights while seriously diminishing private property rights, have taken society toward serfdom.

latexr 5y ago

> There is no other conceivable reason why Perhaps there is no other reason you can (or are willing to) conceive, but that does not make it fact. A major issue with cryptocurrency and blockchain discussions is that vocal proponents speak as if they’re arbiters of truth with perfect knowledge of the the world and everyone who doesn’t subscribe to their view is an envious dunce. They speak in insults and talking points and seem to be more interested in sounding superior than having a conversation. Humility and openness to be wrong are sorely lacking, but both are needed for a good-faith dialogue.

CryptoPunk 5y ago
The only fundamental difference inherent to the respective designs of blockchains and traditional banking, is censorship resistance through genuine self-custody. The former is designed to provide this quality, and the latter is not. So yes, I maintain people opposed to blockchain on principle - as opposed to problematic elements within the contemporary blockchain space - oppose individual liberty, which I characterize as desiring for the population to be under a technocratic form of serfdom.
- defaultprimate 5y ago
  >blockchain on principle - as opposed to problematic elements within the contemporary blockchain space The problems are impossible to decouple from "blockchain on principle" because the problems are intrinsic to the data structure itself, not "contemporary" approaches to the data structure implementation. I am probably aligned with you politically (if not more radical in my libertarian sentiments), and I can sympathize with the stated goals of the crypto space/bitcoin whitepaper. The problem is that the technology and computer science behind it fails completely to deliver on these goals from both an abstract and practical perspective.
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    >>The problems are impossible to decouple from "blockchain on principle" because the problems are intrinsic to the data structure itself, not "contemporary" approaches to the data structure implementation. If that is indeed the belief, then I concede that is an example of someone opposed to blockchains in principle, for a reason that is not an illiberal political agenda. In any case, I like to think I am pretty well informed on blockchain technology, and I can't think of a single problem that currently afflicts the space, that cannot be solved through engineering a solution that does not involve moving away from the general blockchain architecture, or more generally, a solution that does not involve moving away from autonomous ledgers that use cryptoeconomics to maintain consensus.