3 ms·

For nearly everybody who is not European trying to send money to other Europeans, cryptocurrencies are the easiest way to make international payments. For examp

For nearly everybody who is not European trying to send money to other Europeans, cryptocurrencies are the easiest way to make international payments. For example, I have at various times sent money from the US to Turkey, with bitcoin I was able to send the money with very low fees and it arrived in under an hour. To the best of my knowledge crypto is the cheapest and fastest way to send my friend money, though as transaction fees fluctuate we have occasionally changed which currency we use. So, "not one has produced anything of use to real people" should be amended to "not one has produced anything I personally consider useful". How can you be so sure that you are correct, and that the people willing to invest $12.75B are incorrect?

twelve40 5y ago
> people willing to invest $12.75B are incorrect Correct about what? I'm sure many people, memecoin flippers and VCs included, will make a lot of money for themselves, just like a lot of people made money on ICOs (remember that one?) Since a VC's job is to make money, many of them will be "correct". But if the only actual useful thing that came out of this decade-long hype fest is a lower-fee version of Transferwise... then it's just not very convincing.
- brian_cloutier 5y ago
  That is not the only useful thing which which has come out of cryptocurrencies. There is also Filecoin, which provides a similar service to S3 but at a wildly cheaper price point. There are also more examples of actually useful things you can do today. However, when the OP says something like there isn't a single use it doesn't take a basket of use-cases to refute them, it just takes one example. Do you really think that $12.75B is going into pointless NFTs?