5 ms·

Labeling the entire sector as dangerous and fraudulent is incredibly short-sighted, dismissive, and at the end of the day, a lie. I don't buy into the crypto cr

Labeling the entire sector as dangerous and fraudulent is incredibly short-sighted, dismissive, and at the end of the day, a lie. I don't buy into the crypto craze of Web 3.0 and NFTs (in terms of digital art), but I do think the technology already has applications that are useful to many, and many that still remain to be discovered. I agree that we should inform people about the risks and scams that are currently common in the crypto space, but you're advocating for a lot more than that. You can speak for yourself, but you shouldn't pretend that your opinion is shared by, or that you speak for, the majority of people working in IT.

cc9one 5y ago
Well said. These POW/ energy waste arguments are getting really old. They act as if there aren't existing solutions. Take Algorand for an example, which is carbon negative and (Pure) Proof of Stake...
- SCLeo 5y ago
  Until you realize the largest two cryptocurrencies are still using POW. Also, let me guess, who has stakes in this Algorand thing you mentioned.
  - dns_snek 5y ago
    Not everything needs to happen immediately, Proof of Work isn't some existential threat to human kind and Ethereum is already moving to PoS. It's still early days for blockchain/crypto world. Alarmist comments don't really add anything to the discussion.
    - SCLeo 5y ago
      I am willing to bet in 5 years time, the largest crypto currency will still be BTC and it will still be POW.
      - dns_snek 5y ago
        Maybe, maybe not. If you're worried about the climate change impact, you can start now by charging additional taxes on all energy consumption. Why should cryptocurrency be singled out? Just because some people dislike it? We haven't done much about climate change and the big pollutants in decades, but as soon as cryptocurrencies come up, it's suddenly treated as an existential threat to human kind - I don't buy it.
        timeon 5y ago
        > Maybe, maybe not. If we are talking about climate change, time is quickly running out. So talking about wishful thinking while reality is actually other way around does not seems to be helpful.
        dns_snek 5y ago
        Can you quantify the impact on climate change that PoW is going to have if we don't act against it immediately?
- timeon 5y ago
  > These POW/ energy waste arguments are getting really old. They act as if there aren't existing solutions. And solution for the Bitcoin is what?
spacechild1 5y ago
> but I do think the technology already has applications that are useful to many For example?
- pedalpete 5y ago
  How about international money transfer for a start? I can and have moved money internationally in minutes for less than it would cost through the SWIFT system which would take days. This is all fine and good for me, as I live in a developed country, so I "could" just use SWIFT ,but what about remittance payments? For people who have a mobile phone, but no bank (a large number of people in the developing world), a relative in the US used to send money via Western Union, the receiver would travel to the nearest Western Union branch, of course WU would take a chunk of that money, and then you're walking around with your cash. With crypto, it gets sent to a wallet, and they can use that. This isn't some pie in the sky idea, it's happening today, but will increase as crypto gains mass adoption.
  - riskneutral 5y ago
    The only people who could be making any serious of cryptocurrency for international money transfer is organized crime and money launderers. Sending remittance payments in cryptocurrency does not make sense for people who are sending their hard earned dollars back to their home country to support their impoverished families. The risk exposure to exchange rate fluctuations, and risk of loss of funds in transit (due to fraud, hacking, losing a crypto wallet, sending money to the wrong wallet, etc), the fees associated with cryptocurrency transfers, and the extremely slow transfer times, all makes cryptocurrency a totally inappropriate product for the demographic that you are suggesting be targeted. You are basically suggesting that crypto bros should get rich off of selling a product to poor people that will only make them poorer. It's disturbing. This is exactly the kind of thing that makes me agree with title of this post. Fortunately, most people have other options available for international remittance payments. For example, you can now transfer money to people using Visa in over 80 countries, all you need is their Visa card number, and the transfer time is 30 minutes or less for Visa debit. All the major retail banks have similar services, and there are plenty of money transfer apps (including a Western Union app), none of which depend on "blockchain technology."
SCLeo 5y ago
Literally everyone (100%) I knew that are into cryptocurrencies are primarily using them as speculative asset. That alone is not a problem. The problem is when they advocate cryptocurrencies or blockchains, they always talk about "decentralization", "uncensorable", "privacy", "future of web" or some other crap that they are not use the cryptocurrencies primarily for. That is what makes cryptocurrencies fraudulent. If most (in my personal observation, 100%) use cases of such sector seems fraudulent, I do believe it is justified to generalize to the entire sector.
- dns_snek 5y ago
  Decentralization, privacy, and censorship resistance are indeed goals of blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies. In addition, they also serve as speculative assets. What's fraudulent about that? Cryptocurrencies do in fact provide all of that (not all of them provide all of these guarantees, but some do).
  - SCLeo 5y ago
    You completely missed my point. Simply put: People use cryptocurrencies as speculative asset while they claim they are using them for decentralization and other properties.
    - dns_snek 5y ago
      I still don't see the fraud? Just because your friends/associates aren't using cryptocurrencies for that purpose right now, doesn't mean that other people aren't, or that they won't be in the future. This is akin to saying that seat belts are fraudulent because they aren't saving your life every single day. You might not need the properties of censorship resistance, privacy and so on right now, until one day you do. I would much rather live in a world where such currencies are available in case I need to rely on them.
    - mattwilsonn888 5y ago
      Yes but do you understand what speculation means? Speculation means betting on future value.

cc9one 5y ago

Well said. These POW/ energy waste arguments are getting really old. They act as if there aren't existing solutions. Take Algorand for an example, which is carbon negative and (Pure) Proof of Stake...

SCLeo 5y ago
Until you realize the largest two cryptocurrencies are still using POW. Also, let me guess, who has stakes in this Algorand thing you mentioned.
- dns_snek 5y ago
  Not everything needs to happen immediately, Proof of Work isn't some existential threat to human kind and Ethereum is already moving to PoS. It's still early days for blockchain/crypto world. Alarmist comments don't really add anything to the discussion.
  - SCLeo 5y ago
    I am willing to bet in 5 years time, the largest crypto currency will still be BTC and it will still be POW.
    - dns_snek 5y ago
      Maybe, maybe not. If you're worried about the climate change impact, you can start now by charging additional taxes on all energy consumption. Why should cryptocurrency be singled out? Just because some people dislike it? We haven't done much about climate change and the big pollutants in decades, but as soon as cryptocurrencies come up, it's suddenly treated as an existential threat to human kind - I don't buy it.
      - timeon 5y ago
        > Maybe, maybe not. If we are talking about climate change, time is quickly running out. So talking about wishful thinking while reality is actually other way around does not seems to be helpful.
        dns_snek 5y ago
        Can you quantify the impact on climate change that PoW is going to have if we don't act against it immediately?
timeon 5y ago
> These POW/ energy waste arguments are getting really old. They act as if there aren't existing solutions. And solution for the Bitcoin is what?

spacechild1 5y ago

> but I do think the technology already has applications that are useful to many For example?

pedalpete 5y ago
How about international money transfer for a start? I can and have moved money internationally in minutes for less than it would cost through the SWIFT system which would take days. This is all fine and good for me, as I live in a developed country, so I "could" just use SWIFT ,but what about remittance payments? For people who have a mobile phone, but no bank (a large number of people in the developing world), a relative in the US used to send money via Western Union, the receiver would travel to the nearest Western Union branch, of course WU would take a chunk of that money, and then you're walking around with your cash. With crypto, it gets sent to a wallet, and they can use that. This isn't some pie in the sky idea, it's happening today, but will increase as crypto gains mass adoption.
- riskneutral 5y ago
  The only people who could be making any serious of cryptocurrency for international money transfer is organized crime and money launderers. Sending remittance payments in cryptocurrency does not make sense for people who are sending their hard earned dollars back to their home country to support their impoverished families. The risk exposure to exchange rate fluctuations, and risk of loss of funds in transit (due to fraud, hacking, losing a crypto wallet, sending money to the wrong wallet, etc), the fees associated with cryptocurrency transfers, and the extremely slow transfer times, all makes cryptocurrency a totally inappropriate product for the demographic that you are suggesting be targeted. You are basically suggesting that crypto bros should get rich off of selling a product to poor people that will only make them poorer. It's disturbing. This is exactly the kind of thing that makes me agree with title of this post. Fortunately, most people have other options available for international remittance payments. For example, you can now transfer money to people using Visa in over 80 countries, all you need is their Visa card number, and the transfer time is 30 minutes or less for Visa debit. All the major retail banks have similar services, and there are plenty of money transfer apps (including a Western Union app), none of which depend on "blockchain technology."

SCLeo 5y ago

Literally everyone (100%) I knew that are into cryptocurrencies are primarily using them as speculative asset. That alone is not a problem. The problem is when they advocate cryptocurrencies or blockchains, they always talk about "decentralization", "uncensorable", "privacy", "future of web" or some other crap that they are not use the cryptocurrencies primarily for. That is what makes cryptocurrencies fraudulent. If most (in my personal observation, 100%) use cases of such sector seems fraudulent, I do believe it is justified to generalize to the entire sector.

dns_snek 5y ago
Decentralization, privacy, and censorship resistance are indeed goals of blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies. In addition, they also serve as speculative assets. What's fraudulent about that? Cryptocurrencies do in fact provide all of that (not all of them provide all of these guarantees, but some do).
- SCLeo 5y ago
  You completely missed my point. Simply put: People use cryptocurrencies as speculative asset while they claim they are using them for decentralization and other properties.
  - dns_snek 5y ago
    I still don't see the fraud? Just because your friends/associates aren't using cryptocurrencies for that purpose right now, doesn't mean that other people aren't, or that they won't be in the future. This is akin to saying that seat belts are fraudulent because they aren't saving your life every single day. You might not need the properties of censorship resistance, privacy and so on right now, until one day you do. I would much rather live in a world where such currencies are available in case I need to rely on them.
  - mattwilsonn888 5y ago
    Yes but do you understand what speculation means? Speculation means betting on future value.