5 ms·

People still don't understand cryptocurrencies, and at this point it seems more like intentional obtuseness for political reasons. At the same time, cryptocurr

People still don't understand cryptocurrencies, and at this point it seems more like intentional obtuseness for political reasons. At the same time, cryptocurrencies still haven't provided a killer app that shuts everyone up. So, IMO that's the only real thing that matters. Either you build something with it that's useful - or it isn't useful. I understand that it's difficult because of all the infrastructure required (much of which still doesn't exist), but that's where all efforts should be. Create a consumer service that people want. Otherwise, if the idea is that it's simply a trade-off of the speed/efficiency for otherwise mundane services in order to make them decentralized, then stop hyping it and let it become a parallel structure - or underground system that some people use.

orblivion 5y ago
I think as you start to hear about stories from people in (just as an example) Ukraine escaping and being able to take their wealth with them, you're seeing the principal "killer app". It's the same "killer app" as burying gold in a secret location. It only comes up in emergencies.
- bhaak 5y ago
  If that is the only killer app crypto can produce then it's not useful to most people and will stay a niche technology forever.
  - orblivion 5y ago
    It's not useful to people almost all the time but it's vital and one-of-a-kind for that certain scenario. Though I could similarly throw in dissidents earning money and financing. I could just repeat what's in the article. In the mean time, sure, it would be smart to find other use cases.
    - bhaak 5y ago
      I'm not sure if it really is one of a kind. Having a bit of money on PayPal would cover almost all scenarios equally well and even have less friction actually using your money. The combination of PayPal and Gold doesn't seem to justify to me the valuation of a market cap of 800 billion dollars or in other words, a daily budget of 40 million dollars for securing the blockchain.
      - aaaaaaaaata 5y ago
        > Having a bit of money on PayPal would cover almost all scenarios equally well Unless you're...Ed Snowden? Or Paypal takes a dislike to you for their own reasons? etc
        orblivion 5y ago
        To be fair, political persecution is another application. And maybe I should have started with that.
TomSwirly 5y ago
> People still don't understand cryptocurrencies, and at this point it seems more like intentional obtuseness for political reasons. Your assumption that the only reason to hate cryptocurrencies is ignorance is not reasonable. > in order to make them decentralized "Decentralized" and "blockchain" are not synonyms. Blockchain technology is a wildly, insanely expensive way to decentralize an application: https://www.usenix.org/publications/loginonline/web3-fraud https://www.usenix.org/publications/loginonline/web3-fraud
- tenuousemphasis 5y ago
  Do you have a better way to decentralize digital money?
  - aaaaaaaaata 5y ago
    Why would he need that tomfoolery when he has Apple Watch Touch'n'Go Pay at his local store!
McWobbleston 5y ago
IMO there's a couple of networks that have provided a killer app, but Bitcoin maximalism and ETH dominance completely overshadow them. I've followed loosely since 2009, never got into it because I knew the UX would be a problem, but little did I realize markets don't always evaluate technology on merit (an important lesson). It's wild to me now to see networks that have solved the UX problem, but other networks are so entrenched people ignore it or downplay it because it's a risk to their existing investment.
- aaaaaaaaata 5y ago
  Because everyone agreeing on the same handful of L1s is almost a working definition of cryptocurrency adoption.
uncletammy 5y ago
> At the same time, cryptocurrencies still haven't provided a killer app that shuts everyone up. I disagree. The killer app is cash and that use case was intentionally killed by the bitcoin maximalists.
- thinkmassive 5y ago
  Have you used the Lightning Network?
lkrubner 5y ago
Bitcoin started in 2008, 14 years ago. The Internet was opened to commercial use, in 1993. That is 29 years ago. Bitcoin is half the age of the commercial Internet, so Bitcoin is no longer new. 14 years after the opening of the Internet to commercial use, Google was well established, Facebook and Twitter were rising rapidly, MySpace and Digg had already peaked but still had huge audiences. Amazon had already become a behemoth. How many more years can people continue to claim "crypto is so new, it hasn't had time yet to establish a killer app"? All of these industries had become major industries within 14 years of their discovery: telephones, 1876, big industry by 1890 automobiles, 1886, big industry by 1900 The industry with the longest struggle to get the technology "good enough" was perhaps radio with modulation to carry the human voice, 1906 first proof of concept, the industry took off in 1920. The point is, 14 years after their discovery, everyone could easily tell you what cars, telephones and commercial radio was for. The utility was obvious to everyone. But cryptocurrencies are still struggling to come up with a straightforward use case that people can understand.
- tmn 5y ago
  They really aren’t. The store of value is the use case. Now you may not have confidence that the social contract for that value will persist. I personally don’t have a high degree of confidence. But to continue to ignore that this itself isn’t the value add is obtuse to the realities of political turmoil.
  - throw0101a 5y ago
    > The store of value is the use case. And how practical is that, given the wide swings (e.g., relative to USD) that are often seen?
- thinkmassive 5y ago
  “The migration of the ARPANET to TCP/IP was officially completed on flag day January 1, 1983, when the new protocols were permanently activated.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite

orblivion 5y ago

I think as you start to hear about stories from people in (just as an example) Ukraine escaping and being able to take their wealth with them, you're seeing the principal "killer app". It's the same "killer app" as burying gold in a secret location. It only comes up in emergencies.

bhaak 5y ago
If that is the only killer app crypto can produce then it's not useful to most people and will stay a niche technology forever.
- orblivion 5y ago
  It's not useful to people almost all the time but it's vital and one-of-a-kind for that certain scenario. Though I could similarly throw in dissidents earning money and financing. I could just repeat what's in the article. In the mean time, sure, it would be smart to find other use cases.
  - bhaak 5y ago
    I'm not sure if it really is one of a kind. Having a bit of money on PayPal would cover almost all scenarios equally well and even have less friction actually using your money. The combination of PayPal and Gold doesn't seem to justify to me the valuation of a market cap of 800 billion dollars or in other words, a daily budget of 40 million dollars for securing the blockchain.
    - aaaaaaaaata 5y ago
      > Having a bit of money on PayPal would cover almost all scenarios equally well Unless you're...Ed Snowden? Or Paypal takes a dislike to you for their own reasons? etc
      - orblivion 5y ago
        To be fair, political persecution is another application. And maybe I should have started with that.

TomSwirly 5y ago

> People still don't understand cryptocurrencies, and at this point it seems more like intentional obtuseness for political reasons. Your assumption that the only reason to hate cryptocurrencies is ignorance is not reasonable. > in order to make them decentralized "Decentralized" and "blockchain" are not synonyms. Blockchain technology is a wildly, insanely expensive way to decentralize an application: https://www.usenix.org/publications/loginonline/web3-fraud https://www.usenix.org/publications/loginonline/web3-fraud

tenuousemphasis 5y ago
Do you have a better way to decentralize digital money?
- aaaaaaaaata 5y ago
  Why would he need that tomfoolery when he has Apple Watch Touch'n'Go Pay at his local store!

McWobbleston 5y ago

IMO there's a couple of networks that have provided a killer app, but Bitcoin maximalism and ETH dominance completely overshadow them. I've followed loosely since 2009, never got into it because I knew the UX would be a problem, but little did I realize markets don't always evaluate technology on merit (an important lesson). It's wild to me now to see networks that have solved the UX problem, but other networks are so entrenched people ignore it or downplay it because it's a risk to their existing investment.

aaaaaaaaata 5y ago
Because everyone agreeing on the same handful of L1s is almost a working definition of cryptocurrency adoption.

uncletammy 5y ago

> At the same time, cryptocurrencies still haven't provided a killer app that shuts everyone up. I disagree. The killer app is cash and that use case was intentionally killed by the bitcoin maximalists.

thinkmassive 5y ago
Have you used the Lightning Network?

lkrubner 5y ago

Bitcoin started in 2008, 14 years ago. The Internet was opened to commercial use, in 1993. That is 29 years ago. Bitcoin is half the age of the commercial Internet, so Bitcoin is no longer new. 14 years after the opening of the Internet to commercial use, Google was well established, Facebook and Twitter were rising rapidly, MySpace and Digg had already peaked but still had huge audiences. Amazon had already become a behemoth. How many more years can people continue to claim "crypto is so new, it hasn't had time yet to establish a killer app"? All of these industries had become major industries within 14 years of their discovery: telephones, 1876, big industry by 1890 automobiles, 1886, big industry by 1900 The industry with the longest struggle to get the technology "good enough" was perhaps radio with modulation to carry the human voice, 1906 first proof of concept, the industry took off in 1920. The point is, 14 years after their discovery, everyone could easily tell you what cars, telephones and commercial radio was for. The utility was obvious to everyone. But cryptocurrencies are still struggling to come up with a straightforward use case that people can understand.

tmn 5y ago
They really aren’t. The store of value is the use case. Now you may not have confidence that the social contract for that value will persist. I personally don’t have a high degree of confidence. But to continue to ignore that this itself isn’t the value add is obtuse to the realities of political turmoil.
- throw0101a 5y ago
  > The store of value is the use case. And how practical is that, given the wide swings (e.g., relative to USD) that are often seen?
thinkmassive 5y ago
“The migration of the ARPANET to TCP/IP was officially completed on flag day January 1, 1983, when the new protocols were permanently activated.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite