3 ms·
I would characterize this situation (of crypto helping perform fast transfers) as a very temporary "advantage" that would almost certainly disappear over time.
by kingaillas 4y ago
I would characterize this situation (of crypto helping perform fast transfers) as a very temporary "advantage" that would almost certainly disappear over time.
For one thing, this advantage over the national bank, is during a WAR. Assuming the war disrupts the national bank, yet over the long term will not also disrupt all the infrastructure that bitcoin needs (cheap high speed computing, available networking, reliable electricity, etc) strains credibility.
- ______-_-______ 4y agoIn the case of Ukraine, yes, this is probably a temporary state of emergency. But on a global scale, there is always a disruption somewhere. Or as one google SRE put it (I couldn't find the exact quote) "on our scale, once-in-a-million events happen every day". And, for many people out there, crypto is still the fastest way to transfer money, and the situation is very much not temporary. It's just that they are not the people that typically feature in the NYT.
- ilammy 4y agoSpeaking of Ukraine, the banking sector is working fine there at the moment, for what it's worth. Not for moving wealth out of the country and out of the local currency, but otherwise works.
- shagie 4y agoFrom the other day: https://www.npr.org/2022/04/04/1090952156/how-ukraine-kept-banks-afloat-and-money-flowing https://www.npr.org/2022/04/04/1090952156/how-ukraine-kept-b... > Russia's invasion has caused untold damage to lives, buildings, and roads. It also threatened to destroy Ukraine's banking system. > But a month into the war, Ukrainians in most of the country can still put their money in savings accounts, pay their telephone bills, and withdraw cash easily. > Today, we speak to the CEO of Ukraine's second-largest bank to learn how the country's banks are continuing essential business in the wake of devastation on the homefront.