4 ms·

or the government simply coming and seizing your assets for an arbitrary, amoral reason. You mean people don’t like it when the large amorphous and powerful bo

by dvtrn 4y ago

or the government simply coming and seizing your assets for an arbitrary, amoral reason. You mean people don’t like it when the large amorphous and powerful body that asks its constituents to trust it pulls the rug, and all of their currency out from under them?

siftrics 4y ago
Red herring. I'm not arguing for any system that has the power to rug their constituents, crypto systems included. Crypto at least enables systems to be built. It's up to you to either trust it without any due diligence or read the source code yourself. This is a step in the right direction for people who like to assume their own risk and don't like to pay for the bad decision-making of others.
- dvtrn 4y ago
  It's up to you to either trust it without any due diligence or read the source code yourself. I suppose so, but given that your entire conceit started off with a defense of people in under-developed nations, and their access to capital and money, is this really about serving those people? If so, how are people in a country with heavily-devalued currencies under authoritarian regimes served by reading source code for cryptocurrencies? How many people in these countries are you expecting to pop open a laptop and start reading the ETH source before they can buy these digital coins and buy their next meal with it? I'm sorry but the response here of "just read the source code", given you yourself are holding up impoverished nations, where people are not even "allowed a bank account" as beneficiaries of cryptocurrencies is some LOUD hubris. This is a step in the right direction for people who like to assume their own risk Isn't this something someone can already do on established markets in the physical world? don't like to pay for the bad decision-making of others Isn't this exactly what just happened in the article we're discussing right now in this thread?
  - siftrics 4y ago
    >Isn't this something someone can already do on established markets in the physical world? Name one trustless, permission-less system that avoids the double spending problem. I would love to know about it. >Isn't this exactly what just happened in the article we're discussing right now in this thread? I don't know what you're saying. Participants could do their due diligence and fully understand the risks before participating. Who paid for someone else's screw up?

by dvtrn 4y ago

siftrics 4y ago

Red herring. I'm not arguing for any system that has the power to rug their constituents, crypto systems included. Crypto at least enables systems to be built. It's up to you to either trust it without any due diligence or read the source code yourself. This is a step in the right direction for people who like to assume their own risk and don't like to pay for the bad decision-making of others.

dvtrn 4y ago
It's up to you to either trust it without any due diligence or read the source code yourself. I suppose so, but given that your entire conceit started off with a defense of people in under-developed nations, and their access to capital and money, is this really about serving those people? If so, how are people in a country with heavily-devalued currencies under authoritarian regimes served by reading source code for cryptocurrencies? How many people in these countries are you expecting to pop open a laptop and start reading the ETH source before they can buy these digital coins and buy their next meal with it? I'm sorry but the response here of "just read the source code", given you yourself are holding up impoverished nations, where people are not even "allowed a bank account" as beneficiaries of cryptocurrencies is some LOUD hubris. This is a step in the right direction for people who like to assume their own risk Isn't this something someone can already do on established markets in the physical world? don't like to pay for the bad decision-making of others Isn't this exactly what just happened in the article we're discussing right now in this thread?
- siftrics 4y ago
  >Isn't this something someone can already do on established markets in the physical world? Name one trustless, permission-less system that avoids the double spending problem. I would love to know about it. >Isn't this exactly what just happened in the article we're discussing right now in this thread? I don't know what you're saying. Participants could do their due diligence and fully understand the risks before participating. Who paid for someone else's screw up?