7 ms·

My theory is that the likelihood someone understands the use cases is inversely correlated to their trust in government. For example: https://www.bbc.com/news/

• xadhominemx 4y ago
  You still have no answer for the crypto on/off ramp issue.
  • ragnot 4y ago
    I think the idea would be that in a scenario where crypto becomes a currency, there wouldn't need to be an off-ramp (at least immediately, think war/revolution). You would trade the crypto like "real" money.
    • toomuchtodo 4y ago
      This requires price stability, which is at odds with the use of crypto as a speculative investment vehicle. People use fiat to transact because it is stable. It’s stable because a central bank is using tools available to bring about stability.
      • T0Bi 4y ago
        There are decentralized stable coins such as Dai that survived massive crashes/volatility in the past and still remained on peg. Crypto ≠ Bitcoin.
        • toomuchtodo 4y ago
          Unless you have a nation state backing the currency, its speculative assets all the way down.
      • ragnot 4y ago
        It's a hedge. Like anything other hedge it's not bulletproof. I'm blessed to live in a country that has sound monetary policy (you do too probably). But there are millions (if not billions) of people who don't. Crypto offers a way to avoid capital controls when governments fail. It's not the crypto itself, its just the most convenient way. See: https://restofworld.org/2021/the-cryptocurrency-dons-of-beirut/ https://restofworld.org/2021/the-cryptocurrency-dons-of-beir...
        • toomuchtodo 4y ago
          Sort of agree. Find ways to issue them digital wallets with fiat currency support. Venezuelans using Zelle to transact in dollars comes to mind. It’s a financial inclusion and digital identity story, high level. But if you’re violating nation state laws (AML/KYC/money laundering/capital controls), you’re not likely to avoid repercussions for that, state monopoly on force and all that jazz. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/06/16/venezuela-is-a-testing-ground-for-digital-dollarization-and-zelle-doesnt-like-it/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/06/16/venezuela-is-a-t...
    • bitxbitxbitcoin 4y ago
      There's another likely scenario (at least in my mind) where Bitcoin is a global reserve "currency" like gold used to be. In this instance, the on/off ramps that exist already would still likely be the ones around. That is to say, completely centralized instiutions that interface with completely centralized fiat currencies. Bitcoin isn't going to replace countries, countries will likely have fiat stablecoins which is exactly where our increasingly cashless societies are headed towards. tldr; either the crypto itself is traded like real money, or a l2 or even centralized unconnected layer is - either way on/off ramps that currently exist (p2p and centralized) continue to exist and thrive.
    • xadhominemx 4y ago
      You still need an on-ramp inside of the authoritarian country you want to depart
  • game-of-throws 4y ago
    If someone is trying to escape their local currency, they won't want an on/off ramp. In foreign nations with a large underground USD economy, people skip the local currency and trade/spend USD directly. The same could happen with BTC. In fact in the most extreme cases this transformation is already happening: https://www.reuters.com/technology/venezuelas-economy-regresses-crypto-fills-gaps-2021-06-22/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/venezuelas-economy-regres... > But a major part of Venezuela's crypto operations involves businesses swapping out of bolivars to beat inflation, said economist and finance expert Aaron Olmos. > "Nobody is going to tell you 'every night when we do the books, we convert bolivars into bitcoin,' but yes, this is happening."
    • naet 4y ago
      I've used crypto for regular monetary transactions (selling art) and it's a huge pain in the ass compared to using actual currency. The idea that people are going to do day-to-day purchases with bitcoin is pure fantasy, it would be a huge step back from what most people are used to. You pay fees for every single transaction: chain storage, gas, if you want to deposit or withdraw or exchange to another currency, etc; it's slow to go through and at peak times you get gassed out and it doesn't go through at all. The value fluctuates wildly at all times of day, so your transaction might lose a significant percent of value before you've had a chance to even access it let alone trade it for a more stable currency or asset. Oh, and you have zero safety net for if something is entered wrong, a key is lost, if you end up not receiving the item you purchased, you're outta luck and there's no bank or credit card agency you can petition for a chargeback. Plus you lose ALL your money with no recourse if you can't keep track of a non human memorizable secret key, or if it gets in any way intercepted or stolen from your computer, or if you accept the wrong transaction...
    • majewsky 4y ago
      How can everyone convert bolivars into bitcoin? That would imply that equal amounts of bitcoin are being sold by someone in exchange for bolivar. Who is that and why do they think it's a good deal?
      • imtringued 4y ago
  • EGreg 4y ago
    We do. It's called people accepting cryptocurrencies in exchange for goods and services. Here is the roadmap: https://intercoin.org/communities.pdf https://intercoin.org/communities.pdf
    • xadhominemx 4y ago
      Ok then you tie an identity to a Bitcoin address and you have the same exact problem
      • EGreg 4y ago
        Who’s talking about Bitcoin ? ;-)
• immigrantheart 4y ago
  This is the only right answer. Pack it up. For real, every time I try to answer my I do crypto, often people just don't understand. They just don't. They just don't understand why I don't trust entities. If you don't understand this, then you don't understand crypto. Period. There is no other debate necessary. Period. Full stop. We go on our own way. Full stop.
  • SomeCallMeTim 4y ago
    The problem is that crypto doesn't really solve those problems either. As the article says far more eloquently. I understand that you are saying you were burned by a central authority. But the truth is that the only way to get everything to work is with a central authority. The article gives examples of crypto being fully reliant on central authorities, for instance. Everything being done by crypto today could be done better by trusted companies putting together a semi-open peering arrangement that both doesn't waste pointless electricity and that doesn't allow just any potentially hostile actor join the group of authorized peers.
    • Ekaros 4y ago
      The question to me really is which central authorities you trust less... And for me it is at the moment the crypto side. I don't trust exchanges and I can't be bothered to do local transactions. So central government "approved" system is easier for my life.
      • horsawlarway 4y ago
        And this is the case for basically everyone. In fact, given that ownership is fundamentally a mutually agreed upon social norm, and not any sort of real truth - Even if you trust the central authority of your locality less, they are likely a much better resource regardless. I really think crypto advocates just don't actually understand how power works. Power is not the number in the ledger, it's the number of people who will step up to enforce it for you. It turns out that number is very, very tiny for crypto. Much, much larger for your local currency - even if it's not as large as you'd like it to be, or "fair" as you think it should be.
• dogman144 4y ago
  Pretty good answer, but I’ll caveat with wealthy/elite provably bought into this a while ago. A subset of them run OpEds in NYT criticizing the space as bunk. Another large subset have been in it for years. Some data points to support this: - most major algorithmic hedge funds, market makers, etc are significantly involved. Not the janky crypto native one, the lethal ones from NY. - Microstrategy had to convince a whole slew of board members and legal to convert their treasury to btc (“wealthy/elite”). Saylor is on record as saying that all but 1 of them where already on the space and fine with it, or something to that effect. - this is old days btc lore, but there is a famous known event of Wences Cesares and I want to say Reid Hoffman having a SV get together with a few other who’s-who and sending a couple mil in btc around their phones while sitting in a living room. This And related Got most of the early day big tech people who are in it now to invest. This was years ago. Peter Thiel is the most public of this group today. - CIA had the btc core lead Dev visit to explain the tech in 2011 (Gavin Andresen/spelling). - Go to a digital assets event in DC that gets actual DC people to attend, and you’ll have notable elected officials discussing its use as a covert tool - US has paid foreign fighters in it - Bank of International Settlements is allowing member banks to hold a % of btc in reserves - Fidelity has mined btc since early 2010s and is notably involved today. There are a lot of examples like this out there. It’s a large wealth transfer currently benefiting really top crust people/orgs and the tinfoil hat crowd. Everyone else is reading Paul Krugman opeds and calling it a day, or missing the key so-what of the tech that’s worth committing to.
• kaladin_1 4y ago
  This captures some of the reasons why crypto is very big in Nigeria. With Naira the currency being as stable as a pendulum gets on a windy day, many middle class fellows seek to store their money in some form of stable assets. Crypto seems to be the easiest to acquire for the common folks while the politicians prefer and have access to US Dollars.
• nemothekid 4y ago
  I would place "trust in government" with "lives in a hegemonic superpower". You can fully understand the use cases while also believing that they aren't that compelling unless you live in global south. The fact is there is no reason to believe holding crypto would retain value if the united states went through an country-ending economic crisis; it more likely that your crypto would also just become equally worthless and also crash in value. Treating the United States as a "future Argentina" makes no sense, especially when it's the US-based VC investors who are indirectly backing the value of Argentinian purchased bitcoin. If you end up in a situation where the USD worthless, then there is no wealthy counter party to prop up the value of your cryptocoin. It makes no sense to look at third world countries with relatively tiny economies and believe that crypto will retain its value if the US went through a similar situation.
  • notahacker 4y ago
    Also, you can fully understand the hypothetical use cases in the global south whilst being aware that crypto competes with hegemonic superpowers as a way to store wealth there too (and other stable currencies, and lots of other things that hold value and are easy to barter with) in those markets, and generally has fewer or worse on/off ramps for the average person there. People aren't sending money to Coinbase Global Inc because they haven't had access to international money transfers or the ability to store their wealth in anything other than rapidly-depreciating pesos before. I mean, I'll happily concede that cryptocurrency was something that was actually stable in value, was widely accepted and understood in local markets in the global south so you could buy food, save for your kids education and bribe the border guard with it, then it would be even better than gold earrings, black market banknote swaps, hawala or trusting you would be able to access your offshore account in future. But it isn't, the fact that some people would dearly like it to be that way doesn't make it that way (especially not the "stable in value" part), and there isn't an obvious route for it to be that way.
• NikolaNovak 4y ago
  I'm originally from Bosnia / Ex-Yugoslavia. Experienced hyperinflation, experienced civil war, experienced buying bread with 200,000 dinars one year and 2,000,000 next year etc. Experienced scary people with guns knocking at your door. My family and their ancestors all lost all their money and possessions numerous times over the last 100 years, including in the mid-90's. And yet, I feel it's the people IN position of Western privilege, who have NOT experienced actual 'dystopian future', and what a hostile government actually CAN do, and what living under duress is ACTUALLY like, who think Crypto will somehow solve such problems based on their theoretical envisioning of only a specific part of dystopian future. I still believe Crypto, like anything else, survives at the mercy of your local government. It has a tremendous set of requirements, complexity, and telltale signs, to be helpful against hostile government which can and will knock at your door with a gun, or criminalize all crypto use/mining/exchange, etc.
  • tablespoon 4y ago
    I think you're exactly right. Cryptocurrency is built for a dystopian future where the people have access to stable, unmonitored internet (in other words, a contradictory situation that will almost certainly never exist). If the dystopian country retains the technical capacity for widespread internet, the dystopian government will have the ability to detect and crack down hard on cryptocurrency users (if they're worth the trouble). If the dystopian government lacks the ability to crack down like that, the dystopian country has almost certainly lost the technical capacity for widespread internet, making cryptocurrency moot. And in all cases, there are better alternatives to whatever problem cryptocurrency is meant to solve (e.g. gold bullion, US dollars), except in some very narrow cases.
  • colordrops 4y ago
    Your story is an anecdote, and an interesting one, but not sure if your conclusions are valid. Crypto is used in China for subverting government oversight, and they are far more advanced than Bosnia at digital control.
    • aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
      Not always oversight, but for subverting government controls — note that these are very different.
• banannaise 4y ago
  There are a lot of people who don't understand these problems at all, and therefore distrust crypto. There are also a lot of people who understand these problems very well, and therefore distrust crypto. In developed nations, populations who are unbanked/underbanked typically have much bigger fish to fry. In developing nations, they typically already have a solution to the banking problem... and also bigger fish to fry. You'll notice that every article hyping up cryptocurrency as a solution for these things refers to "early adopters". The adopters are no longer early; they're now a perpetually fringe sub-population. (They're also presently experiencing inflation in crypto for the first time.)