3 ms·

> doesn't it still hold the promise of a parallel peer-to-peer non-inflationary currency, suitable for self-custody, which is totally orthogonal to the meltdown

> doesn't it still hold the promise of a parallel peer-to-peer non-inflationary currency, suitable for self-custody, which is totally orthogonal to the meltdown of a cryptoexchange? In my experience whenever some poses a convoluted leading question like this, it's because they have already decided the answer. But let me try a simpler version: > doesn't it still hold the promise of a... currency Did it ever? Has any crypto ever actually been successfully used as a currency for something other than the black/grey market? That's my own convoluted leading question, and I'm fairly confident the answer is no. But if you feel I'm wrong please share a counterexample.

azangru 4y ago
> In my experience whenever some poses a convoluted leading question like this, it's because they have already decided the answer. No; I am genuinely undecided. On the one hand, I hear the arguments of bitcoin advocates from 5-10 years ago (Andreas Antonopoulos; authors of college-level courses on cryptocurrencies and bitcoin; as well as random podcasters); and they still make sense to me — which I tried to inject into the question, and which, you say, made it convoluted. On the other hand, I don't yet have a dog in the fight; I am just observing the space with some curiosity. > Has any crypto ever actually been successfully used as a currency for something other than the black/grey market? Genuine question: why is the use on a black or a grey market a put-down for a currency? Isn't it, on the contrary, a true testament to the value of a currency, if it is sought after, as a means of exchange, on a black market?
- shigawire 4y ago
  >why is the use on a black or a grey market a put-down for a currency? The lack of accountability in black market transactions is a feature. In regular transactions this is a hindrance. The basic examples I can think of would be preventing funding terrorism or human trafficking - which I personally think is a net good. Or even more basically the ability to contest and reverse charges.

azangru 4y ago

> In my experience whenever some poses a convoluted leading question like this, it's because they have already decided the answer. No; I am genuinely undecided. On the one hand, I hear the arguments of bitcoin advocates from 5-10 years ago (Andreas Antonopoulos; authors of college-level courses on cryptocurrencies and bitcoin; as well as random podcasters); and they still make sense to me — which I tried to inject into the question, and which, you say, made it convoluted. On the other hand, I don't yet have a dog in the fight; I am just observing the space with some curiosity. > Has any crypto ever actually been successfully used as a currency for something other than the black/grey market? Genuine question: why is the use on a black or a grey market a put-down for a currency? Isn't it, on the contrary, a true testament to the value of a currency, if it is sought after, as a means of exchange, on a black market?

shigawire 4y ago
>why is the use on a black or a grey market a put-down for a currency? The lack of accountability in black market transactions is a feature. In regular transactions this is a hindrance. The basic examples I can think of would be preventing funding terrorism or human trafficking - which I personally think is a net good. Or even more basically the ability to contest and reverse charges.