5 ms·

Regardless of how you feel about crypto - and I admit to seeing some valuable use-cases, while being highly skeptical of the speculation - you gotta admit that

Regardless of how you feel about crypto - and I admit to seeing some valuable use-cases, while being highly skeptical of the speculation - you gotta admit that these comments are prescient and also very funny. I sincerely hope I have that presence of mind at that age.

azaras 4y ago
But the valuable use-cases could be solved using other methods efficiently.
- mattbrewsbytes 4y ago
  Oh most certainly. We also have a ever growing list of JavaScript frameworks. Software developers are great at the NIH syndrome or not liking how something was solved and they like their way of solving it. Just because there is another solution path doesn't mean new solution paths to the same problem are void. If you mean more efficiently then that is likely a dimension of the solution where it may not fit for some use cases. For example blockchain transactions are known to be slow when compared to say a RDBMS transaction. If you are recording purchases in a web shopping cart its probably not a good solution. The trade-off here is that for some problem, maybe the speed of the transaction is not a concern. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending, nor supporting blockchain solutions. Just pointing out that the "we have ways to solve those problems already" isn't a very valid argument in software.
- ekianjo 4y ago
  so why were they not already solved efficiently before crypto?
  - hef19898 4y ago
    Who says they were not?
tokai 4y ago
>I admit to seeing some valuable use-cases Could you write them here? Genuinely curious.
- Frost1x 4y ago
  The general concept of having a medium and marketplace of exchange that isn't regulated/controlled has some value. It may have more costs than benefits in the grand scheme of things, though. I tend to support regulation in general, but I also see the value of something that has limited opportunity for opportunists to dig their fingers into and extract from without contributing real value themselves. To be very clear, I'm quite an opponent of cryptocurrency in the the big picture. It could be that taxes become absurd or abusive in some governments or corrupt officials steal or waste their fair share. It may be that some government wants to prevent certain types of exchanges that the rest of society thinks are actually 'OK' and their government no longer reflects their interest. For example, my significant other is filipino and in their culture, many leave the country to work internationally because of limited local opportunity. Part of that culture involves many sending money home regularly to their families. Sending that money has limitations and often goes through currency exchanges and other brokers who collect fees off that money. To my SO and their family, these groups are leeches providing no value. I understand why some of these structures exist (to help reduce money laundering and criminal monetary exchanges, etc.) but most these folks sending money home are doing honest labor and simply trying to support their families abroad but have various middlemen sticking their fingers the pot. Crypto and exchanges could provide a viable route to avoid this and send wealth home with limited interference.
  - tokai 4y ago
    But regulation/control has nothing todo with crypto. Its not a technical issue, but social/political. So tax fraud and remittances are left. Both seems like they will make regulation come eventually.
    - ETH_start 4y ago
      It's much harder to regulate and control when there's no centralized gatekeeper that regulators can target. Distributed consensus reduces the power that all centralized entities - whether government or corporate - exert.
jqpabc123 4y ago
FedNow aims to provide *instant* and secure transfers between existing fiat bank accounts 24/7/365 at a projected cost of 5 cents per transaction. In trials now, scheduled to launch in mid-2023. The most valuable use-case for crypto was prodding the Fed to develop and implement this. If all goes as planned, consider crypto's work done. https://explore.fednow.org https://explore.fednow.org
- axlee 4y ago
  Sweden have had Swish for ten years now, long before crypto was relevant. It is ubiquitous, I believe 90% of the population uses it. It was implemented by a consortium of the largest banks in the country. And it's not only Sweden: other countries have similar systems. I believe the use case and the need of instant bank transfers was long known, and that crypto was never a catalyst for the need to be aknowledged. That the US is generally slow to roll out this kind of national standard is mostly due to politics and general aversion to government work, not because the US waited for crypto to make the problem "known". Relatively very few people use crypto for any sort of real-world currency transfer.
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    That the US is generally slow to roll out this kind of national standard is mostly due to politics and general aversion to government work, not because the US waited for crypto to make the problem "known". By design, the Federal Reserve is semi-independent from the political process in the US and is not government funded. The problem was "known" for years but the threat of crypto played a significant role in finally spurring them into quick action.
- madsbuch 4y ago
  In Europe, the SEPA network, this has been the case for the past years. Just that it is free – and this is across countries. The American banking system is currently in a bad, insecure, and expensive state.
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

azaras 4y ago

But the valuable use-cases could be solved using other methods efficiently.

mattbrewsbytes 4y ago
Oh most certainly. We also have a ever growing list of JavaScript frameworks. Software developers are great at the NIH syndrome or not liking how something was solved and they like their way of solving it. Just because there is another solution path doesn't mean new solution paths to the same problem are void. If you mean more efficiently then that is likely a dimension of the solution where it may not fit for some use cases. For example blockchain transactions are known to be slow when compared to say a RDBMS transaction. If you are recording purchases in a web shopping cart its probably not a good solution. The trade-off here is that for some problem, maybe the speed of the transaction is not a concern. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending, nor supporting blockchain solutions. Just pointing out that the "we have ways to solve those problems already" isn't a very valid argument in software.
ekianjo 4y ago
so why were they not already solved efficiently before crypto?
- hef19898 4y ago
  Who says they were not?

tokai 4y ago

>I admit to seeing some valuable use-cases Could you write them here? Genuinely curious.

Frost1x 4y ago
The general concept of having a medium and marketplace of exchange that isn't regulated/controlled has some value. It may have more costs than benefits in the grand scheme of things, though. I tend to support regulation in general, but I also see the value of something that has limited opportunity for opportunists to dig their fingers into and extract from without contributing real value themselves. To be very clear, I'm quite an opponent of cryptocurrency in the the big picture. It could be that taxes become absurd or abusive in some governments or corrupt officials steal or waste their fair share. It may be that some government wants to prevent certain types of exchanges that the rest of society thinks are actually 'OK' and their government no longer reflects their interest. For example, my significant other is filipino and in their culture, many leave the country to work internationally because of limited local opportunity. Part of that culture involves many sending money home regularly to their families. Sending that money has limitations and often goes through currency exchanges and other brokers who collect fees off that money. To my SO and their family, these groups are leeches providing no value. I understand why some of these structures exist (to help reduce money laundering and criminal monetary exchanges, etc.) but most these folks sending money home are doing honest labor and simply trying to support their families abroad but have various middlemen sticking their fingers the pot. Crypto and exchanges could provide a viable route to avoid this and send wealth home with limited interference.
- tokai 4y ago
  But regulation/control has nothing todo with crypto. Its not a technical issue, but social/political. So tax fraud and remittances are left. Both seems like they will make regulation come eventually.
  - ETH_start 4y ago
    It's much harder to regulate and control when there's no centralized gatekeeper that regulators can target. Distributed consensus reduces the power that all centralized entities - whether government or corporate - exert.

jqpabc123 4y ago

FedNow aims to provide *instant* and secure transfers between existing fiat bank accounts 24/7/365 at a projected cost of 5 cents per transaction. In trials now, scheduled to launch in mid-2023. The most valuable use-case for crypto was prodding the Fed to develop and implement this. If all goes as planned, consider crypto's work done. https://explore.fednow.org https://explore.fednow.org

axlee 4y ago
Sweden have had Swish for ten years now, long before crypto was relevant. It is ubiquitous, I believe 90% of the population uses it. It was implemented by a consortium of the largest banks in the country. And it's not only Sweden: other countries have similar systems. I believe the use case and the need of instant bank transfers was long known, and that crypto was never a catalyst for the need to be aknowledged. That the US is generally slow to roll out this kind of national standard is mostly due to politics and general aversion to government work, not because the US waited for crypto to make the problem "known". Relatively very few people use crypto for any sort of real-world currency transfer.
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  That the US is generally slow to roll out this kind of national standard is mostly due to politics and general aversion to government work, not because the US waited for crypto to make the problem "known". By design, the Federal Reserve is semi-independent from the political process in the US and is not government funded. The problem was "known" for years but the threat of crypto played a significant role in finally spurring them into quick action.
madsbuch 4y ago
In Europe, the SEPA network, this has been the case for the past years. Just that it is free – and this is across countries. The American banking system is currently in a bad, insecure, and expensive state.
- jqpabc123 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]