3 ms·
That's a good argument for continuing to explore cryptocurrency-adjacent tech (or simply programming, if you like), but not necessarily purchasing and promoting
by afarviral 4y ago
That's a good argument for continuing to explore cryptocurrency-adjacent tech (or simply programming, if you like), but not necessarily purchasing and promoting the use of cryptocurrencies.
There is a confusing entanglement between the thoughts about the technology vs the thoughts about actually doing financial transactions with it. I have admiration for the developers and awe at the websites, games and services that were spawned, the technology. As a financial construct it's a perfect storm for exploitation; human nature + unregulated hyper-capitalism = bad.
- BLKNSLVR 4y agoNot even going to the level of promoting or purchasing, just not "now it should no longer exist". Regulation is required, As much as for banking because consumer funds are being stored and / or transferred. FTX was just grossly, fraudulently mismanaged and I'm not actually sure the exact machinations of regulation that could ensure that kind of thing doesn't happen - regular reporting of figures, independent audits, etc, but then with the money FTX had been throwing around it would have been easy to fake reports and pay for clean audits (in my layman view of a very complex landscape).
- throwaway22032 4y agoThe thing is that regulation could very easily require that exchanges be decentralised. But that won't happen because money laundering is a religious belief. Instead we'll just get more stupid attempts to watch the watchmen.