5 ms·

There's definitely skepticism around here. A lot of people here were around when the Satoshi paper came out. The hype began almost instantly - let's disrupt gov

by afpx 4y ago

There's definitely skepticism around here. A lot of people here were around when the Satoshi paper came out. The hype began almost instantly - let's disrupt governments with a utopian free-market! Everyone will have an equal say! And, people rolled their eyes because they knew that these systems follow power laws, and eventually the utopia will resemble the status quo. Around the same time, some people realized that bitcoin was deflationary. And, you had two groups: One started hoarding coins and pumping it, and the other group realized it was a pyramid and had too good a conscious to participate. And, the pumping continued until today. And, maybe some people are sour? Then, for 14 years, tons of money was dumped into it, and not much happened. It's still mainly used for black market goods. It still has terrible user interface. The transaction rate is still low. The transaction fees are high. And, it's too easy to have your coins stolen.

stickfigure 4y ago
This seems to be the exact line of thought that Scott is challenging. He agrees with you, "Yes, The Crypto Financial System Is Just Reinventing The Regular Financial System Except Worse In Every Way, And That’s Fine". If you live in a stable economy with good governance and a trustworthy financial system, you don't need crypto. Unfortunately, that does not describe everyone in the world. It may not even describe half of the world.
- r00fus 4y ago
  If what you're saying is correct wouldn't the transaction costs / volume reflect increased usage for those "unserved" by a trustworthy financial system? ie, it's not fine.
  - stickfigure 4y ago
    I guess SA's opinion is close enough to my own that I'm willing to defend it in public. However, I don't understand your question/statement - can you restate it?
darawk 4y ago
> Then, for 14 years, tons of money was dumped into it, and not much happened. It's still mainly used for black market goods. It still has terrible user interface. The transaction rate is still low. The transaction fees are high. And, it's too easy to have your coins stolen. I agree that, in the case of Bitcoin specifically, it's still primarily used for black market goods (excluding speculation, of course), among relatively wealthy developed market users. However, there are a non-trivial number of genuine users among economies with less stable banking systems, as the OP points out. And it isn't true that fees are still high and tx rate is still low, the lightning network solves that problem. It hasn't seen super widespread adoption yet, but the technical problem, as far as fees and transaction rates, is essentially solved. What you are correct about though is that the UX is still pretty terrible for the average person. However, in some places, that UX is a better alternative than the one they have access to locally.

by afpx 4y ago

stickfigure 4y ago

This seems to be the exact line of thought that Scott is challenging. He agrees with you, "Yes, The Crypto Financial System Is Just Reinventing The Regular Financial System Except Worse In Every Way, And That’s Fine". If you live in a stable economy with good governance and a trustworthy financial system, you don't need crypto. Unfortunately, that does not describe everyone in the world. It may not even describe half of the world.

r00fus 4y ago
If what you're saying is correct wouldn't the transaction costs / volume reflect increased usage for those "unserved" by a trustworthy financial system? ie, it's not fine.
- stickfigure 4y ago
  I guess SA's opinion is close enough to my own that I'm willing to defend it in public. However, I don't understand your question/statement - can you restate it?

darawk 4y ago

> Then, for 14 years, tons of money was dumped into it, and not much happened. It's still mainly used for black market goods. It still has terrible user interface. The transaction rate is still low. The transaction fees are high. And, it's too easy to have your coins stolen. I agree that, in the case of Bitcoin specifically, it's still primarily used for black market goods (excluding speculation, of course), among relatively wealthy developed market users. However, there are a non-trivial number of genuine users among economies with less stable banking systems, as the OP points out. And it isn't true that fees are still high and tx rate is still low, the lightning network solves that problem. It hasn't seen super widespread adoption yet, but the technical problem, as far as fees and transaction rates, is essentially solved. What you are correct about though is that the UX is still pretty terrible for the average person. However, in some places, that UX is a better alternative than the one they have access to locally.