5 ms·

Are you the emperor of the world that has the right to tell people what to do? Crypto solves some of the specific problems that people repeatedly have dealing

Are you the emperor of the world that has the right to tell people what to do? Crypto solves some of the specific problems that people repeatedly have dealing with mega-corporations and/or fiat currencies. HackerNews has the collective memory of a goldfish when it comes to crypto. We constantly see peoples' money being stolen and messed with, but then a smug elitist comes out of nowhere and says "Well, ackshually, there's no possible use case for crypto." Absolutely disgusting that we cannot learn from history.

colesantiago 4y ago
> Crypto solves some of the specific problems that people repeatedly have dealing with mega-corporations and/or fiat currencies. Which are? > We constantly see peoples' money being stolen and messed with, but then a smug elitist comes out of nowhere and says "Well, ackshually, there's no possible use case for crypto." Yes, with the same 'smug elitists' building, funding crypto exchanges built as a giant ponzi scheme that inevitably crashes and burns to the ground and lose everyone's money in the process. Maybe it isn't a good idea to try and speedrun all the asset bubbles of financial history. > Absolutely disgusting that we cannot learn from history. Tulip Mania (1634) The South Sea Bubble (1720) Comic book speculation bubble (1985-1993) Beanie Babies Bubble (2000) They all end in the same way.
- logicalmonster 4y ago
  I notice you didn't respond to my question about whether or not you're the emperor of the world who has the right to tell people what to do. Please clarify if you are or are not. I certainly wouldn't want to disrespect his or her majesty. > Which are? You are literally responding in a thread about money being allegedly stolen from a non-profit by a mega-corporation. Are you pretending to not see a possible use-case for crypto in any arc of this story? Sad! Many such cases. > Yes, with the same 'smug elitists' building, funding crypto exchanges built as a giant ponzi scheme that inevitably crashes and burns to the ground and lose everyone's money in the process. The problems with centralized exchanges are not problems with crypto in and of itself. The crypto way of thinking about exchanges is actually "Not your keys, not your coins". > Maybe it isn't a good idea to try and speedrun all the asset bubbles of financial history. There's many reasonable debates and disagreements about how you define crypto and what it currently is and what it will be, but there's significant qualitative differences between crypto and these other examples. For instance, a farmer can grow more tulips and flood the market. Or a tulip easily ages and dries out and has no value. But there can only ever be 21 million Bitcoins, and they exist forever. A beanie baby sort of just sits on a shelf, collecting dust, and silently judging you. But crypto has amazing possible real world utility without even thinking about its value as money, such as being a decentralized programmable tool.
  - colesantiago 4y ago
    > I notice you didn't respond to my question about whether or not you're the emperor of the world who has the right to tell people what to do. Because this is irrelevant. > You are literally responding in a thread about money being allegedly stolen from a non-profit by a mega-corporation. Are you pretending to not see a possible use-case for crypto in any arc of this story? Sad! Many such cases. Yes, the many such great usecases being, enabling ransomware, speculation, scams and rugpulls and losing your money due to volatility. Any usecases crypto tries to provide or replace is never any better than the current financial system. We have UPI which launched in 2016 with already over hundreds of millions of active users using it for P2P payments, a goal that Bitcoin was supposed to achieve but completely failed in doing so. Anything Bitcoin can do, the current financial system can do it already or even better, safer with less energy needed. No matter how you dress it up, Bitcoin and all the other cryptos have no legitimate usecase whatsoever.
    - logicalmonster 4y ago
      > Because this is irrelevant. I made the point in a bit of a flippant way, but the strong authoritarian leanings of the people who dislike crypto are not an irrelevant point to me. Why are the people who seem to like telling others what to do the most also the ones who hate crypto the most? This pattern really activates my almonds. > Any usecases crypto tries to provide or replace is never any better than the current financial system. We have UPI which launched in 2016 with already over hundreds of millions of active users using it for P2P payments, a goal that Bitcoin was supposed to achieve but completely failed in doing so. Anything Bitcoin can do, the current financial system can do it already or even better, safer with less energy needed. No matter how you dress it up, Bitcoin and all the other cryptos have no legitimate usecase whatsoever. 1) Once again, you're literally responding to a story where a non-profit allegedly got their money stolen by a mega-corporation. How did the current financial system protect them? (even if this case isn't accurate, you could substitute many other news cases. Just search for "paypal stole" in HackerNews for a pile of examples, just from one company) 2) I assume you're referring to India's UPI. I'm sure that this kind of financial infrastructure works phenomenally, just until the point that you're a political adversary and the government decides that it wants to mess with your ability to transact to stifle your voice. For people on society's margins who speak inconvenient truths, crypto's inability to easily get shut down is an advantage that the existing financial infrastructure cannot offer.

colesantiago 4y ago

> Crypto solves some of the specific problems that people repeatedly have dealing with mega-corporations and/or fiat currencies. Which are? > We constantly see peoples' money being stolen and messed with, but then a smug elitist comes out of nowhere and says "Well, ackshually, there's no possible use case for crypto." Yes, with the same 'smug elitists' building, funding crypto exchanges built as a giant ponzi scheme that inevitably crashes and burns to the ground and lose everyone's money in the process. Maybe it isn't a good idea to try and speedrun all the asset bubbles of financial history. > Absolutely disgusting that we cannot learn from history. Tulip Mania (1634) The South Sea Bubble (1720) Comic book speculation bubble (1985-1993) Beanie Babies Bubble (2000) They all end in the same way.

logicalmonster 4y ago
I notice you didn't respond to my question about whether or not you're the emperor of the world who has the right to tell people what to do. Please clarify if you are or are not. I certainly wouldn't want to disrespect his or her majesty. > Which are? You are literally responding in a thread about money being allegedly stolen from a non-profit by a mega-corporation. Are you pretending to not see a possible use-case for crypto in any arc of this story? Sad! Many such cases. > Yes, with the same 'smug elitists' building, funding crypto exchanges built as a giant ponzi scheme that inevitably crashes and burns to the ground and lose everyone's money in the process. The problems with centralized exchanges are not problems with crypto in and of itself. The crypto way of thinking about exchanges is actually "Not your keys, not your coins". > Maybe it isn't a good idea to try and speedrun all the asset bubbles of financial history. There's many reasonable debates and disagreements about how you define crypto and what it currently is and what it will be, but there's significant qualitative differences between crypto and these other examples. For instance, a farmer can grow more tulips and flood the market. Or a tulip easily ages and dries out and has no value. But there can only ever be 21 million Bitcoins, and they exist forever. A beanie baby sort of just sits on a shelf, collecting dust, and silently judging you. But crypto has amazing possible real world utility without even thinking about its value as money, such as being a decentralized programmable tool.
- colesantiago 4y ago
  > I notice you didn't respond to my question about whether or not you're the emperor of the world who has the right to tell people what to do. Because this is irrelevant. > You are literally responding in a thread about money being allegedly stolen from a non-profit by a mega-corporation. Are you pretending to not see a possible use-case for crypto in any arc of this story? Sad! Many such cases. Yes, the many such great usecases being, enabling ransomware, speculation, scams and rugpulls and losing your money due to volatility. Any usecases crypto tries to provide or replace is never any better than the current financial system. We have UPI which launched in 2016 with already over hundreds of millions of active users using it for P2P payments, a goal that Bitcoin was supposed to achieve but completely failed in doing so. Anything Bitcoin can do, the current financial system can do it already or even better, safer with less energy needed. No matter how you dress it up, Bitcoin and all the other cryptos have no legitimate usecase whatsoever.
  - logicalmonster 4y ago
    > Because this is irrelevant. I made the point in a bit of a flippant way, but the strong authoritarian leanings of the people who dislike crypto are not an irrelevant point to me. Why are the people who seem to like telling others what to do the most also the ones who hate crypto the most? This pattern really activates my almonds. > Any usecases crypto tries to provide or replace is never any better than the current financial system. We have UPI which launched in 2016 with already over hundreds of millions of active users using it for P2P payments, a goal that Bitcoin was supposed to achieve but completely failed in doing so. Anything Bitcoin can do, the current financial system can do it already or even better, safer with less energy needed. No matter how you dress it up, Bitcoin and all the other cryptos have no legitimate usecase whatsoever. 1) Once again, you're literally responding to a story where a non-profit allegedly got their money stolen by a mega-corporation. How did the current financial system protect them? (even if this case isn't accurate, you could substitute many other news cases. Just search for "paypal stole" in HackerNews for a pile of examples, just from one company) 2) I assume you're referring to India's UPI. I'm sure that this kind of financial infrastructure works phenomenally, just until the point that you're a political adversary and the government decides that it wants to mess with your ability to transact to stifle your voice. For people on society's margins who speak inconvenient truths, crypto's inability to easily get shut down is an advantage that the existing financial infrastructure cannot offer.