6 ms·
Nobody could ever successfully explain to me the lawful utility of crypto at all.
by telepathy 3y ago
Nobody could ever successfully explain to me the lawful utility of crypto at all.
- jongjong 3y agoYou fell for the most basic narrative of the fiat schemers who are destroying our society and manufacturing artificial inequality on a massive scale. Do you want to be ruled by criminals, be surrounded by crazy people? If not, then you see the utility of crypto. The utility of crypto is to enable a fair, functioning society. That is literally, the most important utility of all.
- telepathy 3y agoHow does crypto help with that?
- jongjong 3y agoBy allowing capitalism to exist on top of sound, probably scarce, voluntary monetary systems as opposed to an unfair system where one's social proximity to the money printer determines all outcomes of faux-capitalism.
- telepathy 3y agoHow does crypto help change the law to become fair? As opposed to just facilitating unlawful activity.
- jongjong 3y agoBy putting pressure and providing an alternative. Without alternative, there is zero pressure or incentive to improve anything and gross injustice will become normalized and get worse. IMO, without crypto, we would already be living in feudalism. Especially with all the surveillance tech we have today.
- telepathy 3y agoSo you're saying the only value of crypto is some fringe act of civil disobedience that has so far been futile and riddled with fraud. Cool
- jongjong 3y agoYes. Unfortunately for some of us it's the only chance we have to contribute to society as current system is too centralized and deprives us of all opportunities. You'd have to be in our shoes to understand how weird things are for some of us. Like you could build something that's 100x better than any alternative and can't get more than a few users because of algorithm censorship. Users will tell you how great your product is but it won't move the needle because the information about the product's existence just won't propagate. There are no mediums for it to propagate and there is just one monoculture which works against you and, worst of all, gaslights you constantly.
- telepathy 3y agoAre you running for elected office? If not, then you're suffering from delusions of grandeur.
- jcranmer 3y agoAre you describing cryptocurrency or fiat money? Because "social proximity to the money printer" describes an awful lot of cryptocurrency, e.g., FTX or Tether.
- jongjong 3y agoYes, that's the current reality. Only scams have been allowed to succeed and I would not be surprised if the people who propped them up have special access to money printers as it is an extremely wasteful scheme. I feel like crypto has been a giant money laundering operation for corrupt governments. Still, it posseses the capacity to solve our monetary issues. I don't know how many more waves of scams it will take to solve the problem though. It depends how far fiat proponents are willing to go bribing away the crypto competition decade after decade. But I'm quite sure that crypto will not go away.
- telepathy 3y agoI thought you said the problem was bad monetary policy. Why not focus on improving that? That's not a tech problem, it's a policy problem.
- olalonde 3y agoIt's really best to do both. People opposed to government surveillance tend to use E2E encryption (tech) and also lobby their government for change (policy). Same with cryptocurrency.
- jongjong 3y agoIf they could just shut down money printing, that would solve the problem... But they won't do that unless there is a way to verify that money printing is not taking place in secret. People who live under corrupt governments are familiar with this reality. People should be able to have total confidence in the integrity of their monetary system to ensure that they are not unwittingly supporting actions that go against their morals. Blockchain would allow precisely that.
- capableweb 3y agoAtomic Transfers.
- telepathy 3y agoI assume you're being sarcastic but I kind of hope you're not
- KptMarchewa 3y agoThe bigger fool theory.
- olalonde 3y agoCryptography or cryptocurrency?
- telepathy 3y agoLet's say the top 100 coins by market cap. What's the lawful utility of their existence?
- olalonde 3y agoFor Bitcoin: > A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.
- TillE 3y agoBitcoin specifically is notoriously awful for this purpose, and has been for many years, because of slow transactions with high fees. But even setting those aside, what's the actual point? Why does a normal person care about making online payments without involving a bank?
- olalonde 3y agoFor one, there is no electronic alternative for 69% of the global population. That's how many people are unbanked and/or do not have access to a financial institution.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- telepathy 3y agoThat's because it's either illegal or legally too expensive to give them banking services. You're not describing a tech problem. Banking tech exists. You don't get to decide what random countries want to do with their monetary policy or financial service regulations.
- junofan 3y agoIt’s not a bad idea to have trailblazers exploring a parallel financial system. Once mature, it may help us solve problems humanity has encountered repeatedly. Global financial crises have a history of toppling governments and provoking conflicts; a neutral system could serve as a release valve instead of fighting over who gets to play policeman. In the far future, adopting a dual-currency model may be preferable for whichever nation hosts the world’s reserve currency.
- telepathy 3y agoThis is the standard Web3 type delusions of grandeur that hypes everyone up. Developers don't have a say in such matters. They're not policymakers. Wrong profession.
- jrm4 3y agoSo you're suggesting "definitely keep programmers and developers from experimenting on ideas about how our money system works?" Weird gatekeeping, bro.
- StanislavPetrov 3y agoSending money to people internationally without the blessing, permission or fees of your government or central bank is the primary utility. It is simply astounding to me that otherwise intelligent people can't understand this simple and incredibly useful function. If I want to send $10 to my cousin in Brazil or Madagascar, how do I do that exactly without crypto? Sending him $10 in litecoin takes a few minutes to process through the blockchain, and costs just a few cents in processing fees. What is the alternative, especially if he doesn't a bank account or ready access to a bank? Paying high fees to Moneygram or Western Union, waiting an extended period of time and undergoing an onerous KYC process that often ends up in your funds being returned or rejected from many foreign countries? If you are wealthy, live in the United States, have a bank account, no interest in privacy, and are looking to send and/or receive money from other wealthy people from the United States who also have bank accounts and don't have any interest in privacy, then crypto holds no allure.
- telepathy 3y ago"without the blessing, permission or fees of your government or central bank" = "unlawful" We're looking for lawful use cases that cant' be done with a regular database
- StanislavPetrov 3y agoSorry that's completely wrong. It isn't illegal for me to send $10 in litecoin to my cousin in Brazil or Madagascar without the blessing, permission or fees charged by the government, the banks or fiat currency companies like Moneygram (as much as they would like to make it so). Suggesting that sending $10 in litecoin to my cousin in another country cheaply and easily (which would otherwise be impossible in the traditional banking system) while at the same time arguing that crypto should be illegal because it has no utility is absurd on its face.
- telepathy 3y agoIt's also not unlawful for you to flush it down the toilet. What's your point? We're looking for a use case that can't be done with a regular database. Why are you selecting litecoin as your example, out of curiosity? What's the difference?
- Ridj48dhsnsh 3y agoThere is little to no lawful utility. The value of crypto has always been in its ability to take the power to control the financial freedom of individuals away from government and put it back in the hands of people. Whether you agree that is a good thing or not, depends on your political views towards authoritarian governments.
- telepathy 3y agoThe value of crypto has always been some fringe act of futile civil disobedience? Yikes
- akoboldfrying 3y ago>fringe >futile How did these words get there?
- telepathy 3y agoJust observation
- akoboldfrying 3y agoThey aren't supported by the comment you responded to. IOW, you showed your hand.
- telepathy 3y agoMy "hand" is expressing that nobody has successfully been able to explain the lawful utility of crypto. Whatever you're doing now is certainly no exception. It's not my fault that you can't explain, but you simultaneously have strong feelings about it.
- akoboldfrying 3y agoYour "hand" is revealing your preconceived conclusions after posing as someone open to learning more.
- robbywashere_ 3y agoThe uncensorable transmission or store of value anonymously/pseudonymously; is pretty close to the promise of the original whitepaper. But with something like the evm, there is much more.
- akoboldfrying 3y agoAs a lower bound, it's at least as useful as other things that people regard as valuable mostly because, historically, people have regarded it as valuable. Gold is in this category -- but so would be Awesomium, a substance I just made up but which myself and my associates are certain is gonna be the Next Big Thing, so get in now before it gets big, YOLO! If you trust institutions like banks, tax departments and reserve banks, and transacting with them is easy and cheap, the value of crypto as a medium of exchange is very low. This is how the majority of people feel in the developed world, though whether this is rational (given things like the fact a government can just unilaterally change the rules by printing, or burning, a bunch of money) is disputed. To the extent you don't trust these institutions, or they make transacting hard, the value of alternatives, like cash notes and coins, barter, or crypto increases.
- telepathy 3y agoInventing tech to circumvent law is obviously "unlawful"
- akoboldfrying 3y agoYou claim that the only possible uses of cryptocurrency are to circumvent the law. If that were the case, governments would have simply made holding or trading it illegal -- but with few exceptions (bitcoin in China), they have not done so.
- telepathy 3y agoSo why don't you simply explain a few lawful use cases that are impossible with an ordinary database? Just do that and case closed, you win.
- akoboldfrying 3y ago>a few lawful use cases that are impossible This is not your original question -- you have smuggled the word "impossible" in there, hoping I wouldn't notice. Plainly a thing can have value even if what it can do can be done in other ways. It might be more convenient than those other ways, or cheaper, or be more reliable. It might involve having to trust fewer commercial third parties like banks -- which, you'll notice, has no implications for lawfulness. As I already stated, crypto can be used as a store of value like gold, or for exchange like cash or barter. Neither of these uses are necessarily illegal. I'm done here.
- jrm4 3y agoNor need they? "Legality" isn't a prerequisite to utility, even utility that can be good for the world? I believe that the presence of "exchange of value outside of government control" is potentially a valuable thing even if it can be used for bad. I believe the same about free speech and encryption.
- telepathy 3y agoIt's a prerequisite for the vast majority of law abiding people. Not everyone is a fringe crypto activist willing to take legal risks.
- jrm4 3y agoYou're absolutely correct. It's also true that, historically, "fringe, law-breaking activists" have sometimes been on the better side of history. Which is why one needs a better argument than "it's illegal" to restrict the freedom of individuals to transact with money.
- telepathy 3y agoOkay yeah that's why crytpo is a fringe libertarian collectible like those infomercial "gold coins" and nothing more. You agree.
- RestlessMind 3y ago1. Store of wealth for ordinary people in badly governed countries (Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka) - provably beyond the control of any government, easy to conceal, easy to transfer. See real examples of how individuals are using it - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32406095 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32406095 2. Store of wealth for countries who do not want to keep their reserves in other countries fiat currencies. Gold is one alternative and Bitcoin is a good second option. 3. International settlements - if Pakistan wants to buy cheap oil from Iran, what currency do they transact it? Neither one wants to keep each other's currency on their hand because of a low level of trust. USD/EUR was one alternative but it is increasingly weaponized and anyway one cannot buy Iranian oil with it. That leaves only Gold, which is too hard to transport. Happy to engage further if you want to discuss in good faith.
- telepathy 3y ago1. Badly governed countries still have laws you are required to obey - regardless of your opinion. 2. Beanie babies would be the only third option. There is no 4th option. 3. They could use beanie babies.
- RestlessMind 3y ago> Badly governed countries still have laws you are required to obey - regardless of your opinion. That's determined en masse by the citizens of those bad governments - regardless of your opinion. There is a reason why black markets thrive, societies decay and revolutions happen. Repeatedly.
- telepathy 3y agoAutocratic governments are not determined en masse by citizens and you still have to obey regardless of your little opinion.