6 ms·

> Glad we have so much energy focusing on legit bankers instead of the crypto that is actually funding multiple US adversaries at this very moment Funny you cr

> Glad we have so much energy focusing on legit bankers instead of the crypto that is actually funding multiple US adversaries at this very moment Funny you criticize crypto, when it actually solves all the bullshit you're mentioning. It's so nice knowing for a fact that when I send or receive crypto, it will 100% arrive within moments, unlike the absolute shitfest that is international transfers (like SWIFT).

lxgr 3y ago
On the other hand, crypto provides copious evidence for the need of some level of regulation.
- hanniabu 3y ago
  The technology no, the tradfi companies that "use" it (aka custodial user funds) then yes, but those regulations exist since they're no different than any other financial product company.
- psychlops 3y ago
  For conversations sake I'm curious about specific evidence. It's also fun to consider which country or group of countries would provide the regulations and enforcement.
  - jurynulifcation 3y ago
    Consumer protections. Until there are rigorous consumer protections, crypto is only fit for scams imo.
    - psychlops 3y ago
      > Consumer protections. Those are covered by local laws. What protections do you think are missing from crypto that is different from other areas?
      - jurynulifcation 3y ago
        The ability to undo fraudulent charges and claw back illegitimately stolen funds.
TheHiddenSun 3y ago
100% agree. Crypto today is the only way how you can take control of your own funds. What use is the money in your Bank account if the ruling political party can label you an ultra-right extremist and retroactively lock all your money down, just because of a single 1$ donation you did to a cause you believed to be right, like Canada did?
- seattle_spring 3y ago
  No one had their accounts closed in Canada purely based on a donation.
  - mattdesl 3y ago
    There were a number of reports coming from conservative MPs of this very thing happening. Regardless of the veracity of their claims, the financial systems in place were able and prepared to do this, before the measures were lifted. > Even a $20 donation to the Freedom Convoy after Feb. 15 could result in the donor’s bank accounts being frozen, a Commons committee heard Tuesday. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/even-small-donation-to-freedom-convoy-after-feb-15-enough-to-have-donors-bank-accounts-frozen-finance-committee-told https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/even-small-donation-t...
  - shakow 3y ago
    So what justified closing their account instead?
- a1369209993 3y ago
  > can label you an ultra-right extremist and retroactively lock all your money down Nitpick: about half the time (on sufficiently long term average), they'll instead label you a ultra-left extremist (most infamously anti-COMINTERN initiatives in the 1930s-1950s, but it tends to wobble back and forth depending on what's politically convenient).
- Aerbil313 3y ago
  > Crypto today is the only way how you can take control of your own funds. Well, digging a hole in the forest and storing money there technically remains an option. May be more viable than crypto for certain rare use cases.
hanniabu 3y ago
Wouldn't expect any less from HN, but can't blame them much when people like Senator Warren make up lies about terrorist funding.
- silentsea90 3y ago
  I am always surprised how HN folks fall in hook line and sinker for Democratic talking points from senators FAR removed from any understanding of technology and insistent on curbing basic internet freedoms. The previous version of this was the proposal to ban encryption because bad actors can have a private conversation. If you oppose banning encryption but are in support of banning crypto, I would encourage folks to think more deeply about their positions
  - Yizahi 3y ago
    Because HN folks don't want to live in the anarcho-capitalist libertarian dystopia, where whole world "money" is controlled by a few criminals in the offshores, like Zhao, Giancarlo, Sun, Sam, Alex, etc. and by a small mining cartel controlling every transaction consisting mostly of the same people. They don't want to have their transactions blacklisted (like all those "tainted" bitcoins for example) and don't wasn't to be dependent on the centralized exchanges controlled by criminal, on on the decentralized exchanges also controlled by criminals and relying on shitty spaghetti code (just today Uniswap was exploited, but tokenbros don't write about it, interesting right?). They don't want to live a world where every single thing is monetized and rent is extracted forever by a few "early adopters" of said tokens. Sure, there are problems with banks and goverment overreach, but those need to be fixed, not completely replaced with a worse alternative.
    - silentsea90 3y ago
      There is no better fix than Bitcoin. Banks and governments will always try to be fiscally irresponsible by removing a gold standard even if it were brought back. Bitcoin is the easiest way to impose rules on the system. Let me know what you think is a better alternative
  - 3y ago
mindslight 3y ago
> Funny you criticize crypto [currency], when it actually solves all the bullshit you're mentioning. Maybe if you're talking about Monero or another currency with the key security property of untraceability. Otherwise it's only a matter of time until cryptocurrency exchanges require documentation about the sources of money, which will likely resemble a parallel blockchain that carries wallet metadata.
fzeroracer 3y ago
Ah yes Crypto definitely solves all of the problems. Please ignore the rich men behind the curtains shutting down exchanges and stealing money, the numerous ways people have had crypto stolen from them or how volatile crypto is in general. Make sure to hold my bag for me.
- shakow 3y ago
  Technically, people wishing to use crypto as a bank account would care as much about the exchanges as a ‶normal″ bank customer should care about regulation enforcement on some random bookmaker; both run on [insert currency], but that's about it.
fullarr 3y ago
To OPs point, everything you said is why criminals use it too He's not wrong

lxgr 3y ago

On the other hand, crypto provides copious evidence for the need of some level of regulation.

hanniabu 3y ago
The technology no, the tradfi companies that "use" it (aka custodial user funds) then yes, but those regulations exist since they're no different than any other financial product company.
psychlops 3y ago
For conversations sake I'm curious about specific evidence. It's also fun to consider which country or group of countries would provide the regulations and enforcement.
- jurynulifcation 3y ago
  Consumer protections. Until there are rigorous consumer protections, crypto is only fit for scams imo.
  - psychlops 3y ago
    > Consumer protections. Those are covered by local laws. What protections do you think are missing from crypto that is different from other areas?
    - jurynulifcation 3y ago
      The ability to undo fraudulent charges and claw back illegitimately stolen funds.

TheHiddenSun 3y ago

100% agree. Crypto today is the only way how you can take control of your own funds. What use is the money in your Bank account if the ruling political party can label you an ultra-right extremist and retroactively lock all your money down, just because of a single 1$ donation you did to a cause you believed to be right, like Canada did?

seattle_spring 3y ago
No one had their accounts closed in Canada purely based on a donation.
- mattdesl 3y ago
  There were a number of reports coming from conservative MPs of this very thing happening. Regardless of the veracity of their claims, the financial systems in place were able and prepared to do this, before the measures were lifted. > Even a $20 donation to the Freedom Convoy after Feb. 15 could result in the donor’s bank accounts being frozen, a Commons committee heard Tuesday. https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/even-small-donation-to-freedom-convoy-after-feb-15-enough-to-have-donors-bank-accounts-frozen-finance-committee-told https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/even-small-donation-t...
- shakow 3y ago
  So what justified closing their account instead?
a1369209993 3y ago
> can label you an ultra-right extremist and retroactively lock all your money down Nitpick: about half the time (on sufficiently long term average), they'll instead label you a ultra-left extremist (most infamously anti-COMINTERN initiatives in the 1930s-1950s, but it tends to wobble back and forth depending on what's politically convenient).
Aerbil313 3y ago
> Crypto today is the only way how you can take control of your own funds. Well, digging a hole in the forest and storing money there technically remains an option. May be more viable than crypto for certain rare use cases.

hanniabu 3y ago

Wouldn't expect any less from HN, but can't blame them much when people like Senator Warren make up lies about terrorist funding.

silentsea90 3y ago
I am always surprised how HN folks fall in hook line and sinker for Democratic talking points from senators FAR removed from any understanding of technology and insistent on curbing basic internet freedoms. The previous version of this was the proposal to ban encryption because bad actors can have a private conversation. If you oppose banning encryption but are in support of banning crypto, I would encourage folks to think more deeply about their positions
- Yizahi 3y ago
  Because HN folks don't want to live in the anarcho-capitalist libertarian dystopia, where whole world "money" is controlled by a few criminals in the offshores, like Zhao, Giancarlo, Sun, Sam, Alex, etc. and by a small mining cartel controlling every transaction consisting mostly of the same people. They don't want to have their transactions blacklisted (like all those "tainted" bitcoins for example) and don't wasn't to be dependent on the centralized exchanges controlled by criminal, on on the decentralized exchanges also controlled by criminals and relying on shitty spaghetti code (just today Uniswap was exploited, but tokenbros don't write about it, interesting right?). They don't want to live a world where every single thing is monetized and rent is extracted forever by a few "early adopters" of said tokens. Sure, there are problems with banks and goverment overreach, but those need to be fixed, not completely replaced with a worse alternative.
  - silentsea90 3y ago
    There is no better fix than Bitcoin. Banks and governments will always try to be fiscally irresponsible by removing a gold standard even if it were brought back. Bitcoin is the easiest way to impose rules on the system. Let me know what you think is a better alternative
- 3y ago

mindslight 3y ago

> Funny you criticize crypto [currency], when it actually solves all the bullshit you're mentioning. Maybe if you're talking about Monero or another currency with the key security property of untraceability. Otherwise it's only a matter of time until cryptocurrency exchanges require documentation about the sources of money, which will likely resemble a parallel blockchain that carries wallet metadata.

fzeroracer 3y ago

Ah yes Crypto definitely solves all of the problems. Please ignore the rich men behind the curtains shutting down exchanges and stealing money, the numerous ways people have had crypto stolen from them or how volatile crypto is in general. Make sure to hold my bag for me.

shakow 3y ago
Technically, people wishing to use crypto as a bank account would care as much about the exchanges as a ‶normal″ bank customer should care about regulation enforcement on some random bookmaker; both run on [insert currency], but that's about it.

fullarr 3y ago

To OPs point, everything you said is why criminals use it too He's not wrong