3 ms·

I don't understand how people make these statements. None is a very strong word, just need one counter example to disprove his argument.

talldayo 3y ago
I can name a lot of counterexamples, however most of them are illegal under US federal law so it's a bit of a moot point. There are legal counterexamples, but the majority that come to mind are equally well-served with fiat. If you ask me to come up with a good, legal reason to hold cryptocurrency, I may well tell you that there is none even if there are a few marginal situations that justify it.
- RetroTechie 3y ago
  See PurpleRamen's comment above. Blockchain != cryptocurrency. For blockchain, there exist some good (and legitimate) applications. Cryptocoins otoh... lots of gray area there. If not outright Ponzi schemes. I hope some day, some crypto coin(s) will fulfill their original promise. But that day is not today.
  - talldayo 3y ago
    Distributed blockchain applications are normally unnecessary when they are used though, and absolutely overkill when applied with distributed proofs. Very often a network only needs a secured channel to operate, which can be established with much lower overhead than a blockchain. Currency seems to be the only application that would respect such extreme security measures, and that's really only highlighted the low throughput and capacity problems. I really do feel the same about blockchains as I do about cryptocurrency. Both have extremely limited applications that appear marketable and attractive to nerd-adjacent circles, but only show their drawbacks once fully invested. The intention behind creating a blockchain (or even some cryptocurrency) is pure in it's inception. The application of both technologies is so messy that I would recommend most people stick with simpler options.

3 ms·

I don't understand how people make these statements. None is a very strong word, just need one counter example to disprove his argument.

by katella 3y ago

talldayo 3y ago
I can name a lot of counterexamples, however most of them are illegal under US federal law so it's a bit of a moot point. There are legal counterexamples, but the majority that come to mind are equally well-served with fiat. If you ask me to come up with a good, legal reason to hold cryptocurrency, I may well tell you that there is none even if there are a few marginal situations that justify it.
- RetroTechie 3y ago
  See PurpleRamen's comment above. Blockchain != cryptocurrency. For blockchain, there exist some good (and legitimate) applications. Cryptocoins otoh... lots of gray area there. If not outright Ponzi schemes. I hope some day, some crypto coin(s) will fulfill their original promise. But that day is not today.
  - talldayo 3y ago
    Distributed blockchain applications are normally unnecessary when they are used though, and absolutely overkill when applied with distributed proofs. Very often a network only needs a secured channel to operate, which can be established with much lower overhead than a blockchain. Currency seems to be the only application that would respect such extreme security measures, and that's really only highlighted the low throughput and capacity problems. I really do feel the same about blockchains as I do about cryptocurrency. Both have extremely limited applications that appear marketable and attractive to nerd-adjacent circles, but only show their drawbacks once fully invested. The intention behind creating a blockchain (or even some cryptocurrency) is pure in it's inception. The application of both technologies is so messy that I would recommend most people stick with simpler options.