6 ms·

People have longed said that crypto has no use cases. They're clearly wrong. There is only one true use case for crypto: Making it easier to skirt the law. Thi

People have longed said that crypto has no use cases. They're clearly wrong. There is only one true use case for crypto: Making it easier to skirt the law. This includes: selling/trading unregistered securities, scams, rug pulls, money laundering.

tromp 3y ago
Simple counterexample: I've use crypto to pay out bounties to anonymous coders for doubling the performance of my open source software.
- boringg 3y ago
  You have a sample size issue for your counter.
  - Kiro 3y ago
    It's a huge movement happening in the OSS space but HN refuses to acknowledge it.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - smohare 3y ago
      Do you have any stats to support this is some “huge movement” relative to whatever is considered standard practice? I ask this as an honest question since I’d never heard of the phenomenon, but am not steeped in OSS dev work by any means.
    - bnchrch 3y ago
      HN unfortunately isn't very objective on this particular subject.
- bnchrch 3y ago
  It let me purchase and sell a small software app without going to the bank, signing documents, paying $75 just to orchestrate a wire transfer.
  - aurareturn 3y ago
    Yes, skirting the law. Banks/payments have regulations.
    - bnchrch 3y ago
      Nothing wrong / illegal about what we did. Legitimate business, Used stable coins, filed taxes.
      - aurareturn 3y ago
        Not the point. Crypto skips all the regulations.
        megadal 3y ago
        > Not the point. No that's exactly the point. The point is what is a legitimate use case for crypto, this use case is getting around pointless bureaucracy. You don't get around regulations, the responsibility of adhering to them just shifts from a third party to you, hence the person you're replying to paid taxes. Are you implying avoiding operating fees is not a valid use case? Operating fees help facilitate adherence to regulation at scale but they themselves are not the regulation.
boringg 3y ago
Why do you think it's doing so well?
mam2 3y ago
This includes - making donation to ukraine if you're russian - not have your asset frozen if you protest and the canada government disagree - protecting yourself against false accusation - protecting again a country that would turn communist in an election (closer than you think in some european ones) - getting an additional veil of anonymity if you have to do something illegal in your state such as abortion or defending gay rights. so yeah this is 'against the law' but sometime the law is not on the good side.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > making donation to ukraine if you're russian Crypto, much less crypto from Russians, hasn't been a meaningful contribution vector for Ukraine. Even when we look at the crypto donated, most (EDIT: half) of it was dollar denominated [1]. [1] https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/07/27/ukraine-has-raised-225m-in-crypto-to-fight-russian-invasion-but-donations-have-stagnated-over-the-last-year-crystal/ https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/07/27/ukrai...
  - eimrine 3y ago
    > Even when we look at the crypto donated, most of it was dollar denominated [1]. Have you at least read your source? 120 of 225M were BTC + ETH. > Crypto, much less crypto from Russians, hasn't been a meaningful contribution vector for Ukraine. Crypto is there barely since the Second Maydan, of course Ukrainians managed to survive without cryptocurrencies. If you look closely on your arguments, you will find just a rejection without any arguments. Didn't you observe the recent news about Xenia Havana who donated $50 from her American bank account being in Russia and therefore went into jail?
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > 120 of 225M were BTC + ETH Sorry, meant to say half. Corrected. Thank you. > Xenia Havana who donated $50 from her American bank account being in Russia and therefore went into jail? $50 is not meaningful.
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> one true use case for crypto: Making it easier to skirt the law And gambling. That's a $580bn market on its own [1]. Add to that the $2 to 5tn of money laundering that occurs globally [2][3], assume a 15% take rate, and on the upper bound you have another $580bn market. Curiously, adding those together one gets 91% of the current "market cap" of Bitcoin [4]. Really, all Bitcoin has to do is displace every casino and every cartel and it would be worth over 90% of its current price. [1] https://www.thebusinessresearchcompany.com/report/gambling-global-market-report https://www.thebusinessresearchcompany.com/report/gambling-g... [2] https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2015/09/28/04/53/sp021098 https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2015/09/28/04/53/sp0210... [3] https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/OEMDC/ADVE... [4] https://coinmarketcap.com https://coinmarketcap.com
- derangedHorse 3y ago
  I subjectively disagree with your sentiment but can objectively show you are not accurately quoting your sources. Source [2] and [3] show nothing about $2-$5 trillion dollars being laundered globally. [2] links to an article written in 1998 presumably re-published in 2015 because of the number's presence in the url path, and [3] links to the 'GDP, current prices' of the IMF. Maybe your estimate for the amount of money laundered globally is factual, but your links definitely don't show that. Also, nothing is "curious" about you adding rough estimates together and getting a random percentage of something else.
eimrine 3y ago
> There is only one true use case for crypto: Same with the second amendmend: the only one true use case for firearms is > Making it easier to skirt the law ...if (not if, when) the Government goes nuts.
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  Only if it goes "nuts" in very specific ways: Anything that means the government can exercise large scale organized violence while backed by a sufficient number of people means it doesn't help.
  - eimrine 3y ago
    That is not a "very" specific way considering that the government has monopoly on violence by definition of the government. Actually most of the governments are exactly on that ground abusing the fact that only few countries allows the citizens to own firearms.
    - RandomLensman 3y ago
      The stuff only helps if the government goes weakly nuts - otherwise unlikely to help much. The large number of guns in Germany wasn't doing anything against the Nazis. The idea of violently overcoming an organised tyrannical and violent government that has millions of people supporting it is largely a US myth. Maybe the Russian revolution qualifies - but that kind of swapped things only.
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > idea of violently overcoming an organised tyrannical and violent government that has millions of people supporting is a US myth It's designed to increase the cost of an unpopular takeover, not let Joe who thinks he can shoot 100 yards with a glock take on the U.S. army. The Nazis were popular when they came to power. Contrast that with e.g. Hong Kong.

tromp 3y ago

Simple counterexample: I've use crypto to pay out bounties to anonymous coders for doubling the performance of my open source software.

boringg 3y ago
You have a sample size issue for your counter.
- Kiro 3y ago
  It's a huge movement happening in the OSS space but HN refuses to acknowledge it.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - smohare 3y ago
    Do you have any stats to support this is some “huge movement” relative to whatever is considered standard practice? I ask this as an honest question since I’d never heard of the phenomenon, but am not steeped in OSS dev work by any means.
  - bnchrch 3y ago
    HN unfortunately isn't very objective on this particular subject.
bnchrch 3y ago
It let me purchase and sell a small software app without going to the bank, signing documents, paying $75 just to orchestrate a wire transfer.
- aurareturn 3y ago
  Yes, skirting the law. Banks/payments have regulations.
  - bnchrch 3y ago
    Nothing wrong / illegal about what we did. Legitimate business, Used stable coins, filed taxes.
    - aurareturn 3y ago
      Not the point. Crypto skips all the regulations.
      - megadal 3y ago
        > Not the point. No that's exactly the point. The point is what is a legitimate use case for crypto, this use case is getting around pointless bureaucracy. You don't get around regulations, the responsibility of adhering to them just shifts from a third party to you, hence the person you're replying to paid taxes. Are you implying avoiding operating fees is not a valid use case? Operating fees help facilitate adherence to regulation at scale but they themselves are not the regulation.

boringg 3y ago

Why do you think it's doing so well?

mam2 3y ago

This includes - making donation to ukraine if you're russian - not have your asset frozen if you protest and the canada government disagree - protecting yourself against false accusation - protecting again a country that would turn communist in an election (closer than you think in some european ones) - getting an additional veil of anonymity if you have to do something illegal in your state such as abortion or defending gay rights. so yeah this is 'against the law' but sometime the law is not on the good side.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> making donation to ukraine if you're russian Crypto, much less crypto from Russians, hasn't been a meaningful contribution vector for Ukraine. Even when we look at the crypto donated, most (EDIT: half) of it was dollar denominated [1]. [1] https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/07/27/ukraine-has-raised-225m-in-crypto-to-fight-russian-invasion-but-donations-have-stagnated-over-the-last-year-crystal/ https://www.coindesk.com/consensus-magazine/2023/07/27/ukrai...
- eimrine 3y ago
  > Even when we look at the crypto donated, most of it was dollar denominated [1]. Have you at least read your source? 120 of 225M were BTC + ETH. > Crypto, much less crypto from Russians, hasn't been a meaningful contribution vector for Ukraine. Crypto is there barely since the Second Maydan, of course Ukrainians managed to survive without cryptocurrencies. If you look closely on your arguments, you will find just a rejection without any arguments. Didn't you observe the recent news about Xenia Havana who donated $50 from her American bank account being in Russia and therefore went into jail?
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > 120 of 225M were BTC + ETH Sorry, meant to say half. Corrected. Thank you. > Xenia Havana who donated $50 from her American bank account being in Russia and therefore went into jail? $50 is not meaningful.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> one true use case for crypto: Making it easier to skirt the law And gambling. That's a $580bn market on its own [1]. Add to that the $2 to 5tn of money laundering that occurs globally [2][3], assume a 15% take rate, and on the upper bound you have another $580bn market. Curiously, adding those together one gets 91% of the current "market cap" of Bitcoin [4]. Really, all Bitcoin has to do is displace every casino and every cartel and it would be worth over 90% of its current price. [1] https://www.thebusinessresearchcompany.com/report/gambling-global-market-report https://www.thebusinessresearchcompany.com/report/gambling-g... [2] https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2015/09/28/04/53/sp021098 https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2015/09/28/04/53/sp0210... [3] https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPD@WEO/OEMDC/ADVE... [4] https://coinmarketcap.com https://coinmarketcap.com

derangedHorse 3y ago
I subjectively disagree with your sentiment but can objectively show you are not accurately quoting your sources. Source [2] and [3] show nothing about $2-$5 trillion dollars being laundered globally. [2] links to an article written in 1998 presumably re-published in 2015 because of the number's presence in the url path, and [3] links to the 'GDP, current prices' of the IMF. Maybe your estimate for the amount of money laundered globally is factual, but your links definitely don't show that. Also, nothing is "curious" about you adding rough estimates together and getting a random percentage of something else.

eimrine 3y ago

> There is only one true use case for crypto: Same with the second amendmend: the only one true use case for firearms is > Making it easier to skirt the law ...if (not if, when) the Government goes nuts.

RandomLensman 3y ago
Only if it goes "nuts" in very specific ways: Anything that means the government can exercise large scale organized violence while backed by a sufficient number of people means it doesn't help.
- eimrine 3y ago
  That is not a "very" specific way considering that the government has monopoly on violence by definition of the government. Actually most of the governments are exactly on that ground abusing the fact that only few countries allows the citizens to own firearms.
  - RandomLensman 3y ago
    The stuff only helps if the government goes weakly nuts - otherwise unlikely to help much. The large number of guns in Germany wasn't doing anything against the Nazis. The idea of violently overcoming an organised tyrannical and violent government that has millions of people supporting it is largely a US myth. Maybe the Russian revolution qualifies - but that kind of swapped things only.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > idea of violently overcoming an organised tyrannical and violent government that has millions of people supporting is a US myth It's designed to increase the cost of an unpopular takeover, not let Joe who thinks he can shoot 100 yards with a glock take on the U.S. army. The Nazis were popular when they came to power. Contrast that with e.g. Hong Kong.