4 ms·
> With crypto, it’s still the case that you create a wallet and then… there’s nothing to do on the platform. You’re expected to send real money to someone so th
by zorked 1y ago
> With crypto, it’s still the case that you create a wallet and then… there’s nothing to do on the platform. You’re expected to send real money to someone so they’ll give you some of the funny money that lets you play the game.
This became a problem later due to governments cracking down on cryptos and some terrible technical choices made transactions expensive just as adoption was ramping. (Pat yourselves on the back, small blockers.)
My first experience with crypto was buying $5 in bitcoin from a friend. If I didn't do it that way I could go on a number of websites and buy crypto without opening an account, via credit card, or via SMS. Today, most of the $5 would be eaten by fees, and buying for cash from an institution requires slow and intrusive KYC.
- cornholio 1y ago> buying for cash from an institution requires slow and intrusive KYC. Hello my friend, grab a seat so we can contemplate the wickedness of man. KYC is not some authoritarian or entrenched industry response to fintech upstarts, it's a necessary thing that protects billions of people from crime and corruption.
- ImPostingOnHN 1y agoSo was the telescreen.
- antonvs 1y agoThat's an unreasonably charitable reading of the purpose of KYC. It's primarily about government control of the primary medium of economic exchange. As always, this benefits the privileged at the expense of the less privileged. Its use to limit competition from cryptocurrency is a perfect example of that. A major market which crypto was supposed to be able to serve - the "unbanked" - are largely locked out of it. Turns out giving poor people access to money is not a feature that the system wants to allow. The benefit you claim for KYC is a marketing bullet point side effect at best.
- jakelazaroff 1y agoIt doesn't really matter what use cases cryptocurrencies were supposed to have — their actual use cases turned out to be scams and speculation. We can wax philosophic about the failed promise, but to a rounding error scams and speculation have always been their only use cases. Which makes it very understandable that crypto companies became subject to KYC laws as they tried to scale up to serve the American public! Online gambling and securities trading are already subject to KYC. The rest of the activity is the scams and crime that (despite your cynical reading) KYC was intended to fight in the first place.
- ImPostingOnHN 1y agoIf I understand the discussion correctly: Your opinion is that the benefits of KYC (safety) outweigh the downsides of KYC (giving up liberty). The other poster's opinion is that the downsides outweigh the benefits. There is a quote out there regarding those who would sacrifice liberty to obtain safety, but it slips my mind at the moment.
- jakelazaroff 1y agoCareening at 90 miles per hour through a school zone crosswalk as kids dive out of the way: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
- ImPostingOnHN 1y agoYawn. If that were truly analogous to the current topic, rather than a gross exaggeration, the analogy would be unnecessary. Replace "Careening at 90 miles per hour through a school zone crosswalk as kids dive out of the way" with the actual topic of "Spending your money on legal things without government tracking and control". Your point is understood that you personally prefer one thing to another, compared to another person preferring the opposite.
- 1y ago
- ilaksh 1y agoThere are Ethereum, Algorand, many alternatives with low fees.