throwaway21332

3 ms·

1.
by throwaway21332 5y ago
Arbitrum doesn't require you to use a centralized exchange, it's just easier to onboard with "fiat -> centralized exchange -> arbitrum" than "fiat -> centralized exchange -> ethereum -> arbitrum"
2.
by throwaway21332 5y ago
Big blocks cause centralization which makes the whole thing kind of pointless.
3.
by throwaway21332 5y ago
Binance is supporting direct deposits/withdrawals to Arbitrum. I'd expect more exchanges to do this with other L2s.
4.
by throwaway21332 5y ago
Bitcoin was always supposed to be a store of value, 21M and all that. The problem is that people think that store of value can't be a currency.
5.
by throwaway21332 5y ago
The ledger gives you a guarantee that only you can spend the BTC that you have access to. Nobody can "freeze" your UTXO or forbid you from accepting transactions. Sure, the state can declare that the Bitcoin you own is not legitim
6.
by throwaway21332 5y ago
The reason I am disconnecting those issues is that Bitcoin was never designed to solve the type of fraud you're talking about. There is no proposed mechanism to solve it, because it's outside of it's scope. It was designed to
7.
by throwaway21332 5y ago
You're conflating two issues with each other. One is having a decentralized currency with a fixed monetary policy. Another issue is the counterparty risk. Bitcoin is not designed to solve the counterparty risk, it's just a digital
8.
by throwaway21332 5y ago
Using the word "regulation" does not give you a moral pass for taking other people's money. Nobody forces you to use Bitcoin. Just keep using fiat if it's such a good thing for you.
9.
by throwaway21332 5y ago
You know, there is a reason why crypto people chant "Not your keys, not your coins".