You do understand that there is a middle ground between tyranny and demanding the freedom to senselessly kill yourself, right?
Middle ground is too messy to debate. Either we have fiat currency without the fiat and every citizen can own an atomic bomb - or we outlaw squirt guns and tell everybody to get a job at the DMV.
Money laundering mixed with get-rich-quick? What is there not to love?
According to me cryptocurrencies are a scam and will crash, and I predicted this back in 1957. So there, I win.
It is. It’s spectacularly wasteful, and it’s wasteful by design. Bitcoin doesn’t function if it isn’t burning obscene amounts of electricity (on top of obscenely wasteful hardware) to satisfy a quota of CPU cycles spent per step in the blockchain. No other currency does this.
If it takes months to settle a payment it’s because of fraud protection, not because of the time required to execute a transaction. And for bitcoin to ever be useful as anything more than legalized gambling it will have to incorporate the same kind of fraud protection, which means suffering from the exact same delays.
The thing is, if you take any event that has happened you will almost always be able to find someone that “predicted” it. And while crypto probably will be around for a long time it remains to be seen whether or not it can gain any mainstream traction.
As I’ve said above and elsewhere, in my view the only way cryptocurrencies will become mainstream is if the exact same regulatory controls that crypto lovers hate about fiat currencies are applied.
The other thing to remember here is that miners get paid a portion of fees and a payout from new bitcoins. But the fixed payout halves every 4 years and will disappear in 2040 ish, which means the only way to entice miners will be fees. The problem is that if people then want it to facilitate fast, low-cost payments, there’s very little incentive for miners to keep mining and the network falls apart.
This. I’m not sure why some people think payments are slow due to a technical inability to transmit transactions quickly.
I’m sure someone will offer such a service on top of it.
And then the processing delays you complain about will be exactly the same for bitcoin.
There is no need for so much additional encryption.
As long as there is enough security for the Electronic Data Transaction System to function, it can be used to transact safely.
We had to design those systems.
Just because someone attacks them doesn’t mean they are right.
Just because someone wants to spend time and efforts on encryption whether block chain or other is all the same thing.
More than enough encryption is enough, however, the extra encryption which is not necessary is more than needed and more than enough.
Also, if too much security is put on encryption and not enough on other security methods, efficiency of the encryption can be lost or wasted.
It’s like someone attacking an online transaction from a bank.
It is no more legal.
Because 2 people decide to make a transaction be worth $1 trillion or more, can make it worth that much.
If marriages are good enough to legitimize children from birth,
so can they own the value of the earth from it.
When those attacking the transactions reduce it to be negative and against the interest of the state, the $1 trillion of asset can then be misrepresented as zero, or a debt to the interest of the state, however, it is not for the interest of the state to do so.
If the state decides to waste $1 trillion because they want to create a bad debt with 2 people, and make claims for damages from them, the state is responsible for their own actions.
If police and courts try to steal money and efforts from 2 people,
they don’t have to associate with that state and they don’t have to tolerate their attacks by conniving with them to ignore it by refusing evidence of their attacks against the interest of the state so as to try to gain from false debt.
Aside of bitcoin (and real-life ISK) you can also trade Icelandic
There is a difference if the backend can actually do instant finality without trust and applications on top that add additional constraints. VISA can’t do instant finality, is completely proprietary and trust based. But why do I even have to say that. If you can’t even think that far there is nothing we really can talk about.
There isn’t though. Because you still seem to be failing to understand that the reason they don’t even attempt to go for “instant” is deliberate. In return for it not being instant, consumers get additional protections, and for the most part neither party cares that it’s not instant in the background. The ability to instantly lose all of your money to a fraudser into a web of completely anonymous accounts if you lose a single factor of identification (your private key) is not appealing to most people.
And just how exactly does “the backend” solve the scenario where a seller accepts payment but does not ship the product the customer bought? Because if a conventional payment processor is taking “months” to resolve a transaction the reason is protecting against that kind of fraud.
You are supposed to send your bitcoin to Mr Big, who holds it in escrow until the shipment of coke is delivered.
Hi [Client name…],
We apologize for the delay in answering your support request. The market conditions have created a high demand for service. We are working very hard to resolve your support ticket, we know it is frustrating and we thank you for your patience.
Our transactions backlogged due to high trading velocity, congestion on blockchain networks and third-party banking systems being maxed out, causing a spike in our number of support requests.
"This is truly a historic moment that we are sharing, and every exchange, platform and network has been tested with the recent spikes in volume.
I want to thank you again for investing with Coinberry. You made the right choice. We are adapting and growing fast to bring our response times to be the best in the industry.
We look forward to answering your emails, and thank you again for your patience and your business.
– Andrei Poliakov, CEO
He won’t give you a decent answer. I’ve made multiple clear, concise and relevant points and he’s failed to address any of them. The moment you make any point that gets in the way of his view that bitcoin is the best he just loses his temper. I even raised a point made by the developers of the payment process he’s in favour of and he rejected it out of hand because it didn’t fit his opinion.
People like that really aren’t worth the time.
I think it is important to keep the debate going. Bitcoin has duped a lot of intelligent people - it has something to do with the combination of new technology combined with finance and philosophy.
People want to believe in it, and there is a lot of stuff to unwrap before you can figure out what is really going on. Having the “asset” go up in value like a rocket ship also makes it easier for people to convince themselves that it is real.
Yeah absolutely, I just don’t think it’s possible to engage in a meaningful debate with Karak about it though.
I think you’re right about that, I think that the tech side appeals to many people, particularly being decentralised and anonymous. There are a lot of empty promises and misinformation but as people really want to believe in the tech they ignore any failings and tell themselves it’s perfect. This is where I find the cult like behaviour to be the strangest, because you effectively have people embracing a new technology but then refusing to accept any other new iterations of that tech the resolve the glaring flaws, such as the insane amount of power required for the network to operate.
The finance side of it has made it easy for people that don’t even understand the tech to fall for it and help pump up the hype. A few people have invested a couple of thousands dollars and become millionaires, so others think the same can happen for them. In reality the days of that being possible are long gone. In all likelihood the opposite will be true, at some point the music will stop and the people still holding won’t have chairs.