Then they will ask why nobody wants to use their payment cards
-
Stronger argument is that deflationary currency is not something someone with an investment mind wants to spend. Which is why there is the same price fixation and attempts to hype up crypto like stocks because most people got into it not to spend it, but hold onto it like an asset. Its why people encourage rebuying crypto if you use it to buy something to replenish their balance to not regret having wasted what could be a house to get a slice of pizza.
Now sure there are stable coins but that is more used by investors to move assets around exchanges to then go and buy other crypto that they believe will return a profit or move into when they believe a dip is occuring so they can reenter later to expand their assests by buying low. Pretty much most crypto communities are highly fixated on price as opposed to treating it like currency that should be spent. It's always this is the next big thing, it is going to moon, hodl, etc.
So I guess point is as much as people like to act like they are anticapitalist the culture of crypto once prices started going up is pursuit of capitalism and wealth hording. The values people claim to have was most present when crypto was new and people were giving it away, having fun spending it, and transacting it. But, then greed took over as people saw people becoming millionaires and billionaires for holding what they got early.
It's ironic looking at it now given the state of dogecoin but that maintained the original spirit of crypto for a really long time before it too skyrocketed in price and got pulled into the same asset category.
You speak of Gresham's Law, which is "bad money beats good money". For payments, people would rather part with an inflationary asset than deflarionary because of future value. Definitely the thing that has settled the argument over Bitcoin's primary use case.
Agreed re: the faux anticapitalism. I mean, ideologically I think of myself as anticapitalist. But I have to afford things to not be destitute within this economic regime, so I "play the game". But I wouldn't delude myself into thinking that advocating for one sort of money over another is in any way a stance against capitalism. In most cases it isn't even a stance against status quo.
-
Bitcoin is its own worst enemy. It's deflationary, speculative, and largely interacted with by centralized entities. Those things means its unlikely to be successful as an actual currency; even one it hopes to be.
It's been surpassed by new blockchains in all dimensions except market cap
-
Over 52% of the bitcoin network is renewable energy and growing. Y’all need to update your info, damn
It's wasting useful energy, and you think that's a good thing?
-
BULLSHIT.
You aren't computing the cost in blood, censorship, wasted time, the lives employed by these evil orgs wasting their lives scamming people, the loss of revenue from value-producing business, the waste of banking cards, and the COUNTLESS other energy-guzzling mechanisms involved.
Bitcoin eliminates ALL these problems. It is by far more efficient, it isn't even close. Also, it isn't a payment system like visa, what an ignorant ass comparison. It is literally a sovereign currency with publicly auditable minting & ledgers. It replaces MONEY. Payment processors are built on top of it.
Yea, even the shit visa and mastercard can switch to payment processing on top of Bitcoin. It would actually be beneficial. When they decline a transaction you just directly use the network instead.
Btw PoS is also bullshit, in a completely different and inferior class of crypto. It requires HUMAN CONSENT to enter the network. PoW requires COMPUTATIONAL CONSENT. PoW lets anyone into the network if they can follow the rules of minting. This is HUGE when talking about a freedom-preserving system.
Put more simply, PoS systems are aristocracy owning an apple orchard (you ask an authority if they are allowed to take an apple), PoW is like an apple orchard deep in the woods that anyone can take from (you just have to walk there). Understand the difference?
One OWNS THE ORCHARD. They will protect it from people they deem unauthorized. They demand people go through them for permission. It is no different than what we have now, abstracted further and digitized.
Btw PoS is also bullshit, in a completely different and inferior class of crypto. It requires HUMAN CONSENT to enter the network.
That is specific to delegated proof of stake, not PoS in general.
-
Btw PoS is also bullshit, in a completely different and inferior class of crypto. It requires HUMAN CONSENT to enter the network.
That is specific to delegated proof of stake, not PoS in general.
Proof of Stake = I have a stake in preserving this network, and I am rewarded by receiving an increased stake in the network.
You cannot organically enter a PoS network without having a stake in it. That requires acquiring the network's token somehow. That means you must use a different token to purchase it, do work for someone who will pay you in it, or otherwise perform an operation organized by people in order to acquire the token to have a stake.
That's what I mean by human consent.
-
But you never see milliBTC or µBTC. Your post is literally the first time I see µBTC. No normal person knows how to type µ, let alone knowing what it means or how many eggs that buys. My crypto currency converter doesn't even use µBTC.
mBTC and satoshis (10^-8) are more common indeed, but are used pretty much everywhere. It's not 2015 anymore
-
Proof of Stake = I have a stake in preserving this network, and I am rewarded by receiving an increased stake in the network.
You cannot organically enter a PoS network without having a stake in it. That requires acquiring the network's token somehow. That means you must use a different token to purchase it, do work for someone who will pay you in it, or otherwise perform an operation organized by people in order to acquire the token to have a stake.
That's what I mean by human consent.
Your point is valid for new, immature blockchains. Censorship/access restrictions are possible and it's very easy for PoS to turn into nothing at stake.
In practice mature PoS chains don't require any human consent.
-
It's been surpassed by new blockchains in all dimensions except market cap
Such as?
-
Bitcoin is a lot of things, it's not a scam. Some cryptocoins aren't scams either or didn't start as one.
A lot of crypto coins are scams
Bitcoin and any blockchain based payment system is not a viable alternative to payment processors at world scale. Unless power requirements per transaction go down literally exponentially, it will never be.
Having said all that: Bitcoin does work on the current limited scale, it works better and easier and faster han all payment processors, and most importantly: Bitcoin isn't a giant dick wanting to insert itself into every orifice of your body
Fuck Visa, fuck MasterCard, fuck American Express, fuck all of them you fucking psychopathic narcissistic assholes
wrote last edited by [email protected]Bitcoin may not be a scam per se, but its main usage is to facilitate scams. The biggest of which is being a market that speculators can manipulate to make the currency they actually want.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Last time I checked, BTC transaction fees were prohibitively high to pay for 80$ AAAA games with them, and WAY too high to pay for a 5 USD single-developer itch.io game.
I haven't looked at other Crypto in a while. I made some money off BTC, but I think it is wildly overvalued for a long time, and I've been disappointed in how un-currency-like other alternatives were, even those that have been around long enough that they are unlikely to be rug-pulls.
That said, if you need to get paid and Visa/MC won't let you use them, I'm not going to attack you (too hard) for accepting Crypto. They are bad systems, but we live in Captialism, so you gotta get paid. They might be the least-worse system that is global and isn't Visa/MC. I'm unlikely to buy your product that way, tho; I'm more likely to pirate than I am to participate in cryptocurrency again.
-
Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme because it only keeps its value as long as people are constantly buying it. If no one wants to buy it, the value of any amount of bitcoin is zero. This is why people who have bitcoin are trying to convince anyone else to keep buying.
any currency is initially a bank's promissory notes, and then a promise to exchange the paper for some kind of labor. As a person who has experienced at least one default in his life and whose entire toilet is covered with USSR money, I can say that in this regard, no currency is different from bitcoin.
Well, gold might be a little bit different. It derives its value not because of a government mandate but because monkey brain like shiny
-
Sorry my phrasing was bad and made it confusing. Let me explain it in detail.
They correctly choose a unsigned int for the time but they based it on Unix time, and Unix time is signed. So they choose a system that would require an conversion from Unix time to Bitcoin time (or the other way around) anyway. But you don't need to be able to have a timestamp for 1970, which their timestamp system supports, because instead of counting from 2008 (the invention of Bitcoin) they count from 1970. Wasting 38 years and as you know Unix time is hitting a limit in 2038, 68 years after its start, Bitcoin time is unsigned and so it gets to 2106. 2106-1970= 136 years. And they are wasting 38 years!!! Why? You need a conversion between both after 2038 anyway. And if they really care for cheap conversion, a signed 64bit value would be much better, because after 2038, that will probably be the standard. So they chose to waste 38 years for compatibility which will break after 2038, instead of choosing compatibility after 2038 for 292 billion years.
And if size was the reason and 64bit timestamps would have been too big, just start counting from 2008 (or better 2009 when the network started) and get all those juicy 136 years instead of 98 years.
It is stupid.
The choice of a
uint32_tfor time saves 4 bytes per transaction. That doesn't sound like much, but with 1.2 billion transactions recorded, it adds up to almost 10 GB of space saved.They could, ultimately, just replace it with a
uint64_tsome time in the 22nd century without much fuss. In the late 2000s when Bitcoin was created, storage space was at a significant cost, but now it is quite cheap and in the 2100s it will undoubtedly be even cheaper. -
Crypto is also accepted as a means of exchange. There are plenty of merchants willing to accept it as payment, but they are just not geographically concentrated in one location like banknote-accepters are. With a banknote, you have a very high concentration of merchants who will accept that as a means of payment in one geographic area (i.e. the country or region whose central bank issued that banknote), while it is not accepted anywhere else. With most cryptocurrencies, they will be acceptable worldwide, but the concentration of people willing to take it in any given geographic area is low.
It is important to note that you can't take properties of the smaller coins (the ones which you are probably thinking of are derisively referred to as "shitcoins" and most are deserving of that epithet) and apply them to every cryptocurrency. Just like you can't use properties of the Zimbabwean dollar to smear all fiat currencies in general.
Bitcoin transactions on its Lightning Network are typically instantaneous, and fees are lower than most credit cards (usually on the order of 0.1%). An on-chain Bitcoin transaction currently has a fee of about 1 USD, which would make it competitive to credit cards for transactions greater than 40 USD. Bitcoin fees, despite being notorious for being the highest among all cryptos, are actually very competitive with most traditional payment methods. This transaction from the most recent block at the time of writing paid about 117 USD to move over 411 BTC worth 48.5 million USD. That means they paid about 0.00024% in fees and this is the highest-fee transaction in this block (meaning they paid the highest fee rate of any transaction in this block). The going rate for this block was actually much lower; whoever sent this transaction overpaid by about 50 times.
It's accepted almost no where. And the list of issues go on. Crypto is easily stolen, very difficult to secure. Difficult to use for most people. Proof of work crypto is still in the majority and wastes absurd amounts of energy, etc. But the biggest issue is that it doesn't solve any problems that were not solved long ago unless you are conducting criminal activity (which I do have to acknowledge as it's one stand out use case).
-
It's accepted almost no where. And the list of issues go on. Crypto is easily stolen, very difficult to secure. Difficult to use for most people. Proof of work crypto is still in the majority and wastes absurd amounts of energy, etc. But the biggest issue is that it doesn't solve any problems that were not solved long ago unless you are conducting criminal activity (which I do have to acknowledge as it's one stand out use case).
The notion that "crypto is easily stolen" is completely false. It's definitely harder to steal than, say, cash in a wallet. That it is "accepted almost nowhere" is also false. Look hard enough, and you can find someone who will sell you almost anything for crypto.
-
The notion that "crypto is easily stolen" is completely false. It's definitely harder to steal than, say, cash in a wallet. That it is "accepted almost nowhere" is also false. Look hard enough, and you can find someone who will sell you almost anything for crypto.
It depends greatly on how it's stored. Most people just keep it in an exchange, which are robbed fairly often. Which wouldn't be a problem with real cash as there are laws in place to protect you. With crypto you have no recourse.
-
Your point is valid for new, immature blockchains. Censorship/access restrictions are possible and it's very easy for PoS to turn into nothing at stake.
In practice mature PoS chains don't require any human consent.
Yes, they do.
In order to acquire the token, where does it come from in PoS?
You want to mint the token? It requires the token.
You want to buy the token? It requires someone that already has the token to sell it.
You want to trade the token? You need to find someone that has the token and wishes to perform that trade.
It requires acquiring a counterparty that consents to you acquiring a stake no matter how "mature" a PoS chain is.
-
The main reason I don't care for bitcoin is I have to count a bunch zeros after the decimal point, before reaching a useful number.
$1 = 0.000006128921 btc? Really? Screw those zeroes. Bitcoin is inefficient in so many ways.Monkey brain no like small numbers. Monkey brain like big numbers.
But for real, Bitcoin was the first decentalized currency to solve the Byzantine Generals Problem. Its worth something because its transparent, unmutable, and the original digital currency. It was birthed via grassroot origins in depths of the housing crash. It calls out the Federal Reserve (and any other human institution that seeks to expand their money supply).
-
This post did not contain any content.
I really like Taler
-
I honestly never understood how Lemmy, a privacy and decentralisation focused community, is so vehemently anti-crypto. It's worse than genAI. Every time it is mentioned, everyone goes "crypto is a scam". I don't think I've ever seen any good faith discussion around it, just "scam", "pyramid scheme", and "only criminals use it".
Let's get something out of the way immediately: shitcoins are a literal pyramid scheme and a scam. Anyone can make their own cryptocurrency in an evening, and anyone who throws money at them is either a fool or a gambler.
But I really don't understand what people mean when they say Bitcoin, or Ethereum, or Monero are a scam. Sure they can be used to scam you, just like Amazon gift cards can. Maybe it's about the price volatility, but the price of all 3 mentioned before is up on a day, week, month, 6 months, year, and 5 year scale. It's volatile, but is not a scam. If you bought and sold at two random points in time, it's more likely you made a profit than "got scammed".
You know what actually is a scam? Credit scores, overdraft fees, having to pay to check your balance, and so many other fucked up practices in the US banking system."Criminals use them" is just the worst fucking argument, especially in a space like this. Are PGP, VPNs and TOR for criminals too? Do you think getting rid of crypto would stop crime?
And yes, proof of work fucking sucks. The energy consumption of Bitcoin mining is a problem. I am not a cryptobro who spends all his time making trades and is here to tell you that crypto is the salvation. They are far from being "good" for everyday use. I just wanted to point out how it seems that critical thought gets shut down at the sight of those 6 letters, and I hope someone can explain to me what they find so terrible about crypto (aside from environmental concerns and shitcoins)
The entire concept is fundamentally flawed
You are basing a economy with real economic stakes on something that is massively unstable and very resource intensive.
-
totally agree re bitcoin, and also am very sceptical of crypto as a mass-adopted currency in general
however there are plenty of networks that don’t use proof of work to validate their chains, and they aren’t bad for the environment to nearly the same degree
They are still very unstable and rely on some sort of consensus. It is flat out a bad design. It would be safer to pay with stocks.
