Hacker News Reader

The blanket proposition that cryptocurrencies in general are going to fail is very different from your proposition, that most cryptocurrencies are going to fail. Look at social media: not too long ago, everybody and their cat was attempting to create the next big social media platform, and people were warning that it was all just a fad. And they were right, but people didn't stop using social media, quite the opposite. Social media is now more used and more important than ever, it's just that everthing clustered around a few winners.

That would be my prediction for cryptos: most of them aren't special enough to be useful, a lot are just pyramids schemes where the creators premined a big chunk and hope it will be worth something once they find users, but there's certainly some that are here to stay. I don't see the original Bitcoin disappearing, Ethereum is having a bit of a rough patch right now but has the potential to become a proper computing platform and I think privacy features like those Monero is offering are always going to be in demand. But we shall see.

> There is nothing I'm aware of that I need to do financially which I can do with Bitcoin (or the like) which I'm not better able to do with the regular banking system.

I would suggest that your life experience may not be the best yardstick for every other human.

I will provide an example of a recent situation in which I would have loved to be able to use e.g. Bitcoin. I (US based] did some consulting work for a company in France and they owed me something like $6k. Arranging an incoming international bank wire was a huge pain (if you don’t do this regularly, you’ll have to navigate multiple layers at your bank to find someone who can provide the actual wire details to provide to the counterparty), it took many days to finalize, AND I was charged $25 by my bank for the privilege.

In contrast, I should have been able to provide the French company a BTC address, have had them transmit for pennies or a few dollars at most, and have payment secured and confirmed within the hour.

Maybe a different bank would have a better experience for international wires? My experience is that this takes less time than you have relayed.

I’m not sure honestly.

Companies are super risk averse. They’d rather use arcane tools with seriously battle tested guard rails. As an example, if someone hacked your email and sent them a fraudulent Bitcoin address, and they sent the BTC, they’d have no recourse. No way to reverse, nobody to even complain to. Corporations would much rather have those arcane layers to protect themselves.

Was wise.com not an option? I use them frequently to receive payments in the US from Europe.

As someone who has hired creatives from around the world back in the day - I used to love the BTC option to settle any invoices. Back then it wasn’t as well known so it usually took a little explaining but anyone who accepted it received their payment within minutes. It was so much more preferable than dealing with banks internationally.

The fact that Bitcoin is simpler than the US banking system is a testament to how archaic the latter is, not how useful the former is.

NFTs are interesting because they are a start of the conversation on the path of digital ownership and scarcity. As it stands now, this space is not even close to its final form and eventually the idea of digital ownership is not so far fetched.

As an example - say a famous artist decides to create 1 single sketch. I only create 1 item and sell it to you who now in turn owns that piece to do as you please whether it’s lease it out for commercial purposes, stash it away on a HD, launder money, etc etc. Sure it’s just pixels on a screen but the ownership of rights is what you are paying the artist for. (Now imagine the same scenario 10-20 years down the line when super VR is a thing and most of us spend more time in our digital lives than the real world). As the purchaser, you can now track the usage of your asset you’ve purchased through a blockchain.

So it makes sense, but the current state of small iterations of the same piece of artwork are akin to ikea pieces in real value and are completely just advantage of the current hype. There will be a correction at some point as things mature.

you dont live in a failing economy or one where the govt intervention prevents the free flow of money.

1)chinese were able to smuggle money out of china

2)venezuelans are using it in lieu of their failed currency

3) criminals are using it to launder money and buy/sell illegal products

4) people are using it to send money across national borders without paying fees/tariffs (e.g. to mexico)

I remember not that long ago when the money supply was about 6T. Now with 30T in debt that automatically becomes the defacto money supply. Crypto can act as a stable store of value because all fiat is inflationary, though it is incredibly volatile now.

These are four reasons why the governments of the world would want to ban crypto.

The use case for Bitcoin is a savings vehicle. The global financial system has reached a tipping point where it is incapable of providing a store of value for people who have accumulated capital without crashing the system and causing mass devastation. The fact that so many people still do not understand this tells me we have tremendous upside remaining.

> I very much doubt all but a tiny, tiny fraction of them have any use case at all.

Well, right.

That's why all of the trading volume.

Bunch of no-nothings trying to figure out technological value via herd mentality!