Hacker News Reader

Comment by themihai | Hacker News Reader

Crypto doesn't try to replace cash. It tries to replace digital payments (i.e. bank transfer, paypal, credit card etc) and I'm totally fine with that. Some people like paypal, visa and mastercard, some people don't.

View on HN

Do digital payments need replacing?

I haven't seen physical cash in almost two years (one exception, a contractor wanted to dodge some tax) and the system just works effortlessly.

Tapping a card is easier and faster then counting change.

I don't see how paying a $20 gas fee and waiting 15 minutes would improve the situation.

This is because you don't live in a sanctioned country and you have a good social credit score.

This is like saying "why do I need encryption, I don't have anything to hide".

Many people do not have this privilege.

Sorry, i thought the fact we were discussing a move by Sweden, in English on a website dominated by Americans kind of gave the game away.

We should reopen the thread with a different premise.

"Crypto currencies have no place or value in the western world"

> "Crypto currencies have no place or value in the western world"

If the current demand for it, as measured by the market price is any kind of indicator, you have your work cut out for you trying to convince people.

It hat the same place as encryption for the same reason. And it is being fought like encryption was, for the same reasons.

Wrong.

Nobody ever fought encryption because of its environmental impact and contribution to global warming and wasted energy, or because it burns lots of coal and causes cancer and lung disease.

Correct, they picked other excuses.

You're picking other excuses for shilling cryptocurrency to detract from the hard cold sociopathic fact that you don't give a flying fuck about the environment or public health.

First, physical cash is still the norm in most of the world.

Second, higher competition in the payments ecosystem would force providers to reduce their fees. The glaring example is what is happening in San Salvador, where by using Bitcoin they are likekly to save 450 USD millions/year in fees.

> by using Bitcoin they are likekly to save 450 USD millions/year in fees.

More like shift 450mm/year into the pockets of the people running Chivo while creating a media circus to distract from the president's takeover of the judiciary.

Freedom!

This is incorrect. The transaction costs are very low and you are free to choose whatever wallet you want.

> The transaction costs are very low

That's why the government even preemptively allocated $150mm for them, I guess?

> you are free to choose whatever wallet you want.

Unless you want assistance at one of the official facilities, or the promised stimulus. Half the population is supposedly on Chivo. Defaults matter, especially if your goal is graft and not a sustainable and beneficial economic policy.

I also notice you only tried to contradict the parts critical to dear bitcoin, not about growing autocracy.

why should I defend an autocrat?

Better question: Why should you shill a get-rich-quick pyramid scheme that destroys the environment, causes climate change, wastes energy, burns coal, and causes cancer and lung disease?

... and despite all its rhetoric about freedom, seems to be associated primarily with oligarchs, autocrats, and the biggest winners of traditional capitalism.

No, it isn't a payment system.

Check out GNU Taler (and alternatives), which really are payment systems instead of currency alternatives

It's more of a haven asset. It doesn't make sense as a payment system, and it hasn't in a decade really succeded in that role. It has accumulated a lot of capital, however, that might otherwise have gone into other haven assets.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com