It’s funny watching the United States weaken its own currency. People in the far future will read the history books with great amusement.
Like, in what way does this benefit Colorado or the United States?
Like, in what way does this benefit Colorado or the United States?
The actual impact on US currency valuation will be negligible. Even if it weren't, I believe a large portion of Colorado's economy is based on producing export goods, so a weaker USD is theoretically beneficial to at least some segments of the state's economy.
Arguably, the fact that we're sitting here chatting about Colorado on hacker news indicates that the alleged plan has already succeeded, months before the system is scheduled to come online.
I was also not trying to suggest that it's "export focused" - that would imply that that's a dominant factor in the economy, which is not what I intended to say. I chose the word "large", not to imply that it's a majority, but to imply there's enough money tied to it to make it politically interesting to the elected officials who are driving these sorts of decisions. See, for example, how coal played into the 2016 US elections, despite the US economy not being anything close to "coal focused".
It would be nice to find a percentage-based chart which breaks down economic sectors for the state. It exists somewhere, no doubt, but I am unable to find it this morning.
I do agree with your first point: crypto-for-taxes is primarily a headline generating gimmick. One that sells Colorado as a state with tech-savvy leadership.
“In Colorado, we’ve been laying the groundwork to be a center of crypto and blockchain innovation for a number of years. We see it as a critical part of Colorado’s overall innovation ecosystem,” shared Polis.
This is what the US needs to embrace as a whole, otherwise we won't be competitive with the countries that do as the US dollar (petrodollar) loses its primacy on the global stage.
“People in the far future will read the history books with great amusement.”
Who knows what’s going to happen in the far future?
Yes the only reason someone can make this comment is because they’re jealous of all the money they missed out on.
By the way, the word you’re looking for is envy, not jealousy smh.
It’s isn’t about making money, it’s a question of what Bitcoin is and how it works.
The original point was for small and ultra low overhead transactions, not as a way to make money. I am not saying the price is hitting 0 in 6 months or even 6 years, but clearly the original goal failed, interest is going away, and no use case has replaced it.
https://www.cbinsights.com/research/report/blockchain-trends...
That shows over 700% growth and your excuse is that everything is going down except for NFTs?
Meanwhile you haven't linked anything to back up your claims.
Clearly that isn’t a refutation.
You keep saying it's going down and you still haven't given any evidence of that or explained why you think that. Saying the same thing over and over more forcefully is not evidence.
What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Of note, I didn’t refer to the ROI from holding coins which is way down. I suggest it take a second and consider why I didn’t make that argument.
You just keep saying that despite those graphs being up over 700%, somehow this stat you chose and haven't sourced is down.
You haven't explained in any way why you think that but you keep saying it over and over.
Wow, that’s just perfect. Do you mind if I share this thread?
This is your claim with no evidence, no source and no explanation.
This could not possibly be more ridiculous. Any search you do produces an avalanche of links that directly contradict what you are saying.
Your sources of absolutely nothing are not very convincing.
Is this a joke? This is like someone getting soaked in a flash flood while claiming it isn't raining. I've never seen anyone deny reality this hard, even here.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/20/technology/silicon-valley...
https://www.paymentsdive.com/news/blockchain-startups-landed...
https://originstamp.com/blog/top-blockchain-startups-to-watc...
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/crypto-start-ups-raised-huge...
https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1w6r1v3pjg15s...
https://bitcoinke.io/2022/02/crypto-startups-in-january-2022...
https://blockworks.co/report-vcs-invested-33b-in-crypto-and-...
https://fortune.com/2021/12/01/investors-fund-crypto-startup...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-01/new-york-...
https://news.crunchbase.com/news/private-crypto-vc-funding-u...
Anyway, this is public so I can always just link to it.
This is what you said. Stop pretending you didn't say this and give some evidence.
The New York Times article alone says:
Investors, too, have flooded in. They have poured more than $28 billion into global crypto and blockchain start-ups this year, four times the total in 2020, according to PitchBook, a firm that tracks private investments. More than $3 billion has gone into NFT companies alone.
More than 28 billion dollars into start ups in one year.
Anyway, this is public so I can always just link to it.
Oh yeah? Twelve comments deep and you're now threatening to maybe actually link some evidence (in the future)?.
How is this not embarrassing to you? Do you try to convince people the sky is red and the earth is flat?
Why do you keep replying without evidence? Because it doesn't exist. If it did, you would have linked it already.
https://www.cbinsights.com/research/report/blockchain-trends...
That’s why I was curious about which data you’re basing the statement on. Was wondering if it was wallets, inflows, etc.
If you’re unclear, coins are supposed to be fungible where NFT’s shouldn’t be.
Rather than expend the resources to develop it themselves, they are giving the crypto community enough space to do the R&D for them. Once the technology evolves to a point that it is both secure and practical, the governments will implement their own digital iterations of their respective currencies.
The trust stuff is actually the least interesting part (though perhaps a prerequisite for it).
The interesting part is the potential for a “universal” api. Instead of having to integrate with every financial institution to support the myriad payment methods out there you can support the crypto currency. That’s a big deal.
It’s not what the crypto libertarians are pitching and I still believe that governmental currency controls will always be a thing but standardizing the actual mechanics of money movement would be huge.
This is true both at the application level and the software standards level. An example of the first would be Uniswap. Any one in the world can access this exchange, both for listing tokens, and for trading them, and it is guaranteed to never shut down, as long as the Ethereum network and blockchain exists. This is absolute universality in terms of APIs.
In terms of software standards, the EVM is already used by multiple blockchains, which makes them all share the same address format out of the box, and compatible with software like MetaMask that has tens of millions of installations. I could send Ethereum tokens to your Polygon (an EVM based chain) address, and you would be able to use your Polygon Chain private key to access them. All that you would be required to do is go to MetaMask and switch your network from Polygon to Ethereum mainnet, and the tokens would be appear in your wallet interface.
>>It’s not what the crypto libertarians are pitching and I still believe that governmental currency controls
Government currency controls cannot be a thing any more. Monetary transactions dependent solely on cryptographic authentication, and published to a completely decentralized and immutable platform, totally unmoors money from the types of bottlenecks that state actors could use to control its flows. To control currency requires controlling the flow of information now, and with the universal adoption of the internet, that is not happening.
A system that is powered by crypto making payments and etc basically free, but with the ability to reverse fraud transactions or similar. They have their own goals/constraints that are different than crypto currencies today. Another comment refers to a universal API; even if the API is JUST for settlement between banks it would probably make things way simpler, cheaper, and more efficient.
edit: typo, added universal api comment agreeing with comments from kasey_junk
Taking myself as an example, of all the actual money I currently own (so, not counting securities and whatnot, just cash and bank account balances), approximately 99.5% of it is currently digital and 0.5% of it is analog. And 100% of that is US dollars. And I'm unusually heavily invested in portraits of Andrew Jackson right now; it's typically more like 99.9% digital.
At present, I'm quite happy with USD for my digital currency needs because it offers me greater convenience and lower transaction fees than the available alternatives. One particularly compelling feature is that it's easily convertible to physical currency (and always at a nice, predictable 1:1 exchange rate), which remains the only game in town when I want to make a truly anonymous transaction. For example, when I give money to a pahnandler, I really don't want there to be any paper trail that the person I'm giving money to can possibly trace back to me.