> “In a situation like this, where the national bank is not fully operating, crypto is helping to perform fast transfers, to make it very quick and get results almost immediately,”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/11/technology/bitcoin-ukrain...
Is this BS and marketing?
>> “In a situation like this, where the national bank is not fully operating, crypto is helping to perform fast transfers, to make it very quick and get results almost immediately,”
>> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/11/technology/bitcoin-ukrain...
> Is this BS and marketing?
Here are the next two paragraphs after your quote:
> But Mr. Bornyakov [Ukraine’s deputy minister of digital transformation] seemed wary of overstating crypto’s importance to the Ukrainian cause.
> “I don’t think crypto is playing a major part,” Mr. Bornyakov said. “But its role is essential in this conflict in terms of helping our army.”
Ukraine needs every bit of support they can get, and they won't turn away tens of millions in donations from cryptobros, but it's a minor part of their effort. You can also easily donate USD or do a bank transfer to send them money:
https://bank.gov.ua/en/news/all/natsionalniy-bank-vidkriv-sp...
And they've gotten far more donations that way:
https://bank.gov.ua/en/news/all/nbu-pererahuvav-na-potrebi-v...
> But cryptocurrency doesn't address any real problems.
Nobody was comparing the market share of different forms of currency or anything like that. We can discuss the viable rate of market share growth for new forms of currency some other time.
This is a high ranking government official saying that bitcoin is helping solve a real problem. Can you at least acknowledge that maybe he's telling the truth? Or when the next bitcoin thread rolls around will you just repeat the same tired old complaint about no use cases?
...that aren't better addressed by other, existing technologies. There might be some weird corner cases where it makes sense, but that's not anywhere close to the "future of money" hype.
> This is a high ranking government official saying that bitcoin is helping solve a real problem. Can you at least acknowledge that maybe he's telling the truth? Or when the next bitcoin thread rolls around will you just repeat the same tired old complaint about no use cases?
Sure he's telling the truth. I'm not saying cryptocurrency can't be used to solve problems, what I'm saying it's not anything special as a solution and is often a pretty bad one.
If I add some horse-drawn carriages to my fleet of trucks, because I'm so desperate to haul the absolute largest quantity of something that I can that I'll do anything, that doesn't mean horses are the future of transport or are even a good transportation solution in the modern world.
A lot of that money has been withdrawn via an exchange registered in an offshore. My bet is that someone who set it up has profited nicely during the war.
Has it actually helped Ukraine? Who knows.
For one thing, this advantage over the national bank, is during a WAR. Assuming the war disrupts the national bank, yet over the long term will not also disrupt all the infrastructure that bitcoin needs (cheap high speed computing, available networking, reliable electricity, etc) strains credibility.
> Russia's invasion has caused untold damage to lives, buildings, and roads. It also threatened to destroy Ukraine's banking system.
> But a month into the war, Ukrainians in most of the country can still put their money in savings accounts, pay their telephone bills, and withdraw cash easily.
> Today, we speak to the CEO of Ukraine's second-largest bank to learn how the country's banks are continuing essential business in the wake of devastation on the homefront.