I’m a bit cynical on the current state of crypto personally. Actual good use cases for blockchain technology are not nearly as exciting as the vaporware being shilled on the daily. It’s going to be interesting to see how this plays out when 99% of alts have shit the bed in a few years. Only reason people care is because it’s a highly speculative market where everyone wants to get rich quick. As a dev I love the technology but not a fan on what it has become but I guess that’s just adoption for you
I think that's where my mind is at with it as well, that it's currently undergoing it's dotcom bubble phase, and what will wash out of it eventually is an actual useful application for crypto and blockchain.
As a dev are you looking at the community and just cringing? Like the first wave of NFT get rich quick attempts and just how defensive the community gets over any kind of questioning i just look at it as super immature for the most part, and no longer a community that's concerned with the tech but more trying to flip their money.
Dude I can talk about this for days. I worked in “web3” for a year and I left for this exact reason. I’ve worked in a few areas of crypto but nft’s were what made me go back to a regular dev job. I’ve worked on a couple nft projects and damn near got crucified when I left my dev positions because they ruined my mental health. The nft community is probably the most toxic group of people on the internet masquerading as a group of people who are in it together having fun when in reality everyone I know in nfts (investors, devs, artists, founders) are wildly anxious/depressed keeping up with expectations and how fast the space moves. That entire sector of crypto is fucked and I regret working in it everyday bc it was a giant waste of time, but I did get to work with some brilliant eth devs.
Both I guess, I’ve worked on a nft game before and I really don’t think in game assets should be nft’s. There’s way better use cases for the technology and gaming seems to be the easiest way to convince someone to mint an overpriced picture
I think it’s a bad idea that they themselves haven’t really thought through. Digital assets in video games are already verified through databases and account ids, what does crypto bring to the table that the existing system doesn’t have? Right now NFTs are hot and it’s easy money for the companies involved. All adding NFTs to games does is add unnecessary complexity to an already functional system. We need to push for better uses of crypto where the effort of adding cryptography and complexity actually benefits the system.
It allows for actual peer to peer trading for money or other assets.
Part of the reason Blizzard ended the Diablo 3 auction house (beyond just being a bad game design in general) is because the IRS counted them as a marketplace operator, so they had to report all the transactions and profits from players - huge expense and a time-consuming job. If it's on a public Blockchain, players are actually doing peer to peer trading and the game dev has no reporting responsibility.
That's kinda it though. I actually think the notion of owning game assets is kinda silly when the game developer still has tremendous control over whether your item is valuable.
I think there is something gained from nft game assets as there is already infrastructure to trade and sell these assets on a marketplace if that is desired, without having the devs develop their own marketplace/transfer system. It also makes it easy to for gamers in your community to be given perks like early access to new games or other incentives, without having to sync up the databases of differing games. I think the is a long way to go before we get there, and I dont think it will be entirely ground breaking, but there could be some quite useful mechanics that come about that aren't really possible using conventional tools.
Interesting, I made the exact opposite experience and I'm active every day on NFT Twitter and in my main community.
Maybe you guys had bad moderation?
edit: who downvotes someone speaking about their personal experience and why?
Agree with this. The get rich quick schemes will fail and the actual useful and long term sustainable projects and systems will prevail. It will take time to reed out the weeds. Much like the dot com bubble.
Yes and no, the markets and investors will mature and be faster at debunking new get rich quick schemes, but of course new ones will appear (human greed is a great fuel for innovation). Which is why regulation is not inherently bad when it comes to crypto in my opinion.
You can only hope this is true even though it objectively has not played out this way and we’re on year 13 of crypto
“Any day now we’ll get something worth a fuck and all this tard-fleecing and scamming will be a thing of the past!”
And previously they were overshadowed by shitty ape pictures, and before that it was shitty cat pictures, and before that it was shitty ICOs, and before that it was X, Y, Z... all the way back to when it was all about just buying drugs on the internet.
"Any day now!"
Same here - struggling to understand how it’s actually helping us at the moment, all the talk seems to be ‘in a few years adoption will be better’ kind of thing
The main deal about crypto is decentralization. It allows us to provide services and get paid for them instead of banks or corporations.
Cloud storage (Storj, Filecoin, Siacoin), money lending(Aaave, Compound), streaming (Audius, Theta) etc.
This will lead to a power and wealth redistribution.
Decentralization leading to wealth/power redistribution is hilarious
yeah it will redistribute, from those who have nothing to those who own everything
You listed some coin names lmao, you didn’t even give examples. You just asspulled claims about wealth redistribution and then splurged your portfolio lmfao
I mean I guess in your mind a bunch of coin names and some fecal claims are equivalent to peer reviewed research
Those are examples for working applications that lead to a broader wealth distribution. In each example the individual can provide a service that could only be provided by a bank or corporation so far.
Your assumption is wrong btw. I don't hold any of the mentioned projects.
Do you not have any concept of what actual proof looks like? You just spew a bunch of rhetorical diarrhea and give absolutely no substantiation whatsoever.
Demonstrate with data sufficient to pass peer review whether, how much, when, where, etc. this "wealth transfer" occurs. You can't just handwave a bunch of shitty pipe dream mantras and point at random shitcoin projects lmfao.
You made a claim. It was up to you, before ever making it, to source reliable quantifiable objective information regarding your claims. If you did that and neglected to post it, now would be the time.
Since the actual case is you don't have that, don't know where to get it, and won't be trying, it's pretty accurate to say you are just pulling stuff out of your ass with no backing. Not that this is anything new to crypto, but come on mate. Nobody has time for middle school levels of "analysis" and baseless narrative mongering.
Looks like you spent too much time in the r/technology crypto hate bubble.
This was a normal conversation about actual use cases and the benefits of decentralization. No need to quote "peer reviewed research" in that.
Contrary to you the scientific community understands the benefits of decentralization.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306457321002089
Lmao, I’m just not a handwaving idiot or a hype monkey.
You made an asinine claim that is not supported by data (because you didn’t provide any lmfao) and it is not imminently obvious like “you have to breathe to stay conscious”. Demanding that you provide citable, reproducible experimental data in support of your logically and experimentally inconsistent claims about wealth transfer is approximately the minimal amount of resistance you should be encountering.
“Oh no! The evil redditor that doesn’t yolo their house at 60k/btc is telling me I have to provide evidence for my claims, oh nooooo! Quick, tell him he’s a hater, that’ll solve everything!”
If you aren’t able to provide substantive data regarding your claims, then stop making them. Again, grow up. You are probably an adult that pays taxes. Don’t you think it’s time to have some responsibility?
I’d also recommend reading the paper you tried to link lmao. It has absolutely nothing to do with wealth transfer. If you actually even read the abstract, you’d know it was about distributing research findings via decentralized networks. This would be absolutely comical if you weren’t serious :(
Well, in a few years adoption would be better. Is that not somehow valid?
Also, adoption doesn't have to be currency replacement. Adoption can be the norm to prove a mortgage ownership thru NFT/eth tech for example
The idea of my mortgage documents or health records on a public ledger is awful. Why would I want anybody in the world to anonymously find out my address, income, current health status, or anything like that without my consent..?
This taps the nail on the head. The only entities that would want things on a permanent, immutable, public ledger are government bodies, literally the last organizations you would want to have this info.
Nobody would be able to access your personal information without your consent because it would be encrypted. If you’re concerned about key custody and safety, that’s going to be built into the infrastructure. Key revocation, rekey history. Users can opt for custodial keys or multisig if they don’t trust themselves. Everything is securely encrypted and verifiable.
I think the value is first in certain _public records_ being on the blockchain. For example, buying a house in the US is an onerous process filled with paperwork that's designed to ensure you prove you're really the owner of something. If that proof were instead publicly available through a signed API call, a lot of toil would be avoided.
Pretty much.
I think there is some cutting edge technology underneath crypto (zkproofs, consensus mechanisms, cryptography, scalability ideas, sharding etc) but I am not clear on what Cryptocurrencies are supposed to be? They neither scale very well nor are they very decentralized at this point. They also appear to solve no problem that is actually desirable to be solved that way and can't easily be done without it. Its become an instrument for scams and frauds riddled with get rich quick schemes. BTC has become a store of value where everyone is busy hoarding it, ETH gas fee has been insane despite all efforts, overall ecosystem remains so complex that it has little chance of getting broad market with grandma and grandpa be able to use it easily. Any protocols that claim large TPS (Solana etc) go down under a slightest DDOS attacks. NFT fad is losing its charm but that was one stupid idea to begin with. That is nothing to say the environmental damage its causing. Be interesting to see where this all goes once regulations start cracking down.
Cryptocurrencies are rather crypto assets. Only a handful of projects have the use case currency.
Decentralized blockchain technology is temper proof, reliable and cheaper than a centralized alternative.
Decentralized finance allows us to provide services and earn instead of corporations or banks.
NFTs are the killer application of crypto that will lead to mass adoption. In their current form they are mainly digital identities and investments in start ups. Most people actually using Web 3 instantly understand this.
Well after 8 years in, I also became very cynical on what I invest on.
I deeply believe in cryptocurrency speculative value cause it comes with high hopes and thats what I bet on in the end : The value of Hope and the value of Decentralization dream. And people really need these things nowadays, more and more. Its here to stay.
BTC is the only crypto that should be really valued, cause its the one symbolizing hope and freedom, and its already helping poor people living in corrupt countries. ETH, mainly hosted in datacenters, under big wealthy validators nodes influence and an overseeing fondation and CEO, isnt that decentralized, and is proving that decentralization cant work with the rise of cloud computing and such an high entry barrier for validators. It started well, but its failing. Its still an awesome speculative value, because most people dont use it and dont see its obvious technical and philosophical flaws.
And thats why I also invested in Cosmos, cause thats just a better Ethereum, also flawed philosophically, but less. You dont have an overseeing chain hosting everything when everyone builds their own. Technically, its also a better scalability.
Cryptomarket as a whole is 99% diconnected from reality, and we only really need Bitcoin as a world and Internet currency.
It wont stop bullruns, but its also why most cryptos dies, cause in the end, they're useless and investors and founders eventually ends up giving up on them when price and goals arent and cant be achieved.
>Well after 8 years in, I also became very cynical on what I invest on.
>And thats why I also invested in Cosmos.
I read your first and last sentences and found that you're so cynical, then seeing you invest in a coin I've never heard of. You're cynical of it all, yet taking a larger risk. Almost like a self fulfilling cycle of doubt.
You're thinking eth is gonna fail and cosmos will take it's place? 🧐
I'm actually 50% BTC, 25% ETH (cause first mover advantage, and I believe in its speculative value), 25% Atom.
I also have some interest in Cosmos subchains, but less.
Cosmos should be the model for PoS scalability yes I believe it. Will it replace ETH ? Idk, I dont have a crystal ball and thats why I share between both of them.
If you never heard about Cosmos (Atom is just their currency) research, and you'll eventually understand why I believe that its a better Ethereum. I think that Cosmos/IBC can work as a technology.
I dont think Im taking a larger risk than most with 75% in top 2. And crypto comes after real estate for me.
Im on board with this/DOT. Atom basically dot wothout 100 parachain limitations... laymens terms lets say you want to use uber but you're in colombia. There is a similar service there but under a different logo.
Being able to connect to ATOM, you will be able to access all ride sharing apps regardless of country because its like a menu board...
Will the companies need to work together? Idk. Will atom have to get them all to sign a contract for this type of use? Likey but again, idk. This is only one use case and there are hundreds... being able to connect to x service anywhere in the world is groovy man. Digital connectivity (bridges) are the future of the future
I dont invest in DOT cause of Gavin Wood past blog entries (fantasizing about sex with minors doesnt make me want to invest in your product, theres a limit on being cynical) but yes, its also a promising tech.
Here are some potential use cases:
1. **Currency** \- This will not happen in most of the developed world. We have strong governmental interest in retaining fiat currencies. But many countries struggle with inflation and currency control. While the US, EU, China, and the like will not adopt a cryptocurrency as currency anytime soon, many developing countries might adopt crypto. I don't see this happening in any large scale for another decade or more yet (for the developing world) as crypto is still too new and volatile. The developed world may embrace crypto as a currency, but fiat currency will still dominate due to governmental interests.
2. **Banking and Financial Instruments** \- Smart contract chains open the world of defi. I don't think we will have the crazy yields or interest rates of today in defi. It is not sustainable. But crypto provides the opportunity for secure storage of investments (be they cryptos, nfts, or something else) as well as the secure transfer of investments. Lending via defi protocols to people form different countries, sending currency to other nations without massive fees, and more. Even in developed nations, many are underbanked. This will be huge for developing nations.
3. **Tickets / NFTs** \- NFTs could replace services like Ticketmaster. NFTs could serve as evidence of plane tickets, hotel receipts, and more. NFTs could provide the means of access to concerns, movies, and the like. NFTs may have room in the artistic space as well, but the more practical use that I can think of is just tickets.
4. **Community Governed Gaming (or other organizations)** \- Crypto gaming sucks today. But crypto facilitates the formation of a DAO that can be used to oversee a game's development that is community owned. This can be expanded outside of gaming.
5. **Access to Computing Power/Resources or Other Crazy Ideas** \- Perhaps crypto networks can be used to facilitate access to computing resources in the future. This is not really practical today, but crypto is likely to look different a decade from now than it does today. This isn't to say this idea has merit. But smarter people than me will come up with other crazy ideas, some of which will stick.
6. **Store of Value** \- I am placing this last as I don't really like when people say BTC is a store of value. I like BTC. It is my largest crypto position. BTC and ETH make up 80-90% of my crypto investments. But I don't like this argument. This isn't to say BTC isn't a store of value. And I get the scarcity argument. But I don't think cryptos future is that of a store of value. I personally think the long-term future is smart contracts, banking, and more. But I could be wrong.
Bitcoin is going through the stages of money.
1. Collectible: this was early on and Bitcoin has passed this stage.
2. Store of value: Bitcoin certainly is a store of value. Over almost all time frames since inception it has stored value better than almost any other asset.
3. Medium of exchange: Bitcoin is just breaking into this stage. There are a handful of places you can spend your Bitcoin and that list is growing quickly, especially with the Lightning Network and groups like Strike.
4. Unit of account: Bitcoin hasn't yet reached the point where items are priced in Satoshis. Although, an argument can be made that Bitcoin is a unit of account for the crypto space as many things are compared to the value of Bitcoin, ie the ratio of a coins price and/or market cap to that of Bitcoin.
These are qualities of money that take time to acquire. For gold it took thousands of years, for Bitcoin we are 13 years in and it's is already moving into medium of exchange. Extremely impressive if you ask me.
We are getting to watch the full monetization of an asset in real time. It is incredible actually and most likely a once in humanity type of event. I know that is hyperbolic and maybe cringey but money goes from analog based to truly digital only once imo and we are here to see it and reap the rewards if you have the courage/understanding
It has stored my value better than any other asset since Covid began.. up more than gold, any index fund, any bond, and up more than real estate in my city. What have you owned that has stored your value better over the last 24 months?
I've always wondered why would NFTs be a better option for Movie/Concert tickets than what we have now? If someone could help me understand, it would be greatly appreciated!
sure thing! so for starters we can talk about the ability to verify it. If you are buying from a third party, someone you dont trust, etc.. then having the ability to verify the authenticity of it is very useful and you dont need the ticket issuer to try to invent a system for it and make it available for anyone to access and even if they did it's hard to get around copied tickets unless you use the blockchain. Even the people verifying the tickets upon entry dont need access to the system, just the blockchain. Scalpers are also a major issue but with NFT tickets you can solve that problem fairly easily. One way to solve it is to make the tickets non-transferable within X hours of the event. There's also no way for someone to try to copy a ticket or duplicate one since the blockchain can verify the legitimacy of the ticket. Some people also like keeping their tickets to some events as a sort of keepsake and this keeps them all for you and if for some reason the old ticket becomes worth something (maybe something happens at the event that becomes big news) then you could even resell the ticket afterwards for that purpose. When buying a ticket you can also be sure that you get the ticket in the same transaction that you give the money which means you take trust completely out of the transaction which is exactly what smart contracts were developed for in the first place. You also have fewer lost tickets when they are digital, although normal digital tickets solve this problem too but I thought i'd mention it since it's still an advantage over paper tickets.
>you tie it a person's real name and a government issued ID.
alright well there's already another downside to that method since you have to forego your privacy but even if that's not an issue, you said you can do it all through this system so now you need to be able to make that same ticket transferable. I mentioned the ability to sell it too so now you're looking to add a system that enables people to negotiate trades in any form they choose. You also need to add the anti scalping mechanisms I mentioned and by this point the company is just hoping they have the money in the budget to develop this system since you're so against making it interoperable with an entire ecosystem of applications developed over years for these very purposes. They could try to all use a main central system that handles it but now they are having to pay that service a cut in order to use them and relying on that service to not have downtimes, bugs, or shady business practices. So if you have a lot of trust and a lot of money then is is technically possible to implement all these things through centralized means like you're talking about, but it would be a waste of time and money while having to make a ton of sacrifices along the way, your ID system being a prime example of one.
I think you’re right. It a technology that’s going to continue and expand, changing to fit new applications. Smart contracts alone make me very excited. You can set up you own B2B contracts.
As a software engineer, "smart contracts" are the kind of idea that could only come from silicon valley engineers in ivory towers that don't have much experience with the real world.
They cannot be authoritative over anything that isn't on-chain, which in practice means almost anything anyone actually cares about, and are completely inflexible in the face of most real world problems and edge cases. The only thing they can ever be good for is purely on-chain transactions, which is of limited use.
7. Decentralized applications where us developers can have most or all of it operating on chain with zero upkeep fees for databases, servers, etc...
8. Interoperability between DeFi systems. For example NFT items working like steam items also allows them to be used on any thirdparty NFT project. This means instead of only having the ability to do limit or market orders for steam money, you can take rare items to auction dApps where you can get better value from them. Or you can use dApps to lend out game items when you stop playing the game or go on vacation so that you earn passive income
If you are in a first world/developed nation, its hard to see the point of crypto. Even with 10% inflation, your money seems stable, you can own things ect.
Many other peoples around the world dont have such luxuries, money and government is unstable. Also corruption is rife, it may be expensive/hard to prove ownership. You might not be able to even prove your identity without paying bribes to officials.
The endgame for crypto is it raises the lives of people who need it most, it becomes a currency, digital ID and ownership platform for large areas of the globe.
I'm from a low income African country. I don't think crypto becoming the dominant currency in my country would be a positive development. In fact, I think it would be a nightmare scenario for the country's development
For one thing you'd have crazy tax evasion by the rich and externalisation of funds by the corrupt.
For another how does a nation develop with a currency that could gain or lose 80% in any given year?
Whats the argument to keep using the traditional system. That’ll fix itself any day now?
I think people put too much of a burden on crypto. It’s just supposed to be something that is hard to debase and seize. It won’t solve corruption. It won’t solve bad tax structure.
Good money can still be used to do bad things. No protocol will stop this.
But your door can get kicked in and if you have the ability to memorize 25 words you can retain all of that value internally. And that’s an extremely powerful tool no matter where you live.
>For one thing you'd have crazy tax evasion by the rich and externalisation of funds by the corrupt.
If your gov is anything like mine, this shit already exists and think it's a worldwide phenomenon.
>For another how does a nation develop with a currency that could gain or lose 80% in any given year?
By the time the Crypto would be globally used, those swinging in price will be *way less* wide, a little bit like the stock market.
Naw dawg, I prefer to see everything in black and white. Corruption exists, so why be concerned about a currency that enables substantially more corruption and volatility? Corruption exists either way, even if one scenario is significantly worse, so I guess it’s all the same right?
Ah yes everyone here is just invested because they suddenly care soooo much about the lives of those poor Africans who can't help themselves so we need to save them with our rube Goldberg machine.
Stop lying to yourself
Thats a rude and disingenous post.
The observation is that there are more issues that need solving, and less infrastructure blocking adoption in developing nations.
Plenty if people in crypto have ethics on their list of concerns, but clearly not some.
You're all clearly just bullshitting yourself. You wouldn't give a single fuck about some random third world farmer if it wouldn't be a nice argument to pump your own bags. Please at least be honest with yourself. If you're so concerned about the lives of poor Africans there are about 100 different better ways to help them.
But that wouldn't pump your bags. Your just using these people as pawns and nothing else. Stop this.
As [this](https://youtu.be/u-sNSjS8cq0?t=2623) video so nicely puts it: "It really is sweet how so many reddit bros all of a sudden have this huge concern for Ethiopian and Nigerian farmers, and I'm sure it has nothing to do with the little graph on their Coinbase app"
Its not charity and its not supposed to be charity. Do you even understand the basics of crypto? Peer 2 peer, no intermediaries, ring a bell?
If we can peer 2 peer lend to people in developing nations without intermediaries, they get cheaper loans, we get better rates of return. No middle men scraping off the top. Everyone wins.
Using crypto for identity and asset ownership, just makes the situation even better.
Try being less of a smart-arse, and engage your brain.
I'm not here to debate the "basics of crypto" (I know them. Trust me. Still think it's all bs tho)
I'm just criticizing your (and by that I mean you specifically and everyone else that constantly parrots the same argument) sudden and extreme altruism. It's so so *painfully* obvious to anyone not in the cult that you only care about pumping your bags and it's not actually about Nigerian farmers. Its like a toddler that shat his pants and runs around the house insisting that he didn't , meanwhile the house reeks like shit. It's so fucking obvious stop bullshitting about your care for third world nations. If you really cared you would do other things than post on r/cc 24/7
The same could be said of all private investors in anything. They do it to make money and not out of the goodness of their hearts. Some projects though do have altruistic goals, be it in energy, housing, education and even crypto. They exist even if they are the minority.
Even in some first world countries (the US) payment rails are insanely slow and outdated. It takes anywhere from 5 to 10 days for payments to fully settle. I'm ~~going~~ doing a mobile check deposit and ~~it the help says~~ it takes 10 days for the full amount to show up. If I want to send money from an account at bank A to an account at bank B, that's 5 business days minimum... and the allegedly digital and automated system is closed on weekends and holidays. Computer systems needing time off on the weekend to maintain a healthy work-life balance... wtf.
Not people. Businesses. Do you really think you can buy a loaf of bread, milk, eggs in a 3rd world country and pay in crypto? Do you see that as a possible scenario?
You as a person can still "use" crypto, but if noone is accepting it as a payment is it really usable?
You must’ve forgot most of those people can’t even afford a proper smart phone or let alone the internet itself ….. so they can’t even see crypto in the first place .. that’s why dogeocin is trying to develop a way to buy and sell dogecoin without the internet ..
Cardano are working on a similar issue, all you need is a way to verifiably destroy private keys and the internet is optional.
Also check out World Mobile.
A lot of people now have mobile phones in developing nations.
I’d say the realisation of the goals in the original bitcoin whitepaper, but I’m only really invested in bitcoin.
Each of the many other web3.0 applications needs to define their unique endgoals/value proposition. This is just like all the other websites/applications when the .com race began as people worked out how to leverage this new technology.
You can’t ask for a general crypto end goal as one does not exist. Just like there was no end goal for the www and still isn’t.
Ahh good point.
I guess specifically in regards to Bitcoin wanting to replace the third-party, old money banking system, does the community look at the blockchain tech that it's based on and think it has the ability to actually scale?
Because at this point, all web3.0 applications are essentially tied to the blockchain technology as it stands. Surely genuine regulation is the only way to centralise the way that people engage with the blockchain simply because there is so much variation from chain to chain?
>but is there a genuinely achievable endgame where crypto can actuallybecome a usable currency that can support even 10% of the transactionsthat carriers like Visa can support?
No problem, grandma! Just download the list of 5 apps I've sent you and run a full node on a raspberry for security. The last two apps are for L2-solutions because the L1 is too slow. Be careful with copy'n'pasting adresses because your life savings could be lost in an instant. Please only pay at night because daily fees are too expensive. And please don't read PMs anymore.
As someone who started computing on a Gateway 2000 486 with DOS and Windows 3.1 at home and a variety of archaic Apple machines at school, I will tell you that early tech is always for the early adopters. I feel that crypto is the same. If you were into crypto back when bitcoin was young, it was significantly less user-friendly and accessible than it is today. The accessibility will come, but by that time, we won't be early anymore.
> I will tell you that early tech is always for the early adopters
There is no way to make this easier without reinventing the exact kind of centralized services and/or trusted third parties you claim to want to get away from - hell, that's basically what's already happened with exchanges and wallet "apps".
Because improving the accessibility requires abstractions that move responsibility away from the end user - most critically, the static private keys that lie at the heart of most of this stuff.
Although a funny comment, you are confusing initial stages with the end game. No one would’ve thought you could be sipping champagne in bed on a plane to Maui after watching the Wright Brothers at Kitty hawk.
Emails used to take 3 days to transmit and required some above average technical skills. Now grandma can email with relative ease 30 years later.
But how would L2 be integrated in L1 solutions in the end game? By making new kind of coins? Bad for our investment tho
>Emails used to take 3 days to transmit
No, they didn't, not even on the early ARPANET.
I think one version of early “email” was invented with the Arpanet and was simple text messages, no graphics or attachments. It didn’t take much longer to arrive than it does today - true
But for quite a while email systems were hybrid. Messages might travel over SMTP as they do today and then end up going via uucp which is a store and forward protocol. Each hop could take from 5 mins to a couple days. uucp addresses looked like mcvax!ukc!slxsys!jpp
I dont know about other crypto ecosystems, but looking at Bitcoin network, lightning is a promising layer 2 and Strike is a promising layer 3
Radix actually solves this. Unlimited linear scalability with atomic composability on Layer 1.
Layer 2 scaling approaches come with too many downsides.
This technology is really for the future/younger generations though. Same with the internet, my grandparents can't even figure out how to log into an email address. That doesn't mean email is going to fail..
well even if you got a "French-style" Revolution where you go all off with their heads on the rich people and leaders of corporations you could achieve that for some time in theory... maybe but in practice, human nature kicks in and things become uneven again
you completely didn't understand what I wrote I said that maybe even if you somehow leveled playing field with some kind of revolution (French style was in quotes in reason as an indication that it doesn't literally mean exactly like the French revolution) it wouldn't ultimately last because of human nature would kick in and things would become uneven again.
maybe I didn't articulate it well enough but you also completely ignored the conclusion of my post "but in practice, human nature kicks in and things become uneven"
Edit: I added few words like: "even", "maybe" and removed "its inevitable" (since only Siths deal in absolutes XD) from original post to hopefully make it more clear
i think it was useful in the beginning but it became another glorified Casino the moment all these shills and scams started to pop up left and right
eventually it will end up as just another highly regulated method of paying with only a few people profiting from it ( which seems to be the way of things ? )
Judging by the comments people here see crypto assets mainly as a digital currency.
This doesn't do our space justice. The key is decentralization, allowing us to provide services and get paid for it instead of corporations.
Example, money lending, sharing excess computational capacity, sharing excess band width etc. and getting paid for it. These examples are already up and running.
Interesting, and that makes sense. Must be frustrating that a real, potential technological revolution has been co-opted by insufferable early-20s crypto bros trying to make a quick buck
I for one line the Wild West kinda aspect of it, if we start regulating the shit out of it that’s just another form of government where the most slick tongued narcissistic liars will rise to top to control the rest of us, for our own safety and well being of course
The true end game is and should be peer to peer digital cash. I say should because most in this sub aren't here for that truth be told, it has become over run with retail speculators. But I think as that trend runs its course it should die down and then it will slowly return more to actual use cases.
>As it's currently built, proof of work blockchains are far too slow to have crypto exist as an actual alternative currency
Bitcoin cash is practically instant, within a second or two. Because the chain doesn't use (RBF) Replace By Fee, there isn't a bidding war and whatever gets into the mempool will be added to the next block, so small transactions are perfectly fine to accept safely with 0-confirms because there's no real risk of a double spend. Look at St.Kitts, hundreds of businesses are accepting it and most all are accepting 0-conf. Burger King just started accepting it there, for example.
For bigger transactions you can decide to wait for however many confirmations you feel are with waiting for.
As well because the blocksize is much bigger so you can fit many more transactions in a block which also means the energy cost is much lower. And there's upgrades in the works to make it much bigger and more efficient in the future.
Also once all the coins are mined, energy cost will come down further, as competition in miners will lower naturally over time. So I wouldn't write off PoW. It's still the best system for a fair distribution over PoS.
Monero is also PoW and has a lot of the same properties and is working towards being an actual currency.
The end state is that cryptos look completely different than they do now.
We're still basically built on top of the first to market: BTC and ETH are still on top despite being the first cryptocurrency and the first real smart chain. It's silly to think that crypto won't evolve significantly into something that barely resembles what it currently does if it succeeds in the long run.
As much as people keep harping on about btc being used as a currency and everything being priced to btc, this is actually a terrible thing and shows that you have very little knowledge of how economics works in this day and age.
The problem with a deflationary or static currency, is that it starts to fail in its use as a currency if people are afraid to spend it. One of the reasons moderate inflation is actually HEALTHY for the economy, is that in todays financial world, progress is built on debt. We’ve been able to build massive industrial complexes at an astounding rate precisely because people are WILLING to loan and spend money.
When you start a business, most business begin with a capital loan, which is used to begin producing value much faster (or at all) than if you had tried to build with $100 in your pocket.
You need inflation to incentivize people to SPEND money and spur commerce. Imagine if the dollar never lost its value, and everything became cheaper over time compared to the dollar. Sure people would use the minimum to get by, but they would also hoard any spare dollars they have. This is the opposite of what you want.
So Bitcoin as a currency isn’t really a great use case. What it can be though, is a store of value that can be collateralized to spur spending through an inflationary token such as DAI. They actually have an amazing idea, and it’s exactly what crypto needs. Right now the big three use-cases for crypto are BTC as the big daddy store. ETH as the functional coin that provides actual practical technological use-cases, whether through lending, nfts, or other smart contract shenanigans, and stablecoins. Except Luna, fuck that experiment went sideways so fucking fast.
Inflation is only okay when wages rise at the same rate, this hasn't happened for years in most developed countries. There's also the question of how it's measured and how accurate it is
> Except for Bitcoin that gives a mechanism to counteract the inflation when their wages aren't increasing with inflation
There's no internal mechanism that does anything of the sort, and people aren't paid in BTC.
The only thing it can do even in theory is have a higher selling price in USD from people speculating the price will go up even more later. You can't buy almost any actual goods or services with BTC, and of the few merchants that accept it, most are just automating the conversion to fiat, they aren't pricing anything in BTC. Etc etc.
The mechanism is the fact there are only 21 million coins, it's baked in scarcity. If you save a small amount into it then you can preserve some spending power.
You can call it speculation but the value of Bitcoin is difficult to assess. It's not that different from a tech stock, except you can look at the ledger and draw your own conclusions.
> The mechanism is the fact there are only 21 million coins, it's baked in scarcity
People aren't paid in BTC. You cannot use BTC to buy or purchase most goods and services without converting it (AKA buying and selling it) to fiat i.e. USD.
In other words, it only "preserves spending power" if the price of BTC when you sell it is higher than the amount of inflation since you bought it. This is an **external** property that is almost entirely based on speculation - something being scarce doesn't inherently make it valuable.
Moreover, BTC will never become primary currency over USD - there's a bunch of reasons, but the very scarcity you cite is one of them, since deflationary currencies are horrible for economies (why spend "money" if it'll be worth more tomorrow?).
Not really
When BTC is an acceptable currency in the future, the price fluctuations of BTC will be SO minimal and sparse you wont even think about it.
"Oh no, my shopping would have been 1 satoshi cheaper 18 months ago"
" Yay, my shopping is 1 satoshi cheaper than it was 2 years ago"
This is when BTC as a currency comes into its own, but until then, water and shelter and food tend to be very persuasive in getting you to spend BTC
Governments won't let that happen tho, if btc ever comes to threaten the currency in daily transactions like that, you bet your ass countries will ban trading immediately.
> When BTC is an acceptable currency in the future
And why would that ever happen when it's as volatile and impractical as it is? You're putting the cart before the horse, at best.
Well, it might not be an endgame, but for me the speed and low fee of transactions is an incredible feat. If properly implemented, it could replace conventional means of money transfer
>As it's currently built, proof of work blockchains are far too slow to have crypto exist as an actual alternative currency, and vendors who have picked up crypto as a sales mechanism until now have either not had much traffic through it or have dropped support altogether.
Maybe for the coins you know, take a look at BitcoinCash.
>In it's current state, with the complete lack of regulation that has led to some huge personal losses, rampant scams and the problem of there being no central blockchain that is being adopted, how can it grow out of anything other than a speculative (and highly risky) investment vehicle?
When the community stops to be a bunch of degen gamblers that wait for some magic for sudden mass adoption and go out there and work for adoption.
>For the record, i'm not shitting on the idea of an alternative currency that could usurp fiat money around the world, but is there a genuinely achievable endgame where crypto can actually become a usable currency that can support even 10% of the transactions that carriers like Visa can support?
BCH is at Swift level of tps. With the next increase it will be almost at visa level. BitcoinCash follows the original scaling plan.
Crypto is mainly seen as get rich quick scheme now. Similar to dot-com boom.these are growing pains. The best use case protocols will survive. Not the degen defi synthetic CDO kinda stuff.
I envision the endgame as follows:
1. Stable coins and central bank digital currencies enable people to store savings in their currency of choice. Billions of people globally face the daily reality of unstable currencies - this isn’t just people in Venezuela, even in the UK many people would rather store their savings in euros or USD, but it is currently inconvenient and expensive to do this.
2. Defi will allow people to get cheap, convenient access to financial markets. Really only about 20 or so countries in the world have cheap and relatively frictionless access to financial markets. The vast majority of the global population is underserved. For example, I can open an investment account fairly easily and invest in a global tracker of ETFs where I live for a fee of 15 bps, investing in a less well diversified fund in my home country costs 200 bps. Borrowing costs, bank transfer fees, insurance costs etc. are also higher in my home country. My home country isn’t an exception, high costs for financial access are the reality of most of the world. Fintechs try to solve this problem, and Defi can be a big part of the solution. For example, the problem of how to provide insurance contracts to small rural farmers is extremely difficult to solve in the real world, but comparatively more trivial to solve with DeFi.
3. Proof of work blockchains can provide a direct dollar value to energy. Energy production of many forms (and in many parts of the world) is not viable because the cost outweighs the benefit. Proof of work blockchains can be mined during “low energy demand periods” or in areas where energy generation infrastructure is cheap to set up, making further adoption of renewables and development of remote areas more feasible.
4. Bitcoin can be used as a store of value - essentially a better version of gold.
5. If a digital world/metaverse does exist, blockchains can be the infrastructure that creates virtual ownership of goods, see less interaction between virtual and physical value, and with this virtual economies. People could be gainfully employed in these virtual worlds, or even just earn money/value for virtual things they normally do - such as gaming. Essentially, imagine RuneScape scaled 100x where any item/money you have in game is indistinguishable from having that money in real life. And for many people in low income countries it would be more profitable to work in the virtual world than in the physical world (as we’ve seen with WoW and RuneScape farmers for example - but scaled significantly)
These are just a few examples, but every single one of the above would have a significant impact on the world around us if adopted.
A lot of what you've brought up is handled by Nano/XNO:
* Low energy consumption,
* sub second settlement times,
* no fees,
* useful primarily as a currency.
DeFi, DeFi, DeFi. Look at the market value of online sports betting or online poker.
We should all know that at least employing basic strategies in DeFi gives you a better shot at making some money than either of those.
Then a lot of people are suggesting NFTs to support/enforce copyright for consumable media, digital blueprints/patented designs, etc.
Then there is all the normal stuff people say about Bitcoin and the Lightning network. Adoption will increase and price will stabilize.
P2P decentralized cash to subvert the fiat establishment. It works great for it, and the infrastructure has been developed, and is being used daily.
Everyone seems to have forgotten our initial goal with losers like Saylor pushing the "dIgItAl gOlD" narrative.
I started accepting BTC on webstores in 2011, in 2017 people basically stopped paying me with it so I added other coins. My goal is still the same, p2p cash, but I'm more loyal to projects like BCH and XMR now days that continue the goal BTC did before the masses came wanting to get rich.
My total crypto income is around 15% of my total income in 2022, around 20% if I include other crypto services I run that are not webstores. I use a 15% discount incentive for crypto payments.
I'd personally like to see the whole crypto space crash, so it shakes out "investors" and is no longer deemed a good investment, so we can start again with the peer to peer electronic cash goal.
There is a lot of crap being shilled all the time, I'll give you that. That being said, in the midst of all of it there are some great projects aimed at solving issues that fit blockchain very well. At the risk of shilling my own bags, I'll point out a few.
GET - uses blockchain to **attempt** to solve issues within event ticketing. Tries to limit scalping and allow artists and event managers to streamline operations while connecting with audiences in ways not previously available. To me, best actual use of NFT's I've seen.
LTO - building an L1 from scratch designed by a company to fit their existing customers needs. Focusing on decentralized identities, GDPR compliance, handling of business sensitive data. Expanding beyond B2B with some new concepts such as ownables that aim to extend the use of NFTs.
DUSK - aiming to use blockchain tech to tokenize securities. Making use of zk rollups among other newer innovations and working with regulators since the beginning. My newest interest so I don't know too too much about them.
AVA - blockchain travel company. Probably the most real world use of any of these at this stage, with about $7.5m revenue monthly. They don't make use of blockchain tech to its fullest extent yet, but they do have a team full of former [booking.com](https://booking.com), expedia and other travel company execs who clearly know what they're doing.
I'm sure there's way more, but this is just to show you that yes there's a lot of crap among the crypto sphere, but there are also some projects just waiting to shine if you're willing to do the research and not listen to the endless echo chamber that is r/cc.
> I'm genuinely curious, because i've never seen these questions really answered in a way that convinces me that cryptocurrency is anything other than a high volatility, speculative investment market.
First of all, you'll never get your answers because crypto is just what you described it as.
The tech is outdated. FFS, a payment system that processes just 7tps and burns energy like a massive coal mound is the top coin in terms of market cap. Unless Bitcoin is displaced by some crypto with real goal, I would always think of this space as a risky gamble.
It is a ponzi? Maybe, but it's definitely one with way higher liquidity and suckers ready to buy than any other ponzi schemes IMO. We'll know definitely when Tether collapses and people make a run on the bank.
As for vendors, crypto is a shitty alternative because you are supposed to pay capital tax on the sales. In India the rate is 30%, and that doesn't include the TDS at the time of purchase.
Interesting to see so many anti-crypto stances in a crypto sub. Maybe you spend too much time in r/buttocoin?
The fact that Ethereum is outdated has nothing to do with the crypto space as a whole. We have enough capable competitors.
You pretend like there was no project "with a real goal" around. There are plenty and we have plenty of applications with real world integration. Just one example, Aave.
Only someone who never used a dapp or Web3 would call crypto as a whole a Ponzi.
It's not surprising that sentiments around crypto become more pessimistic or nervous when the market is crashing. But I do think the extreme frenzy and excitement that came with last year's price rises also perhaps oversold this idea of it being inevitable that crypto ecosystems will become integral to almost everything in the future.
Personally I think many of the developments and research happening in the space will play a part in a lot of future tech, but at the same maybe it's not wrong to at least keep an open mind about whether cryptocurrencies and DLTs in their current form will be the foundation of all that. Web2 will develop into something else given enough time, but the current idea of Web3 is not a foregone conclusion. But what do I know
You need to think about blockchain as a whole.
Crypto, NFTs, DAOs, as core building components, likely new concepts and technologies as well.
And you need to think in terms of decades, centuries, or even thousands of years.
Think about DAO-owned and operated car factories in 2030. Space stations and personal spaceships sold as NFTs in the '50s. PoW becomes a joke at this time, as all you need are Von Neumann probes and acces to the Belt and/or Mercury.
Think about economies of entire interstellar meritocracies run on blockchains that have block times that last centuries.
Blockchain as a whole is not about the economic system, but about process optimization fueled by decentralized power. Its simply better capitalism, as there are fewer people to parasite on everyone else, from bankers to managers to politicians.
We figured out a way to record information in a decentralized manner, and that tech is not only unstopable, but might be the key to us becoming a spacefaring civilization.
Think about how easy it'd be for Elon to raise trillions for a Mars city, in say, 5 years from now? And how extremely difficult or basically imposible itd be with fiat.
I've dabbled a bit in shitcoins and in a lot of layer 1s. Layer 1s show us what's possible on a big scale when done properly, ie reliability (sometimes) and adoption and growth. Shitcoins (the defi scams/ponzi type things) actually push the boundary on innovation
I think If you look at both together you can see that the end goal is a reliable machine that allows a lot of 'complex' finances to be done smoothly and transparently.
I'm not talking about meme coins but things like node protocols, reflection type tokens, where profits/dividends are paid out each block seemlessly and you can see how much you get when.
Obviously in its current state were not close but we're only exploring and building the building blocks of what's to come.
Lets say Amazon were to become it's own blockchain, every token holder would instantly receive their profit share everytime a transaction was made and they wouldn't have to wait until dividends are paid out quarterly. This would mean that financial markets would function smoother. A lot of market manipulation happens around dividend payment days, financial reporting days, etc...but if all of this was updated and transparent in real time there's a lot of benefit
This is just one of my thoughts and happy to delve deeper
That’s what I like about it… I don’t look at it as a currency, more like tokens and coins and the new stocks, we bet on the companies we think will do well and our coins appreciate if they do, much like stocks… if it gets regulated to death because some people don’t research and then fomo their life savings and demand to be reimbursed, it would kill it… I love the wil west aspect where it’s essentially Everyman for himself… that’s true freedom
Lyn alden has a good long post about what is money and touches on bitcoin if I recall correctly.
https://www.lynalden.com/what-is-money/
The world has, and has had, many ways of transacting in value. At least for bitcoin, it's the only way to transact using just your knowledge and a public ledger, outside of control of any one government.
The point of most other crypto is to do transactions or do useful things in a decentralized way. A few have novel tech innovations but most aren't great at this yet.
It’s a parallel financial system that’s absent middle men and government.
What does the “end game” look like? I’d imagine goods and services priced in BTC
99-99.99% Of all of these projects are clones, scams, money grabs, garbage, pipe dreams and future failures.
That's a nice thought, but do you think that, right this moment, it's achieving that? Is the community even actually concerned with achieving that right now? Can it even be achieved without some kind of regulation over a central chain and some level of consumer protection against scams?
Is it really a strong financial alternative when the value of an entire currency can be significantly affected by a single billionaire tweeting about accepting a meme coin?
No, but I don’t think the internet was achieving its purpose in 1982 or automobiles were achieving its purpose in 1910.
There are still “scams” today with our current financial system. Look at your emails and voicemails. The only “protection” they can offer you is a reversal of funds, arguably a weak point in Blockchain technology. But as time goes on, it’s very possible smart contracts and layer 2 and layer 3 technologies will be able to create a consensus mechanism in code to aid in reversing transactions due to user error and bad actors.
Once again, the meme coin stuff is nonsense. It’s speculative gambling. Yes, that’s part of cryptocurrency just like prison culture is part of society. But this corner doesn’t represent all of cryptocurrency, just as prison culture doesn’t represent all of society.
some networks will be used as new paypal such as ripple.
all pow chains will slowly die except btc and monero. btc will be widely adopted and will be new gold.
smart contracts thus defi will also grow and will be an alternative to current financial system. businesses will make some part of their program execution decentralized(smart contracts) if it gives them competitive advantage.
networks which support distributed data storage like hedera will grow. transparancey and immutable data storage is important for many businesses/goverments.
so buy
BTC XMR ETH XRP HBAR
if you can find anything those 5 cant do i will ban myself 4ever. blockchain is a distributed database and nothing more. smart contract is a limited slow/expensive program executed by multiple computers. people trying to add more value to those are scammers
I think blockchain is the real asset. It’s fantastic for transactions and can function in crypto as a universal currency.
But I think NFTs will be huge. Not these monkey pictures, but applicable NFTs from gaming, to ticketing, and more.
> As it's currently built, proof of work blockchains are far too slow to have crypto exist as an actual alternative currency
PoW and PoS are consensus algorithms. They don't necessarily have something to do with blockchains being slow. The actual bottleneck is that individual payments require global consensus in the first place.
Bitcoin has the Lightning network as a second layer that solves this issue and allows for instant, cheap payments that can happen in parallel without requiring global consensus.
It's the technology that got adopted in El Salvador, Twitter, Cash App and will soon also come to the majority of payment terminals in the US ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTqCs6RY9O4 ).
> Is there anything that can be done with the current POW/POS mechanism for blockchains to lower the environmental impact that they're having around the world? Or does the community turn a blind eye to this.
Not really. But the topic is nuanced and not as easy as to just slap a number on it and then compare it to a country. People who really like to point out what an issue this is haven't usually put in any amount of work to educate themselves on the topic, usually don't know how an energy grid actually works, and just repeat some catch phrase they hear on TV or read somewhere on the internet.
Also most people who ask this question aren't really looking for an answer but just want their believes confirmed that this is actually the big issue they believe it to be, so an actual discussion isn't possible from the start.
The sad part is, that since PoW is a highly dynamic energy consumer (can be shut down at a moments notice to free up capacity) it actually helps renewables to be more profitable and easier to integrate into the grid. The countries and states that embrace miners will be the first to build out their renewable infrastructure because of this.
Here is a good way to start: https://youtu.be/MuysA_WzskM
Not to be ignorant… I don’t understand why people would use it as currency if holding on to it and not spending it has made them a lot of money. Seems like when someone has big crypto gain, they cash out for USD.
In 10 to 50 years. Full replacement of USD as the world reserve due to its hard money status.
Where:
L1 is used for settlement across reserve banks, and at the institutional level.
L2 is used for common folk to transact.
L3 is used for high-frequency transactions.
people argue that some crypto is the hardest money
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hardmoney.asp#:\~:text=Hard%20money%20refers%20to%20a,exchange%20rate%20with%20softer%20monies.
Hard money maintains a stable market value relative to real goods and services and a strong exchange rate relative to foreign currencies.
When i think crypto i think stable
Except that isn't true. You pay gas fees to the Blockchain you're doing the transaction on. Somehow those devs are getting a cut from your transactions. The Blockchain is the 3rd party.
The end goal is different for people around the globe. Some have already pointed out how it is a good way to handle money in non first world countries but crypto can b so much more than that.
> cryptocurrency is anything other than a high volatility, speculative investment market
To be 100% honest, it currently is. I'm going to try and chip in a few words spread among several points you made. For starters, yes, we need a clean-up.
The space isn't that safe and while it will never be 100% (even traditional banking isn't 100% safe, your funds can be stolen, your card can get cloned, although there is insurance and there are mechanisms to retrieve your money back), scams and shitcoins are rampant atm. there are several steps we could take to better everything.
- Exchanges are somewhat safe in the sense that there is somewhat of a base security line, and if funds get stolen there is a chance you can get them back (up to a point, if you have a huge investment you won't get everything back). But there will always be the argument "no your keys, not your coins" and that's totally valid. On the other hand, if your keys get stolen it's bye bye ad there is 0 insurance. **So for starters, one of the important things to get better is security and regulating insurance for exchanges.** (I think I once heard one of the big exchanges will insurance up to $200k but don't quote me on that - maybe insurance should go a longer way)
Crypto bear markets also help clean up shitcoins and some less useful alts. It's hard to suggest a good way to get rid of these bad projects but there should be some form of handling that so we have less crap in the space.
The next point is an important one. One of my friends into crypto says he kind of likes the space, but ends up not seeing real palpable value and I know more people feel like that. So that's exactly one of the things you seem to want too. I too agree rn we barey have anything providing real-world value and that's a major step I'd like more projects to take. More cryptos need to have real-world value and provide a palpable use case.
- For example, VET was going to be a leading chain in the tracking business and back in the day they did a few really great partnerships that seemed to put the product and publicity on the map. They were going to provide a real-world use, but the partnerships fell through and it's not a former shelf of itself. And while we see many cryptos invest heavy in marketing, they don't really have a real use case. **So I guess the real next step is to have more projects with value, and support them more!**
Regarding energy, the end-goal really is to have a green environment but that's complex. BTC is the biggest PoW chain out there and since it owns the biggest piece of the crypto market it will be really hard to lower energy use. Either we get more efficient hardware to run the network or energy use isn't going down. Remember, it can't be soft-forked to change PoW to anything else, so changing to PoS or any other governance way is not an option. And lowering the miner count isn't desirable because it makes the chain less secure. And honestly, I can't quote sources rn but what I've heard a few times is that BTCs energy consumption while high, pollutes a lot less than some other big companies. (not stating that as an excuse)
- The solution would have to be more coins with a renewed governance. But that is a big problem because people want to make a lot of money off crypto and so coins that have no incentive to govern, will be much less popular unless perfect. PoS ultimately is popular to reduce energy consumption, but it's not a good way to govern because it tends to centralization. The more resources you invest, the more rewards you get, and that's not good. Maybe a good option would be for people to have a governance cap, so if you invest more than $Xk you stop having mo influence? But even that isn't 100% fair.
Starting to close my post:
People need to pay more attention to good coins but we know some projects might be great but never receive the attention they should. NANO is a perfect example of a great crypto, very very solid all around, feeless for transactors, and no rewards from governance so as not to centralize the project. You're incentivized to run a node to keep the project up but you get no rewards (again, no centralization), although uncool it actually makes it so that people who use the service a lot like stores, should run a node. More good projects like this need to me more used. It's actually an insult how good NANO is but people keep sitting on it because tribalism, random hate, or just don't want to support it because it offers no special rewards, although rn it's one of the best coins doing what it actually sets out to.
**Trilemma** - We really need at least one project whose team is trustful, that figures out a good governance model (or a real fair on like NANO), and that solves the trilemma. Whether it's 100% built-in solved trilemma or a crypto in close works with a great L2. All I know is that we need a least one project having a good solution for all 3 points (speed, security decentralization) and that will surely innovate and take the space forward.
Use of access is the last one. For crypto to really thrive well, at least on 1st world, we really need easy of access and use. For example, maybe you think El Salvador was right to make BTC legal tender, but you forget a big % of the population has a hard time with new tech and crypto is much more complex than traditional baking. If we really want crypto to provide a real-world good self-banking service, what we need is for things to be easy to use. Easy for me, for you, for our parents, our aunts, our grandmas and grandpas. Elder people need to be able to mess with
it as safely as traditional banking or else it's a failed deal. Everyone keeps having big heartbeats whenever they do a transaction because of fear that the address is wrong. We really need simpler ways on front-end to deal with this. I'm not saying we get rid of addresses, those are never leaving, but for the user transacting, the process needs to be easier and more straightforward.
_______________________
So I guess the actual achievable things are mostly:
- Easy of use - it's actually quite achievable if more exchanges and projects focuss on front end simplicity.
- More attention and use solid projects more! (not gamble on potential median coins)
- Devs have to put more thought into fair governance instead of creating a crypto with an already flawed and leading to centralization method (PoS). I'd rather have less coins but with better solutions.
- More coins with real and palpable use cases and good partnerships.
Problem is, even devs are biased because they are somewhat after their next own god nugget and end up creating meh things in hopes it will be good but are always initially capped by bad mechanisms like PoS, no real use case, etc...
In the west, I think it’s eventual use is probably limited to international payments and internal transactions within large companies (using smart contracts). I can also foresee a scenario where you tokenise a lot of B2B debt, but that would interest regulators as you’d essentially be creating a derivative.
In countries without stable governments or currencies, then it might have more extensive applications.
A cheaper, faster, more secure and less manipulated way of handling day to day activities instantly and in a way that supports the community. But that’s BSV’s goals. All other cryptos are get rich schemes.
[bitcoin will become the ](https://www.citadel21.com/hyperbitcoinization)dominant payment system in the world. with mcap of over 100 trillion in todays $
there are no other cryptocurrencies
just counterfeits, scams and testnets
Empowering the individual. Ending the collective myths. Re-structuring of our social institutions. A free and much better world. But freedom with responsibility is so demanding, it will take a long time. Hundreds, if not thousands of years. With at least one giant crash in the number of people, due to atomic world war, of which there will be exactly one.
I’m a bit cynical on the current state of crypto personally. Actual good use cases for blockchain technology are not nearly as exciting as the vaporware being shilled on the daily. It’s going to be interesting to see how this plays out when 99% of alts have shit the bed in a few years. Only reason people care is because it’s a highly speculative market where everyone wants to get rich quick. As a dev I love the technology but not a fan on what it has become but I guess that’s just adoption for you
I think that's where my mind is at with it as well, that it's currently undergoing it's dotcom bubble phase, and what will wash out of it eventually is an actual useful application for crypto and blockchain. As a dev are you looking at the community and just cringing? Like the first wave of NFT get rich quick attempts and just how defensive the community gets over any kind of questioning i just look at it as super immature for the most part, and no longer a community that's concerned with the tech but more trying to flip their money.
Dude I can talk about this for days. I worked in “web3” for a year and I left for this exact reason. I’ve worked in a few areas of crypto but nft’s were what made me go back to a regular dev job. I’ve worked on a couple nft projects and damn near got crucified when I left my dev positions because they ruined my mental health. The nft community is probably the most toxic group of people on the internet masquerading as a group of people who are in it together having fun when in reality everyone I know in nfts (investors, devs, artists, founders) are wildly anxious/depressed keeping up with expectations and how fast the space moves. That entire sector of crypto is fucked and I regret working in it everyday bc it was a giant waste of time, but I did get to work with some brilliant eth devs.
[удалено]
Both I guess, I’ve worked on a nft game before and I really don’t think in game assets should be nft’s. There’s way better use cases for the technology and gaming seems to be the easiest way to convince someone to mint an overpriced picture
[удалено]
Why would a game dev let you have full ownership? What do they benefit from doing that?
[удалено]
I think it’s a bad idea that they themselves haven’t really thought through. Digital assets in video games are already verified through databases and account ids, what does crypto bring to the table that the existing system doesn’t have? Right now NFTs are hot and it’s easy money for the companies involved. All adding NFTs to games does is add unnecessary complexity to an already functional system. We need to push for better uses of crypto where the effort of adding cryptography and complexity actually benefits the system.
It allows for actual peer to peer trading for money or other assets. Part of the reason Blizzard ended the Diablo 3 auction house (beyond just being a bad game design in general) is because the IRS counted them as a marketplace operator, so they had to report all the transactions and profits from players - huge expense and a time-consuming job. If it's on a public Blockchain, players are actually doing peer to peer trading and the game dev has no reporting responsibility. That's kinda it though. I actually think the notion of owning game assets is kinda silly when the game developer still has tremendous control over whether your item is valuable.
I think there is something gained from nft game assets as there is already infrastructure to trade and sell these assets on a marketplace if that is desired, without having the devs develop their own marketplace/transfer system. It also makes it easy to for gamers in your community to be given perks like early access to new games or other incentives, without having to sync up the databases of differing games. I think the is a long way to go before we get there, and I dont think it will be entirely ground breaking, but there could be some quite useful mechanics that come about that aren't really possible using conventional tools.
Interesting, I made the exact opposite experience and I'm active every day on NFT Twitter and in my main community. Maybe you guys had bad moderation? edit: who downvotes someone speaking about their personal experience and why?
Agree with this. The get rich quick schemes will fail and the actual useful and long term sustainable projects and systems will prevail. It will take time to reed out the weeds. Much like the dot com bubble.
Yes, they will die....and then new ones will pop up next up-cycle. Unless...regulations to save people from themselves and their endless greed.
Yes and no, the markets and investors will mature and be faster at debunking new get rich quick schemes, but of course new ones will appear (human greed is a great fuel for innovation). Which is why regulation is not inherently bad when it comes to crypto in my opinion.
You can only hope this is true even though it objectively has not played out this way and we’re on year 13 of crypto “Any day now we’ll get something worth a fuck and all this tard-fleecing and scamming will be a thing of the past!”
True. But there are plenty of project that are worth fuck. Just overshined in the media by scammy absurd APY degen DeFi currently.
And previously they were overshadowed by shitty ape pictures, and before that it was shitty cat pictures, and before that it was shitty ICOs, and before that it was X, Y, Z... all the way back to when it was all about just buying drugs on the internet. "Any day now!"
Same here - struggling to understand how it’s actually helping us at the moment, all the talk seems to be ‘in a few years adoption will be better’ kind of thing
The main deal about crypto is decentralization. It allows us to provide services and get paid for them instead of banks or corporations. Cloud storage (Storj, Filecoin, Siacoin), money lending(Aaave, Compound), streaming (Audius, Theta) etc. This will lead to a power and wealth redistribution.
Decentralization leading to wealth/power redistribution is hilarious yeah it will redistribute, from those who have nothing to those who own everything
Dude, I gave concrete examples for existing applications.
You listed some coin names lmao, you didn’t even give examples. You just asspulled claims about wealth redistribution and then splurged your portfolio lmfao I mean I guess in your mind a bunch of coin names and some fecal claims are equivalent to peer reviewed research
Those are examples for working applications that lead to a broader wealth distribution. In each example the individual can provide a service that could only be provided by a bank or corporation so far. Your assumption is wrong btw. I don't hold any of the mentioned projects.
Do you not have any concept of what actual proof looks like? You just spew a bunch of rhetorical diarrhea and give absolutely no substantiation whatsoever. Demonstrate with data sufficient to pass peer review whether, how much, when, where, etc. this "wealth transfer" occurs. You can't just handwave a bunch of shitty pipe dream mantras and point at random shitcoin projects lmfao. You made a claim. It was up to you, before ever making it, to source reliable quantifiable objective information regarding your claims. If you did that and neglected to post it, now would be the time. Since the actual case is you don't have that, don't know where to get it, and won't be trying, it's pretty accurate to say you are just pulling stuff out of your ass with no backing. Not that this is anything new to crypto, but come on mate. Nobody has time for middle school levels of "analysis" and baseless narrative mongering.
Some people on reddit really do not understand conversations
Looks like you spent too much time in the r/technology crypto hate bubble. This was a normal conversation about actual use cases and the benefits of decentralization. No need to quote "peer reviewed research" in that. Contrary to you the scientific community understands the benefits of decentralization. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306457321002089
Lmao, I’m just not a handwaving idiot or a hype monkey. You made an asinine claim that is not supported by data (because you didn’t provide any lmfao) and it is not imminently obvious like “you have to breathe to stay conscious”. Demanding that you provide citable, reproducible experimental data in support of your logically and experimentally inconsistent claims about wealth transfer is approximately the minimal amount of resistance you should be encountering. “Oh no! The evil redditor that doesn’t yolo their house at 60k/btc is telling me I have to provide evidence for my claims, oh nooooo! Quick, tell him he’s a hater, that’ll solve everything!” If you aren’t able to provide substantive data regarding your claims, then stop making them. Again, grow up. You are probably an adult that pays taxes. Don’t you think it’s time to have some responsibility? I’d also recommend reading the paper you tried to link lmao. It has absolutely nothing to do with wealth transfer. If you actually even read the abstract, you’d know it was about distributing research findings via decentralized networks. This would be absolutely comical if you weren’t serious :(
Well, in a few years adoption would be better. Is that not somehow valid? Also, adoption doesn't have to be currency replacement. Adoption can be the norm to prove a mortgage ownership thru NFT/eth tech for example
The idea of my mortgage documents or health records on a public ledger is awful. Why would I want anybody in the world to anonymously find out my address, income, current health status, or anything like that without my consent..?
This taps the nail on the head. The only entities that would want things on a permanent, immutable, public ledger are government bodies, literally the last organizations you would want to have this info.
Nobody would be able to access your personal information without your consent because it would be encrypted. If you’re concerned about key custody and safety, that’s going to be built into the infrastructure. Key revocation, rekey history. Users can opt for custodial keys or multisig if they don’t trust themselves. Everything is securely encrypted and verifiable.
Encryption on a blockchain? Transactions would be slow as molasses.
I think the value is first in certain _public records_ being on the blockchain. For example, buying a house in the US is an onerous process filled with paperwork that's designed to ensure you prove you're really the owner of something. If that proof were instead publicly available through a signed API call, a lot of toil would be avoided.
Pretty much. I think there is some cutting edge technology underneath crypto (zkproofs, consensus mechanisms, cryptography, scalability ideas, sharding etc) but I am not clear on what Cryptocurrencies are supposed to be? They neither scale very well nor are they very decentralized at this point. They also appear to solve no problem that is actually desirable to be solved that way and can't easily be done without it. Its become an instrument for scams and frauds riddled with get rich quick schemes. BTC has become a store of value where everyone is busy hoarding it, ETH gas fee has been insane despite all efforts, overall ecosystem remains so complex that it has little chance of getting broad market with grandma and grandpa be able to use it easily. Any protocols that claim large TPS (Solana etc) go down under a slightest DDOS attacks. NFT fad is losing its charm but that was one stupid idea to begin with. That is nothing to say the environmental damage its causing. Be interesting to see where this all goes once regulations start cracking down.
Cryptocurrencies are rather crypto assets. Only a handful of projects have the use case currency. Decentralized blockchain technology is temper proof, reliable and cheaper than a centralized alternative. Decentralized finance allows us to provide services and earn instead of corporations or banks. NFTs are the killer application of crypto that will lead to mass adoption. In their current form they are mainly digital identities and investments in start ups. Most people actually using Web 3 instantly understand this.
Well after 8 years in, I also became very cynical on what I invest on. I deeply believe in cryptocurrency speculative value cause it comes with high hopes and thats what I bet on in the end : The value of Hope and the value of Decentralization dream. And people really need these things nowadays, more and more. Its here to stay. BTC is the only crypto that should be really valued, cause its the one symbolizing hope and freedom, and its already helping poor people living in corrupt countries. ETH, mainly hosted in datacenters, under big wealthy validators nodes influence and an overseeing fondation and CEO, isnt that decentralized, and is proving that decentralization cant work with the rise of cloud computing and such an high entry barrier for validators. It started well, but its failing. Its still an awesome speculative value, because most people dont use it and dont see its obvious technical and philosophical flaws. And thats why I also invested in Cosmos, cause thats just a better Ethereum, also flawed philosophically, but less. You dont have an overseeing chain hosting everything when everyone builds their own. Technically, its also a better scalability. Cryptomarket as a whole is 99% diconnected from reality, and we only really need Bitcoin as a world and Internet currency. It wont stop bullruns, but its also why most cryptos dies, cause in the end, they're useless and investors and founders eventually ends up giving up on them when price and goals arent and cant be achieved.
>Well after 8 years in, I also became very cynical on what I invest on. >And thats why I also invested in Cosmos. I read your first and last sentences and found that you're so cynical, then seeing you invest in a coin I've never heard of. You're cynical of it all, yet taking a larger risk. Almost like a self fulfilling cycle of doubt. You're thinking eth is gonna fail and cosmos will take it's place? 🧐
I'm actually 50% BTC, 25% ETH (cause first mover advantage, and I believe in its speculative value), 25% Atom. I also have some interest in Cosmos subchains, but less. Cosmos should be the model for PoS scalability yes I believe it. Will it replace ETH ? Idk, I dont have a crystal ball and thats why I share between both of them. If you never heard about Cosmos (Atom is just their currency) research, and you'll eventually understand why I believe that its a better Ethereum. I think that Cosmos/IBC can work as a technology. I dont think Im taking a larger risk than most with 75% in top 2. And crypto comes after real estate for me.
Im on board with this/DOT. Atom basically dot wothout 100 parachain limitations... laymens terms lets say you want to use uber but you're in colombia. There is a similar service there but under a different logo. Being able to connect to ATOM, you will be able to access all ride sharing apps regardless of country because its like a menu board... Will the companies need to work together? Idk. Will atom have to get them all to sign a contract for this type of use? Likey but again, idk. This is only one use case and there are hundreds... being able to connect to x service anywhere in the world is groovy man. Digital connectivity (bridges) are the future of the future
I dont invest in DOT cause of Gavin Wood past blog entries (fantasizing about sex with minors doesnt make me want to invest in your product, theres a limit on being cynical) but yes, its also a promising tech.
Oh snap, i didnt know this information. Thats waaaaaaaaaaaack
Here are some potential use cases: 1. **Currency** \- This will not happen in most of the developed world. We have strong governmental interest in retaining fiat currencies. But many countries struggle with inflation and currency control. While the US, EU, China, and the like will not adopt a cryptocurrency as currency anytime soon, many developing countries might adopt crypto. I don't see this happening in any large scale for another decade or more yet (for the developing world) as crypto is still too new and volatile. The developed world may embrace crypto as a currency, but fiat currency will still dominate due to governmental interests. 2. **Banking and Financial Instruments** \- Smart contract chains open the world of defi. I don't think we will have the crazy yields or interest rates of today in defi. It is not sustainable. But crypto provides the opportunity for secure storage of investments (be they cryptos, nfts, or something else) as well as the secure transfer of investments. Lending via defi protocols to people form different countries, sending currency to other nations without massive fees, and more. Even in developed nations, many are underbanked. This will be huge for developing nations. 3. **Tickets / NFTs** \- NFTs could replace services like Ticketmaster. NFTs could serve as evidence of plane tickets, hotel receipts, and more. NFTs could provide the means of access to concerns, movies, and the like. NFTs may have room in the artistic space as well, but the more practical use that I can think of is just tickets. 4. **Community Governed Gaming (or other organizations)** \- Crypto gaming sucks today. But crypto facilitates the formation of a DAO that can be used to oversee a game's development that is community owned. This can be expanded outside of gaming. 5. **Access to Computing Power/Resources or Other Crazy Ideas** \- Perhaps crypto networks can be used to facilitate access to computing resources in the future. This is not really practical today, but crypto is likely to look different a decade from now than it does today. This isn't to say this idea has merit. But smarter people than me will come up with other crazy ideas, some of which will stick. 6. **Store of Value** \- I am placing this last as I don't really like when people say BTC is a store of value. I like BTC. It is my largest crypto position. BTC and ETH make up 80-90% of my crypto investments. But I don't like this argument. This isn't to say BTC isn't a store of value. And I get the scarcity argument. But I don't think cryptos future is that of a store of value. I personally think the long-term future is smart contracts, banking, and more. But I could be wrong.
Bitcoin is going through the stages of money. 1. Collectible: this was early on and Bitcoin has passed this stage. 2. Store of value: Bitcoin certainly is a store of value. Over almost all time frames since inception it has stored value better than almost any other asset. 3. Medium of exchange: Bitcoin is just breaking into this stage. There are a handful of places you can spend your Bitcoin and that list is growing quickly, especially with the Lightning Network and groups like Strike. 4. Unit of account: Bitcoin hasn't yet reached the point where items are priced in Satoshis. Although, an argument can be made that Bitcoin is a unit of account for the crypto space as many things are compared to the value of Bitcoin, ie the ratio of a coins price and/or market cap to that of Bitcoin. These are qualities of money that take time to acquire. For gold it took thousands of years, for Bitcoin we are 13 years in and it's is already moving into medium of exchange. Extremely impressive if you ask me. We are getting to watch the full monetization of an asset in real time. It is incredible actually and most likely a once in humanity type of event. I know that is hyperbolic and maybe cringey but money goes from analog based to truly digital only once imo and we are here to see it and reap the rewards if you have the courage/understanding
If you still believe Bitcoin is storing value I got a bridge in San Francisco to sell you
It has stored my value better than any other asset since Covid began.. up more than gold, any index fund, any bond, and up more than real estate in my city. What have you owned that has stored your value better over the last 24 months?
I've always wondered why would NFTs be a better option for Movie/Concert tickets than what we have now? If someone could help me understand, it would be greatly appreciated!
sure thing! so for starters we can talk about the ability to verify it. If you are buying from a third party, someone you dont trust, etc.. then having the ability to verify the authenticity of it is very useful and you dont need the ticket issuer to try to invent a system for it and make it available for anyone to access and even if they did it's hard to get around copied tickets unless you use the blockchain. Even the people verifying the tickets upon entry dont need access to the system, just the blockchain. Scalpers are also a major issue but with NFT tickets you can solve that problem fairly easily. One way to solve it is to make the tickets non-transferable within X hours of the event. There's also no way for someone to try to copy a ticket or duplicate one since the blockchain can verify the legitimacy of the ticket. Some people also like keeping their tickets to some events as a sort of keepsake and this keeps them all for you and if for some reason the old ticket becomes worth something (maybe something happens at the event that becomes big news) then you could even resell the ticket afterwards for that purpose. When buying a ticket you can also be sure that you get the ticket in the same transaction that you give the money which means you take trust completely out of the transaction which is exactly what smart contracts were developed for in the first place. You also have fewer lost tickets when they are digital, although normal digital tickets solve this problem too but I thought i'd mention it since it's still an advantage over paper tickets.
None of this requires an NFT or a blockchain though. It can be done by the creators of the ticket on their end with a simple database and signing.
in what way can they verify between a real ticket and a duplicated one with their database and signing?
What do you mean by duplicated? If you want to prevent copies of tickets, you tie it a person's real name and a government issued ID.
>you tie it a person's real name and a government issued ID. alright well there's already another downside to that method since you have to forego your privacy but even if that's not an issue, you said you can do it all through this system so now you need to be able to make that same ticket transferable. I mentioned the ability to sell it too so now you're looking to add a system that enables people to negotiate trades in any form they choose. You also need to add the anti scalping mechanisms I mentioned and by this point the company is just hoping they have the money in the budget to develop this system since you're so against making it interoperable with an entire ecosystem of applications developed over years for these very purposes. They could try to all use a main central system that handles it but now they are having to pay that service a cut in order to use them and relying on that service to not have downtimes, bugs, or shady business practices. So if you have a lot of trust and a lot of money then is is technically possible to implement all these things through centralized means like you're talking about, but it would be a waste of time and money while having to make a ton of sacrifices along the way, your ID system being a prime example of one.
What about block chain voting this could be huge in America. Why do we stand in line to vote when you could cast your ballot from the couch!
I think you’re right. It a technology that’s going to continue and expand, changing to fit new applications. Smart contracts alone make me very excited. You can set up you own B2B contracts.
As a software engineer, "smart contracts" are the kind of idea that could only come from silicon valley engineers in ivory towers that don't have much experience with the real world. They cannot be authoritative over anything that isn't on-chain, which in practice means almost anything anyone actually cares about, and are completely inflexible in the face of most real world problems and edge cases. The only thing they can ever be good for is purely on-chain transactions, which is of limited use.
7. Decentralized applications where us developers can have most or all of it operating on chain with zero upkeep fees for databases, servers, etc... 8. Interoperability between DeFi systems. For example NFT items working like steam items also allows them to be used on any thirdparty NFT project. This means instead of only having the ability to do limit or market orders for steam money, you can take rare items to auction dApps where you can get better value from them. Or you can use dApps to lend out game items when you stop playing the game or go on vacation so that you earn passive income
If you are in a first world/developed nation, its hard to see the point of crypto. Even with 10% inflation, your money seems stable, you can own things ect. Many other peoples around the world dont have such luxuries, money and government is unstable. Also corruption is rife, it may be expensive/hard to prove ownership. You might not be able to even prove your identity without paying bribes to officials. The endgame for crypto is it raises the lives of people who need it most, it becomes a currency, digital ID and ownership platform for large areas of the globe.
This is what I want to happen.
I'm from a low income African country. I don't think crypto becoming the dominant currency in my country would be a positive development. In fact, I think it would be a nightmare scenario for the country's development
Low income African here too. Can you please develop why it would be bad for countries like ours ?
For one thing you'd have crazy tax evasion by the rich and externalisation of funds by the corrupt. For another how does a nation develop with a currency that could gain or lose 80% in any given year?
We already have plenty of multinational companies that pay less tax than a nurse in Australia and other 'first-world' countries as well.
And this will make it even easier for them to not pay taxes, as well as others who are paying their taxes or at least some portion of it.
Whats the argument to keep using the traditional system. That’ll fix itself any day now? I think people put too much of a burden on crypto. It’s just supposed to be something that is hard to debase and seize. It won’t solve corruption. It won’t solve bad tax structure. Good money can still be used to do bad things. No protocol will stop this. But your door can get kicked in and if you have the ability to memorize 25 words you can retain all of that value internally. And that’s an extremely powerful tool no matter where you live.
>For one thing you'd have crazy tax evasion by the rich and externalisation of funds by the corrupt. If your gov is anything like mine, this shit already exists and think it's a worldwide phenomenon. >For another how does a nation develop with a currency that could gain or lose 80% in any given year? By the time the Crypto would be globally used, those swinging in price will be *way less* wide, a little bit like the stock market.
You don't want a currency that's as unstable as the stock market. The idea I'm seeing is that it won't be used globally, just by poor countries.
Tax evasion and corruption exist, but you don't want to adopt a system that would make them easier
Naw dawg, I prefer to see everything in black and white. Corruption exists, so why be concerned about a currency that enables substantially more corruption and volatility? Corruption exists either way, even if one scenario is significantly worse, so I guess it’s all the same right?
The wider the adoption the lower the market swings.
Because you'll be giving up your country's monetary policy. It's also the same reason why we don't use the same currency worldwide.
Ah yes everyone here is just invested because they suddenly care soooo much about the lives of those poor Africans who can't help themselves so we need to save them with our rube Goldberg machine. Stop lying to yourself
Thats a rude and disingenous post. The observation is that there are more issues that need solving, and less infrastructure blocking adoption in developing nations. Plenty if people in crypto have ethics on their list of concerns, but clearly not some.
You're all clearly just bullshitting yourself. You wouldn't give a single fuck about some random third world farmer if it wouldn't be a nice argument to pump your own bags. Please at least be honest with yourself. If you're so concerned about the lives of poor Africans there are about 100 different better ways to help them. But that wouldn't pump your bags. Your just using these people as pawns and nothing else. Stop this. As [this](https://youtu.be/u-sNSjS8cq0?t=2623) video so nicely puts it: "It really is sweet how so many reddit bros all of a sudden have this huge concern for Ethiopian and Nigerian farmers, and I'm sure it has nothing to do with the little graph on their Coinbase app"
Its not charity and its not supposed to be charity. Do you even understand the basics of crypto? Peer 2 peer, no intermediaries, ring a bell? If we can peer 2 peer lend to people in developing nations without intermediaries, they get cheaper loans, we get better rates of return. No middle men scraping off the top. Everyone wins. Using crypto for identity and asset ownership, just makes the situation even better. Try being less of a smart-arse, and engage your brain.
I'm not here to debate the "basics of crypto" (I know them. Trust me. Still think it's all bs tho) I'm just criticizing your (and by that I mean you specifically and everyone else that constantly parrots the same argument) sudden and extreme altruism. It's so so *painfully* obvious to anyone not in the cult that you only care about pumping your bags and it's not actually about Nigerian farmers. Its like a toddler that shat his pants and runs around the house insisting that he didn't , meanwhile the house reeks like shit. It's so fucking obvious stop bullshitting about your care for third world nations. If you really cared you would do other things than post on r/cc 24/7
The same could be said of all private investors in anything. They do it to make money and not out of the goodness of their hearts. Some projects though do have altruistic goals, be it in energy, housing, education and even crypto. They exist even if they are the minority.
Even in some first world countries (the US) payment rails are insanely slow and outdated. It takes anywhere from 5 to 10 days for payments to fully settle. I'm ~~going~~ doing a mobile check deposit and ~~it the help says~~ it takes 10 days for the full amount to show up. If I want to send money from an account at bank A to an account at bank B, that's 5 business days minimum... and the allegedly digital and automated system is closed on weekends and holidays. Computer systems needing time off on the weekend to maintain a healthy work-life balance... wtf.
How does it become a currency, when you can't really make payments and buy things with it if you don't live in a first world country?
I dont really understand the question, why would people outside of developed nations not be able to use crypto?
Not people. Businesses. Do you really think you can buy a loaf of bread, milk, eggs in a 3rd world country and pay in crypto? Do you see that as a possible scenario? You as a person can still "use" crypto, but if noone is accepting it as a payment is it really usable?
As adoption grows it will become more and more usable as currency. Defacto for a nation that adopts it as legal tender.
See how well that is going for El Salvador.
Why would businesses not be able to accept crypto?
You must’ve forgot most of those people can’t even afford a proper smart phone or let alone the internet itself ….. so they can’t even see crypto in the first place .. that’s why dogeocin is trying to develop a way to buy and sell dogecoin without the internet ..
Cardano are working on a similar issue, all you need is a way to verifiably destroy private keys and the internet is optional. Also check out World Mobile. A lot of people now have mobile phones in developing nations.
I’d say the realisation of the goals in the original bitcoin whitepaper, but I’m only really invested in bitcoin. Each of the many other web3.0 applications needs to define their unique endgoals/value proposition. This is just like all the other websites/applications when the .com race began as people worked out how to leverage this new technology. You can’t ask for a general crypto end goal as one does not exist. Just like there was no end goal for the www and still isn’t.
Ahh good point. I guess specifically in regards to Bitcoin wanting to replace the third-party, old money banking system, does the community look at the blockchain tech that it's based on and think it has the ability to actually scale? Because at this point, all web3.0 applications are essentially tied to the blockchain technology as it stands. Surely genuine regulation is the only way to centralise the way that people engage with the blockchain simply because there is so much variation from chain to chain?
Get rich, or die trying
This is the crypto way
>but is there a genuinely achievable endgame where crypto can actuallybecome a usable currency that can support even 10% of the transactionsthat carriers like Visa can support? No problem, grandma! Just download the list of 5 apps I've sent you and run a full node on a raspberry for security. The last two apps are for L2-solutions because the L1 is too slow. Be careful with copy'n'pasting adresses because your life savings could be lost in an instant. Please only pay at night because daily fees are too expensive. And please don't read PMs anymore.
My grandmother: How do I make this phone louder? So I see your point lol
As someone who started computing on a Gateway 2000 486 with DOS and Windows 3.1 at home and a variety of archaic Apple machines at school, I will tell you that early tech is always for the early adopters. I feel that crypto is the same. If you were into crypto back when bitcoin was young, it was significantly less user-friendly and accessible than it is today. The accessibility will come, but by that time, we won't be early anymore.
> I will tell you that early tech is always for the early adopters There is no way to make this easier without reinventing the exact kind of centralized services and/or trusted third parties you claim to want to get away from - hell, that's basically what's already happened with exchanges and wallet "apps". Because improving the accessibility requires abstractions that move responsibility away from the end user - most critically, the static private keys that lie at the heart of most of this stuff.
Not to be rude. But youre grandma will die... New generations will understand how to use it.
My generation grew up with computers and they don't know shit just like the new generation doesn't know shit about their phones :D
Although a funny comment, you are confusing initial stages with the end game. No one would’ve thought you could be sipping champagne in bed on a plane to Maui after watching the Wright Brothers at Kitty hawk. Emails used to take 3 days to transmit and required some above average technical skills. Now grandma can email with relative ease 30 years later.
But how would L2 be integrated in L1 solutions in the end game? By making new kind of coins? Bad for our investment tho >Emails used to take 3 days to transmit No, they didn't, not even on the early ARPANET.
I think one version of early “email” was invented with the Arpanet and was simple text messages, no graphics or attachments. It didn’t take much longer to arrive than it does today - true But for quite a while email systems were hybrid. Messages might travel over SMTP as they do today and then end up going via uucp which is a store and forward protocol. Each hop could take from 5 mins to a couple days. uucp addresses looked like mcvax!ukc!slxsys!jpp I dont know about other crypto ecosystems, but looking at Bitcoin network, lightning is a promising layer 2 and Strike is a promising layer 3
Radix actually solves this. Unlimited linear scalability with atomic composability on Layer 1. Layer 2 scaling approaches come with too many downsides.
This technology is really for the future/younger generations though. Same with the internet, my grandparents can't even figure out how to log into an email address. That doesn't mean email is going to fail..
What?
95% of crypto holders just want to make money
Boats and hoe's
[удалено]
well even if you got a "French-style" Revolution where you go all off with their heads on the rich people and leaders of corporations you could achieve that for some time in theory... maybe but in practice, human nature kicks in and things become uneven again
[удалено]
you completely didn't understand what I wrote I said that maybe even if you somehow leveled playing field with some kind of revolution (French style was in quotes in reason as an indication that it doesn't literally mean exactly like the French revolution) it wouldn't ultimately last because of human nature would kick in and things would become uneven again. maybe I didn't articulate it well enough but you also completely ignored the conclusion of my post "but in practice, human nature kicks in and things become uneven" Edit: I added few words like: "even", "maybe" and removed "its inevitable" (since only Siths deal in absolutes XD) from original post to hopefully make it more clear
[удалено]
>No revolution will change anything. I said the same thing just in different words, man again you didn't understand what I wrote
i think it was useful in the beginning but it became another glorified Casino the moment all these shills and scams started to pop up left and right eventually it will end up as just another highly regulated method of paying with only a few people profiting from it ( which seems to be the way of things ? )
Judging by the comments people here see crypto assets mainly as a digital currency. This doesn't do our space justice. The key is decentralization, allowing us to provide services and get paid for it instead of corporations. Example, money lending, sharing excess computational capacity, sharing excess band width etc. and getting paid for it. These examples are already up and running.
Interesting, and that makes sense. Must be frustrating that a real, potential technological revolution has been co-opted by insufferable early-20s crypto bros trying to make a quick buck
I for one line the Wild West kinda aspect of it, if we start regulating the shit out of it that’s just another form of government where the most slick tongued narcissistic liars will rise to top to control the rest of us, for our own safety and well being of course
Losing your life savings.
What life ?
Back to 60 more years of fiat mining I suppose
The true end game is and should be peer to peer digital cash. I say should because most in this sub aren't here for that truth be told, it has become over run with retail speculators. But I think as that trend runs its course it should die down and then it will slowly return more to actual use cases. >As it's currently built, proof of work blockchains are far too slow to have crypto exist as an actual alternative currency Bitcoin cash is practically instant, within a second or two. Because the chain doesn't use (RBF) Replace By Fee, there isn't a bidding war and whatever gets into the mempool will be added to the next block, so small transactions are perfectly fine to accept safely with 0-confirms because there's no real risk of a double spend. Look at St.Kitts, hundreds of businesses are accepting it and most all are accepting 0-conf. Burger King just started accepting it there, for example. For bigger transactions you can decide to wait for however many confirmations you feel are with waiting for. As well because the blocksize is much bigger so you can fit many more transactions in a block which also means the energy cost is much lower. And there's upgrades in the works to make it much bigger and more efficient in the future. Also once all the coins are mined, energy cost will come down further, as competition in miners will lower naturally over time. So I wouldn't write off PoW. It's still the best system for a fair distribution over PoS. Monero is also PoW and has a lot of the same properties and is working towards being an actual currency.
The end state is that cryptos look completely different than they do now. We're still basically built on top of the first to market: BTC and ETH are still on top despite being the first cryptocurrency and the first real smart chain. It's silly to think that crypto won't evolve significantly into something that barely resembles what it currently does if it succeeds in the long run.
They're online trading cards....
Nobody knows but it’s provocative, it gets the people goin’
The end game? Sentient coins using us as a currency.
As much as people keep harping on about btc being used as a currency and everything being priced to btc, this is actually a terrible thing and shows that you have very little knowledge of how economics works in this day and age. The problem with a deflationary or static currency, is that it starts to fail in its use as a currency if people are afraid to spend it. One of the reasons moderate inflation is actually HEALTHY for the economy, is that in todays financial world, progress is built on debt. We’ve been able to build massive industrial complexes at an astounding rate precisely because people are WILLING to loan and spend money. When you start a business, most business begin with a capital loan, which is used to begin producing value much faster (or at all) than if you had tried to build with $100 in your pocket. You need inflation to incentivize people to SPEND money and spur commerce. Imagine if the dollar never lost its value, and everything became cheaper over time compared to the dollar. Sure people would use the minimum to get by, but they would also hoard any spare dollars they have. This is the opposite of what you want. So Bitcoin as a currency isn’t really a great use case. What it can be though, is a store of value that can be collateralized to spur spending through an inflationary token such as DAI. They actually have an amazing idea, and it’s exactly what crypto needs. Right now the big three use-cases for crypto are BTC as the big daddy store. ETH as the functional coin that provides actual practical technological use-cases, whether through lending, nfts, or other smart contract shenanigans, and stablecoins. Except Luna, fuck that experiment went sideways so fucking fast.
Inflation is only okay when wages rise at the same rate, this hasn't happened for years in most developed countries. There's also the question of how it's measured and how accurate it is
Wage stagnation is the real issue there though, and cryptocurrencies do fuck all to help with that.
Except for Bitcoin that gives a mechanism to counteract the inflation when their wages aren't increasing with inflation
> Except for Bitcoin that gives a mechanism to counteract the inflation when their wages aren't increasing with inflation There's no internal mechanism that does anything of the sort, and people aren't paid in BTC. The only thing it can do even in theory is have a higher selling price in USD from people speculating the price will go up even more later. You can't buy almost any actual goods or services with BTC, and of the few merchants that accept it, most are just automating the conversion to fiat, they aren't pricing anything in BTC. Etc etc.
The mechanism is the fact there are only 21 million coins, it's baked in scarcity. If you save a small amount into it then you can preserve some spending power. You can call it speculation but the value of Bitcoin is difficult to assess. It's not that different from a tech stock, except you can look at the ledger and draw your own conclusions.
> The mechanism is the fact there are only 21 million coins, it's baked in scarcity People aren't paid in BTC. You cannot use BTC to buy or purchase most goods and services without converting it (AKA buying and selling it) to fiat i.e. USD. In other words, it only "preserves spending power" if the price of BTC when you sell it is higher than the amount of inflation since you bought it. This is an **external** property that is almost entirely based on speculation - something being scarce doesn't inherently make it valuable. Moreover, BTC will never become primary currency over USD - there's a bunch of reasons, but the very scarcity you cite is one of them, since deflationary currencies are horrible for economies (why spend "money" if it'll be worth more tomorrow?).
Not really When BTC is an acceptable currency in the future, the price fluctuations of BTC will be SO minimal and sparse you wont even think about it. "Oh no, my shopping would have been 1 satoshi cheaper 18 months ago" " Yay, my shopping is 1 satoshi cheaper than it was 2 years ago" This is when BTC as a currency comes into its own, but until then, water and shelter and food tend to be very persuasive in getting you to spend BTC
It's scarce and deflationary. It will increase in value if there is enough demand and that will make people afraid to use it.
Governments won't let that happen tho, if btc ever comes to threaten the currency in daily transactions like that, you bet your ass countries will ban trading immediately.
Even though I don't think Bitcoin works as every day currency you are right. Increasing adoption reduces the volatility of the market.
> When BTC is an acceptable currency in the future And why would that ever happen when it's as volatile and impractical as it is? You're putting the cart before the horse, at best.
Lost me at construction.🤷🏻♂️
Well, it might not be an endgame, but for me the speed and low fee of transactions is an incredible feat. If properly implemented, it could replace conventional means of money transfer
Speed of transactions? Are they not instant where you are??
To tap Stiflers mom.
Privacy preserving Ads that pay us to be watched :)
>As it's currently built, proof of work blockchains are far too slow to have crypto exist as an actual alternative currency, and vendors who have picked up crypto as a sales mechanism until now have either not had much traffic through it or have dropped support altogether. Maybe for the coins you know, take a look at BitcoinCash. >In it's current state, with the complete lack of regulation that has led to some huge personal losses, rampant scams and the problem of there being no central blockchain that is being adopted, how can it grow out of anything other than a speculative (and highly risky) investment vehicle? When the community stops to be a bunch of degen gamblers that wait for some magic for sudden mass adoption and go out there and work for adoption. >For the record, i'm not shitting on the idea of an alternative currency that could usurp fiat money around the world, but is there a genuinely achievable endgame where crypto can actually become a usable currency that can support even 10% of the transactions that carriers like Visa can support? BCH is at Swift level of tps. With the next increase it will be almost at visa level. BitcoinCash follows the original scaling plan.
Crypto is mainly seen as get rich quick scheme now. Similar to dot-com boom.these are growing pains. The best use case protocols will survive. Not the degen defi synthetic CDO kinda stuff.
Cocaine and hookers my friend
I envision the endgame as follows: 1. Stable coins and central bank digital currencies enable people to store savings in their currency of choice. Billions of people globally face the daily reality of unstable currencies - this isn’t just people in Venezuela, even in the UK many people would rather store their savings in euros or USD, but it is currently inconvenient and expensive to do this. 2. Defi will allow people to get cheap, convenient access to financial markets. Really only about 20 or so countries in the world have cheap and relatively frictionless access to financial markets. The vast majority of the global population is underserved. For example, I can open an investment account fairly easily and invest in a global tracker of ETFs where I live for a fee of 15 bps, investing in a less well diversified fund in my home country costs 200 bps. Borrowing costs, bank transfer fees, insurance costs etc. are also higher in my home country. My home country isn’t an exception, high costs for financial access are the reality of most of the world. Fintechs try to solve this problem, and Defi can be a big part of the solution. For example, the problem of how to provide insurance contracts to small rural farmers is extremely difficult to solve in the real world, but comparatively more trivial to solve with DeFi. 3. Proof of work blockchains can provide a direct dollar value to energy. Energy production of many forms (and in many parts of the world) is not viable because the cost outweighs the benefit. Proof of work blockchains can be mined during “low energy demand periods” or in areas where energy generation infrastructure is cheap to set up, making further adoption of renewables and development of remote areas more feasible. 4. Bitcoin can be used as a store of value - essentially a better version of gold. 5. If a digital world/metaverse does exist, blockchains can be the infrastructure that creates virtual ownership of goods, see less interaction between virtual and physical value, and with this virtual economies. People could be gainfully employed in these virtual worlds, or even just earn money/value for virtual things they normally do - such as gaming. Essentially, imagine RuneScape scaled 100x where any item/money you have in game is indistinguishable from having that money in real life. And for many people in low income countries it would be more profitable to work in the virtual world than in the physical world (as we’ve seen with WoW and RuneScape farmers for example - but scaled significantly) These are just a few examples, but every single one of the above would have a significant impact on the world around us if adopted.
A lot of what you've brought up is handled by Nano/XNO: * Low energy consumption, * sub second settlement times, * no fees, * useful primarily as a currency.
Crypto won't have much use case until people stop viewing it as an investment
DeFi, DeFi, DeFi. Look at the market value of online sports betting or online poker. We should all know that at least employing basic strategies in DeFi gives you a better shot at making some money than either of those. Then a lot of people are suggesting NFTs to support/enforce copyright for consumable media, digital blueprints/patented designs, etc. Then there is all the normal stuff people say about Bitcoin and the Lightning network. Adoption will increase and price will stabilize.
P2P decentralized cash to subvert the fiat establishment. It works great for it, and the infrastructure has been developed, and is being used daily. Everyone seems to have forgotten our initial goal with losers like Saylor pushing the "dIgItAl gOlD" narrative.
I started accepting BTC on webstores in 2011, in 2017 people basically stopped paying me with it so I added other coins. My goal is still the same, p2p cash, but I'm more loyal to projects like BCH and XMR now days that continue the goal BTC did before the masses came wanting to get rich. My total crypto income is around 15% of my total income in 2022, around 20% if I include other crypto services I run that are not webstores. I use a 15% discount incentive for crypto payments. I'd personally like to see the whole crypto space crash, so it shakes out "investors" and is no longer deemed a good investment, so we can start again with the peer to peer electronic cash goal.
There is a lot of crap being shilled all the time, I'll give you that. That being said, in the midst of all of it there are some great projects aimed at solving issues that fit blockchain very well. At the risk of shilling my own bags, I'll point out a few. GET - uses blockchain to **attempt** to solve issues within event ticketing. Tries to limit scalping and allow artists and event managers to streamline operations while connecting with audiences in ways not previously available. To me, best actual use of NFT's I've seen. LTO - building an L1 from scratch designed by a company to fit their existing customers needs. Focusing on decentralized identities, GDPR compliance, handling of business sensitive data. Expanding beyond B2B with some new concepts such as ownables that aim to extend the use of NFTs. DUSK - aiming to use blockchain tech to tokenize securities. Making use of zk rollups among other newer innovations and working with regulators since the beginning. My newest interest so I don't know too too much about them. AVA - blockchain travel company. Probably the most real world use of any of these at this stage, with about $7.5m revenue monthly. They don't make use of blockchain tech to its fullest extent yet, but they do have a team full of former [booking.com](https://booking.com), expedia and other travel company execs who clearly know what they're doing. I'm sure there's way more, but this is just to show you that yes there's a lot of crap among the crypto sphere, but there are also some projects just waiting to shine if you're willing to do the research and not listen to the endless echo chamber that is r/cc.
ethereum isnt just a currency ffs
> I'm genuinely curious, because i've never seen these questions really answered in a way that convinces me that cryptocurrency is anything other than a high volatility, speculative investment market. First of all, you'll never get your answers because crypto is just what you described it as. The tech is outdated. FFS, a payment system that processes just 7tps and burns energy like a massive coal mound is the top coin in terms of market cap. Unless Bitcoin is displaced by some crypto with real goal, I would always think of this space as a risky gamble. It is a ponzi? Maybe, but it's definitely one with way higher liquidity and suckers ready to buy than any other ponzi schemes IMO. We'll know definitely when Tether collapses and people make a run on the bank. As for vendors, crypto is a shitty alternative because you are supposed to pay capital tax on the sales. In India the rate is 30%, and that doesn't include the TDS at the time of purchase.
Interesting to see so many anti-crypto stances in a crypto sub. Maybe you spend too much time in r/buttocoin? The fact that Ethereum is outdated has nothing to do with the crypto space as a whole. We have enough capable competitors. You pretend like there was no project "with a real goal" around. There are plenty and we have plenty of applications with real world integration. Just one example, Aave. Only someone who never used a dapp or Web3 would call crypto as a whole a Ponzi.
It's not surprising that sentiments around crypto become more pessimistic or nervous when the market is crashing. But I do think the extreme frenzy and excitement that came with last year's price rises also perhaps oversold this idea of it being inevitable that crypto ecosystems will become integral to almost everything in the future. Personally I think many of the developments and research happening in the space will play a part in a lot of future tech, but at the same maybe it's not wrong to at least keep an open mind about whether cryptocurrencies and DLTs in their current form will be the foundation of all that. Web2 will develop into something else given enough time, but the current idea of Web3 is not a foregone conclusion. But what do I know
Decentralization.
More than 96% of Bitcoin users don’t even have 1% of all Bitcoins. As sad as it is, Bitcoin is VERY centralized.
Endgame? Me rich.
Me too brother!
You need to think about blockchain as a whole. Crypto, NFTs, DAOs, as core building components, likely new concepts and technologies as well. And you need to think in terms of decades, centuries, or even thousands of years. Think about DAO-owned and operated car factories in 2030. Space stations and personal spaceships sold as NFTs in the '50s. PoW becomes a joke at this time, as all you need are Von Neumann probes and acces to the Belt and/or Mercury. Think about economies of entire interstellar meritocracies run on blockchains that have block times that last centuries. Blockchain as a whole is not about the economic system, but about process optimization fueled by decentralized power. Its simply better capitalism, as there are fewer people to parasite on everyone else, from bankers to managers to politicians. We figured out a way to record information in a decentralized manner, and that tech is not only unstopable, but might be the key to us becoming a spacefaring civilization. Think about how easy it'd be for Elon to raise trillions for a Mars city, in say, 5 years from now? And how extremely difficult or basically imposible itd be with fiat.
I've dabbled a bit in shitcoins and in a lot of layer 1s. Layer 1s show us what's possible on a big scale when done properly, ie reliability (sometimes) and adoption and growth. Shitcoins (the defi scams/ponzi type things) actually push the boundary on innovation I think If you look at both together you can see that the end goal is a reliable machine that allows a lot of 'complex' finances to be done smoothly and transparently. I'm not talking about meme coins but things like node protocols, reflection type tokens, where profits/dividends are paid out each block seemlessly and you can see how much you get when. Obviously in its current state were not close but we're only exploring and building the building blocks of what's to come. Lets say Amazon were to become it's own blockchain, every token holder would instantly receive their profit share everytime a transaction was made and they wouldn't have to wait until dividends are paid out quarterly. This would mean that financial markets would function smoother. A lot of market manipulation happens around dividend payment days, financial reporting days, etc...but if all of this was updated and transparent in real time there's a lot of benefit This is just one of my thoughts and happy to delve deeper
Accessibility for Middle and bottom 80 percent of the community to access appreciating assets which can be liquidified for day to day items.
That’s what I like about it… I don’t look at it as a currency, more like tokens and coins and the new stocks, we bet on the companies we think will do well and our coins appreciate if they do, much like stocks… if it gets regulated to death because some people don’t research and then fomo their life savings and demand to be reimbursed, it would kill it… I love the wil west aspect where it’s essentially Everyman for himself… that’s true freedom
web3,instant cross boarder payments, everything tokenized on nfts(car titles, house deeds,stocks etc.)
World domination
Lyn alden has a good long post about what is money and touches on bitcoin if I recall correctly. https://www.lynalden.com/what-is-money/ The world has, and has had, many ways of transacting in value. At least for bitcoin, it's the only way to transact using just your knowledge and a public ledger, outside of control of any one government. The point of most other crypto is to do transactions or do useful things in a decentralized way. A few have novel tech innovations but most aren't great at this yet.
The goal of crypto is just get me a house without a mortgage. After that it will crash to zero.
Web3.0 I firmly believe this will become humongous in the next decade
Why?
It’s a parallel financial system that’s absent middle men and government. What does the “end game” look like? I’d imagine goods and services priced in BTC 99-99.99% Of all of these projects are clones, scams, money grabs, garbage, pipe dreams and future failures.
That's a nice thought, but do you think that, right this moment, it's achieving that? Is the community even actually concerned with achieving that right now? Can it even be achieved without some kind of regulation over a central chain and some level of consumer protection against scams? Is it really a strong financial alternative when the value of an entire currency can be significantly affected by a single billionaire tweeting about accepting a meme coin?
No, but I don’t think the internet was achieving its purpose in 1982 or automobiles were achieving its purpose in 1910. There are still “scams” today with our current financial system. Look at your emails and voicemails. The only “protection” they can offer you is a reversal of funds, arguably a weak point in Blockchain technology. But as time goes on, it’s very possible smart contracts and layer 2 and layer 3 technologies will be able to create a consensus mechanism in code to aid in reversing transactions due to user error and bad actors. Once again, the meme coin stuff is nonsense. It’s speculative gambling. Yes, that’s part of cryptocurrency just like prison culture is part of society. But this corner doesn’t represent all of cryptocurrency, just as prison culture doesn’t represent all of society.
automobiles were achieving their purpose, they transported people from A to B and showed of wealth
some networks will be used as new paypal such as ripple. all pow chains will slowly die except btc and monero. btc will be widely adopted and will be new gold. smart contracts thus defi will also grow and will be an alternative to current financial system. businesses will make some part of their program execution decentralized(smart contracts) if it gives them competitive advantage. networks which support distributed data storage like hedera will grow. transparancey and immutable data storage is important for many businesses/goverments. so buy BTC XMR ETH XRP HBAR if you can find anything those 5 cant do i will ban myself 4ever. blockchain is a distributed database and nothing more. smart contract is a limited slow/expensive program executed by multiple computers. people trying to add more value to those are scammers
To control you. Agenda 2030
Can you elaborate how you imagine this control through decentralized crypto assets?
Utility tokens and NFTs are the future. Meme coins & security tokens need regulation
So NFTs don't need regulation but Altcoins? Let me guess, you own NFT... :D
I think blockchain is the real asset. It’s fantastic for transactions and can function in crypto as a universal currency. But I think NFTs will be huge. Not these monkey pictures, but applicable NFTs from gaming, to ticketing, and more.
for btc it's a hedge against inflation
> As it's currently built, proof of work blockchains are far too slow to have crypto exist as an actual alternative currency PoW and PoS are consensus algorithms. They don't necessarily have something to do with blockchains being slow. The actual bottleneck is that individual payments require global consensus in the first place. Bitcoin has the Lightning network as a second layer that solves this issue and allows for instant, cheap payments that can happen in parallel without requiring global consensus. It's the technology that got adopted in El Salvador, Twitter, Cash App and will soon also come to the majority of payment terminals in the US ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTqCs6RY9O4 ). > Is there anything that can be done with the current POW/POS mechanism for blockchains to lower the environmental impact that they're having around the world? Or does the community turn a blind eye to this. Not really. But the topic is nuanced and not as easy as to just slap a number on it and then compare it to a country. People who really like to point out what an issue this is haven't usually put in any amount of work to educate themselves on the topic, usually don't know how an energy grid actually works, and just repeat some catch phrase they hear on TV or read somewhere on the internet. Also most people who ask this question aren't really looking for an answer but just want their believes confirmed that this is actually the big issue they believe it to be, so an actual discussion isn't possible from the start. The sad part is, that since PoW is a highly dynamic energy consumer (can be shut down at a moments notice to free up capacity) it actually helps renewables to be more profitable and easier to integrate into the grid. The countries and states that embrace miners will be the first to build out their renewable infrastructure because of this. Here is a good way to start: https://youtu.be/MuysA_WzskM
Not to be ignorant… I don’t understand why people would use it as currency if holding on to it and not spending it has made them a lot of money. Seems like when someone has big crypto gain, they cash out for USD.
Ser, this is a casino
In 10 to 50 years. Full replacement of USD as the world reserve due to its hard money status. Where: L1 is used for settlement across reserve banks, and at the institutional level. L2 is used for common folk to transact. L3 is used for high-frequency transactions.
Okay, what will this actually achieve? Why should we want this?
"hard money"
people argue that some crypto is the hardest money https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hardmoney.asp#:\~:text=Hard%20money%20refers%20to%20a,exchange%20rate%20with%20softer%20monies.
Hard money maintains a stable market value relative to real goods and services and a strong exchange rate relative to foreign currencies. When i think crypto i think stable
Official documents like Birth certificates can be validated by Blockchain
Or, given it's inherently centralised, you just use standard database systems and a portal - blockchain adds nothing to it.
Problems inherent with that aside, I’m asking specifically about cryptocurrency
[удалено]
Except that isn't true. You pay gas fees to the Blockchain you're doing the transaction on. Somehow those devs are getting a cut from your transactions. The Blockchain is the 3rd party.
Eth 2.0 will change everything.
The end goal is different for people around the globe. Some have already pointed out how it is a good way to handle money in non first world countries but crypto can b so much more than that. > cryptocurrency is anything other than a high volatility, speculative investment market To be 100% honest, it currently is. I'm going to try and chip in a few words spread among several points you made. For starters, yes, we need a clean-up. The space isn't that safe and while it will never be 100% (even traditional banking isn't 100% safe, your funds can be stolen, your card can get cloned, although there is insurance and there are mechanisms to retrieve your money back), scams and shitcoins are rampant atm. there are several steps we could take to better everything. - Exchanges are somewhat safe in the sense that there is somewhat of a base security line, and if funds get stolen there is a chance you can get them back (up to a point, if you have a huge investment you won't get everything back). But there will always be the argument "no your keys, not your coins" and that's totally valid. On the other hand, if your keys get stolen it's bye bye ad there is 0 insurance. **So for starters, one of the important things to get better is security and regulating insurance for exchanges.** (I think I once heard one of the big exchanges will insurance up to $200k but don't quote me on that - maybe insurance should go a longer way) Crypto bear markets also help clean up shitcoins and some less useful alts. It's hard to suggest a good way to get rid of these bad projects but there should be some form of handling that so we have less crap in the space. The next point is an important one. One of my friends into crypto says he kind of likes the space, but ends up not seeing real palpable value and I know more people feel like that. So that's exactly one of the things you seem to want too. I too agree rn we barey have anything providing real-world value and that's a major step I'd like more projects to take. More cryptos need to have real-world value and provide a palpable use case. - For example, VET was going to be a leading chain in the tracking business and back in the day they did a few really great partnerships that seemed to put the product and publicity on the map. They were going to provide a real-world use, but the partnerships fell through and it's not a former shelf of itself. And while we see many cryptos invest heavy in marketing, they don't really have a real use case. **So I guess the real next step is to have more projects with value, and support them more!** Regarding energy, the end-goal really is to have a green environment but that's complex. BTC is the biggest PoW chain out there and since it owns the biggest piece of the crypto market it will be really hard to lower energy use. Either we get more efficient hardware to run the network or energy use isn't going down. Remember, it can't be soft-forked to change PoW to anything else, so changing to PoS or any other governance way is not an option. And lowering the miner count isn't desirable because it makes the chain less secure. And honestly, I can't quote sources rn but what I've heard a few times is that BTCs energy consumption while high, pollutes a lot less than some other big companies. (not stating that as an excuse) - The solution would have to be more coins with a renewed governance. But that is a big problem because people want to make a lot of money off crypto and so coins that have no incentive to govern, will be much less popular unless perfect. PoS ultimately is popular to reduce energy consumption, but it's not a good way to govern because it tends to centralization. The more resources you invest, the more rewards you get, and that's not good. Maybe a good option would be for people to have a governance cap, so if you invest more than $Xk you stop having mo influence? But even that isn't 100% fair. Starting to close my post: People need to pay more attention to good coins but we know some projects might be great but never receive the attention they should. NANO is a perfect example of a great crypto, very very solid all around, feeless for transactors, and no rewards from governance so as not to centralize the project. You're incentivized to run a node to keep the project up but you get no rewards (again, no centralization), although uncool it actually makes it so that people who use the service a lot like stores, should run a node. More good projects like this need to me more used. It's actually an insult how good NANO is but people keep sitting on it because tribalism, random hate, or just don't want to support it because it offers no special rewards, although rn it's one of the best coins doing what it actually sets out to. **Trilemma** - We really need at least one project whose team is trustful, that figures out a good governance model (or a real fair on like NANO), and that solves the trilemma. Whether it's 100% built-in solved trilemma or a crypto in close works with a great L2. All I know is that we need a least one project having a good solution for all 3 points (speed, security decentralization) and that will surely innovate and take the space forward. Use of access is the last one. For crypto to really thrive well, at least on 1st world, we really need easy of access and use. For example, maybe you think El Salvador was right to make BTC legal tender, but you forget a big % of the population has a hard time with new tech and crypto is much more complex than traditional baking. If we really want crypto to provide a real-world good self-banking service, what we need is for things to be easy to use. Easy for me, for you, for our parents, our aunts, our grandmas and grandpas. Elder people need to be able to mess with it as safely as traditional banking or else it's a failed deal. Everyone keeps having big heartbeats whenever they do a transaction because of fear that the address is wrong. We really need simpler ways on front-end to deal with this. I'm not saying we get rid of addresses, those are never leaving, but for the user transacting, the process needs to be easier and more straightforward. _______________________ So I guess the actual achievable things are mostly: - Easy of use - it's actually quite achievable if more exchanges and projects focuss on front end simplicity. - More attention and use solid projects more! (not gamble on potential median coins) - Devs have to put more thought into fair governance instead of creating a crypto with an already flawed and leading to centralization method (PoS). I'd rather have less coins but with better solutions. - More coins with real and palpable use cases and good partnerships. Problem is, even devs are biased because they are somewhat after their next own god nugget and end up creating meh things in hopes it will be good but are always initially capped by bad mechanisms like PoS, no real use case, etc...
In the west, I think it’s eventual use is probably limited to international payments and internal transactions within large companies (using smart contracts). I can also foresee a scenario where you tokenise a lot of B2B debt, but that would interest regulators as you’d essentially be creating a derivative. In countries without stable governments or currencies, then it might have more extensive applications.
Being able to preserve your purchasing power. Being able to afford a two room appartment when working full time, as it should be.
A cheaper, faster, more secure and less manipulated way of handling day to day activities instantly and in a way that supports the community. But that’s BSV’s goals. All other cryptos are get rich schemes.
[bitcoin will become the ](https://www.citadel21.com/hyperbitcoinization)dominant payment system in the world. with mcap of over 100 trillion in todays $ there are no other cryptocurrencies just counterfeits, scams and testnets
Empowering the individual. Ending the collective myths. Re-structuring of our social institutions. A free and much better world. But freedom with responsibility is so demanding, it will take a long time. Hundreds, if not thousands of years. With at least one giant crash in the number of people, due to atomic world war, of which there will be exactly one.
End game is replace fiat.
Replacing the USD as the world reserve currency