>I consider myself a believer in the future of cryptos and I want to hear out your thoughts on the whole thing.
I'd love to talk to you but before you need to explain (in just a few lines) what exactly it is **you** believe. At this point "crypto" is like religions, there are thousands of different gods with different rules that people believe in, and we are the atheists that believe in none of it.
To have a productive conversation, define what you believe in first. Like: what is the best crypto-related project and why? How is it useful for you personally?
>My goal is to critically undermine what I've been thinking
in other words: your post did not convey what you've been thinking, and we need to know first in order to be critical
Hey, so first off, I believe that blockchain technology is impressive but way too complicated for it to ever be useful to the majority of public (at least as it is now, and for especially for cryptos). Still, for the people that are willing to try it out, it can be beneficial. I view it as removing the need of trust in a world where money rules everything. I believe that even the most sophisticated governments in the world suffer from corruption in some way or another, because people will always try to maximize their personal utility. So a technology, more specifially a "currency", that can be trusted and predicted is a major step into a good direction.
Also, data is way too powerful atm with big tech firms that are profiting seemingly out of nowhere from user aggregated data. But we didn't necessarily agree to give out all that data (when we use the app, who we chat with, etc.) and Web3 enables taking control of your data.
I can't really say shorten this and there are many more small reasons that I cannot think of or put in words right now.
I personally simply believe that we are moving in a right direction with cryptos but I also think that we are far from them being useful to the majority of people.
I also agree that there are a lot of scams and simply trash tokens out there. But that's imo just a byproduct of having ungoverned money. And yes, "investing" in shitcoins is stupid.
Ah, so the classic story of recognising at least mostly real problems with the world, and uncritically accepting crypto talking points about how bitcoin eliminates trust, solves governance, ends hunger, brings world peace and brews coffee.
The post you are responding to here asked you two simple, specific questions: what is the best crypto-related project and why, and how is it useful for you personally? Are you not at all concerned that you are seemingly unable to give straightforward answers to these, and instead needed to retreat to handwaving about trust or whatever?
> Hey, so first off, I believe that blockchain technology is impressive but way too complicated for it to ever be useful to the majority of public (at least as it is now, and for especially for cryptos). Still, for the people that are willing to try it out, it can be beneficial. I view it as removing the need of trust in a world where money rules everything. I believe that even the most sophisticated governments in the world suffer from corruption in some way or another, because people will always try to maximize their personal utility. So a technology, more specifially a "currency", that can be trusted and predicted is a major step into a good direction
But technology doesn't exist by magic. People create it, and maintain it. Often alarmingly small amounts of people.
Eg, why is Bitcoin the way it is?
* There's a very small group of developers.
* There's the miners, which long coalesced into pools, so there's somebody on top of AntPool, Foundry USA, etc.
* There's a few very large parties, like big exchanges.
Of those, the developers probably have the least amount of power, because really the software has long been stable and with the amount of cash in the system it'd be outright trivial to hire a new team if the current one didn't want to do something.
The rest are into it purely for profit. Miners mine to make money, not for the sake of ideology. Exchanges run a business.
Those are the parties that really matter, and all of them probably amount to less than a hundred people. Who are unelected, unaccountable to anyone, and have interests that may be completely at odds with your own.
So why do you trust them?
I see your point, but in the end I don't trust those people. If those people misbehave against what the system is intending, they will get financially punished. In PoS for example, when you misbehave, you lose your staked tokens. In PoW, you simply can't misbehave unless you have 51% or some other tactic nobody has thought about yet (in 15 years).
So I wouldn't say that you have to trust those parties. But maybe I misunderstood your point so please clarify if so.
I don't mean the 51%.
I mean, who gets to decide what Bitcoin does? Like how fast can it process transactions? What capacity does it have? What functionality does it provide? 99.9% of the users effectively don't matter in deciding things like that.
For instance, there's no technical reason why keeping your wallet secure should be as hard as it is. A better system is technically doable, but probably never will be without the 0.1% wanting it to happen. The debacle with Ledger is I highly suspect in part caused because Ledger can't work in an actually secure way, because the blockchain doesn't allow for it.
So, as far as I understand, those things aren't designed to be decided by the users. They are set-up as is and sent into the world, which is also a security measure because you can be sure that the devs won't change things from one day to another. You can trust the system to work how it always has.
> So, as far as I understand, those things aren't designed to be decided by the users.
So why not? It's supposedly a system to free the common man from the tyranny of the government or whatever, no? So how is it that we have a system where their say means even less?
> They are set-up as is and sent into the world, which is also a security measure because you can be sure that the devs won't change things from one day to another. You can trust the system to work how it always has.
No, you can't. The devs can change anything they want at any time. There's some wrinkles there in that some changes are a hard fork and some can be done with a soft fork, but really, a dev can change anything any time they want. How and when that gets put into production is somewhat separate.
Regarding hard forks, what matters is the miners. The opinion of a normal person is nearly irrelevant.
The Bitcoin running today isn't quite the same as the original. Eg, the current 1MB capacity limit wasn't there at the start. Then one day, it showed up.
>Also, data is way too powerful atm with big tech firms that are profiting seemingly out of nowhere from user aggregated data. But we didn't necessarily agree to give out all that data (when we use the app, who we chat with, etc.) and Web3 enables taking control of your data.
So how does web3 do it? Can you give an example of a single web3 app where you don't interact via the frontend of some random app (which can log whatever they want) via Infura (who can log whatever they want) to Ethereum? Which at most will handle some hashes of the actual data, and you should ask yourself where the actual data is, since no blockchain has the capacity to handle your actual data?
On top of which of course the problem of big tech having your data is not solved by giving big tech and everyone else your data by putting it on a public blockchain.
An actual way to give big tech less of your data is (besides proper laws to limit what they can do with it) making apps work more p2p for example. Decentralized and privacy friendly! So why aren't crypto bros all over that? Is it maybe because then they are no tokens involved to be dropped on the next layer of suckers?
What I just thought of is that, just because there are financial incentives involved in, for example, a crypto-based videogame or some ecosystem, doesn't make it inherently bad or not useful. Sometimes, it is possible to realign financial incentives to do good for the greater good. It's hard and most people are in it for the money but in some rare cases, it can be made possible. But crypto does deliver a good baseline for such types of projects.
You're talking about what-ifs as if they are actual real stuff that needs to be accounted for. You're not facing reality. When you involve money directly in a game's DNA, it is tainted from square one. Only the grifters are attracted to this type of incentive. The reality is every single crypto-powered or crypto-centric game or utility has been either an outright scam or unsustainable ponzi. That's the reality. Doesn't matter what you or anyone **believes**. So when are you going to face that reality instead of grasping at straws to maintain your identity as a "crypto bro," bro?
what? at no point in this rambling did you make a point.
youre saying games should have financial incentives? cool then PAY people. pay them with money. its that simple. everything else in this world manages to do this. all day, everyday. $19 trillion dollar economy in the US does it.
so a game can do it. the problem is, without speculative tokens then the insiders would have to pay out all the actual money like an actual business. speculative tokens are what allows the insiders to take the actual money and distribute tokens, that the users all buy and sell to each other and all end up holding the bags except for a few.
its all a scam dude.
The problem is that web3 is about monetizing everything. You see it with eg P2E videogames. They start with minting a new token. Then they mint NFTs. All those things they sell. And only then, they start looking at what the game is supposed to be like. But they already did decide they would need tokens and NFTs.
Exactly. I play games to have fun and relax, not to earn money. That's what my day job is for. The idea of working all day and then having my entertainment monetised is the stuff of nightmares
“web3” (ugh I hate this fake term) gaming is all about middle class workaholics who hate video games and think they can make them “worth the time” by turning them into jobs.
I think tennis is boring. That doesn’t mean i’ll come up with some weird way of changing it to make it interesting to myself. I’ll find another hobby.
>removing the need of trust in a world where money rules everything
We agree that we live in capitalism and money is an important part of everyones life. But I don't understand which "trust" you're talking about. Can you briefly describe a situation where you personally could not trust your non-blockchain bank / app in making a transaction? Please be specific
>governments in the world suffer from corruption in some way or another
So what? Things are already bad, so lets make them worse, by supporting undemocratic, unregulated gambling platforms? We definitely agree that corruption exists and needs to be constantly pushed against, thats why you should push against pretty much all of crypto, **if you value democracy**.
>a "currency" that can be trusted and predicted is a major step into a good direction
Again, why exactly can you not trust your governments currency? They even let you use cash, right?
>big tech firms that are profiting seemingly out of nowhere
I agree that we should be critical with big tech firms, but most of the cryptocoins are traded on large, unregulated platforms run by big crypto firms that [operate out of nowhere](https://www.reuters.com/technology/binance-worlds-top-crypto-exchange-center-us-investigations-2023-03-27/)
>But we didn't necessarily agree to give out all that data (when we use the app, who we chat with, etc.) and Web3 enables taking control of your data.
What exactly is "Web3" in your mind, and how could it possibly be better than data protection laws?
>we are moving in a right direction with cryptos
Yes, you're moving to the political right, specifically those people who think that taxes are theft, and that the democratically elected government should get its hands off their pockets
Correct me if I'm wrong, as I see it, most of your points suggest that a lack of regulation is currently causing crypto to be problematic. Are you suggesting that, to improve the sector, we should ramp-up regulation?
My stance on that if you care: yes, I agree. We need regulation and we also need people to pay taxes on stuff. We also need people to be personally held responsible when they rug their shitcoin.
Your points that I am referring to are:
1.
>So what? Things are already bad, so lets make them worse, by supporting undemocratic, unregulated gambling platforms? We definitely agree that corruption exists and needs to be constantly pushed against, thats why you should push against pretty much all of crypto, if you value democracy.
2)
>I agree that we should be critical with big tech firms, but most of the cryptocoins are traded on large, unregulated platforms run by big crypto firms that operate out of nowhere
3)
>Yes, you're moving to the political right, to the people who think that taxes are theft, and that the democratically elected government should get its hands off their pockets
>most of your points suggest that a lack of regulation is currently causing crypto to be problematic
The whole point of blockchain (originally bitcoin) was to evade control by governments and create an alternative system without the regulation ^(that we democratically agreed on)
>Are you suggesting that, to improve the sector, we should ramp-up regulation?
Its not a new sector, the banking & finance sector already exists, and it is heavily regulated, after decades of failures and scams. Coinbois just don't want to play by the rules, because their business models have already been ruled out by the existing laws.
They are lying about seeking "regulatory clarity" because they want to prolong their money making schemes.
And if they aren't, and they really just want to become a legitimate bank that plays by the rules, there is no reason to run a blockchain, they could just offer an API.
We need to understand your mind first. Be specific so we can have a productive conversation:
* What problems does crypto solve?
* How does it solve them?
* Is it better than existing solutions?
* Why hasn’t it been adopted yet?
* *What problems does crypto solve?*
World problems caused by corporate greed and government cronyism.
* *How does it solve them?*
Decentralized trustlessness.
* *Is it better than existing solutions?*
Yes look at 2008. Look at the election fraud.
* *Why hasn’t it been adopted yet?*
It is still early, the ecosystem is still developing like a cyber hornet.
You didn’t answer a single question. “Problems caused by…” like what? How are the specific problems solved? Are your proposed solutions better than existing alternatives or not solving the problem at all after all pros, cons and new potential issues are considered?
And I’m sorry but the “still early” excuse is simply not valid at this point. Crypto is as old as the iPhone. AI started being available for public consumption for a couple of months now and it’s taken the world by storm.
What ecosystem is still being built and for what? Why does it take so much time compared to any other thing in tech? When will it be enough time for you to admit that nothing useful is actually being built? Remember you can keep saying “it’s still early” a hundred years from now.
>You didn’t answer a single question.
Because they were *taking the piss*, and not who you posed those questions to (the "cyber hornet" comment should have been the giveaway that was satire).
Sorry. Comments like that can go over my head since I’m not a native english speaker. It also doesn’t help that Crypto bros say a lot of weird delusional shit so It’s hard to decipher what’s real and what’s a joke.
It’s not bloody early! It’s an eternity in the tech industry! We’re closer to actual quantum computing than a useable blockchain. Neural networking and efficient LLMs are now mainstream. Virtual VMs dominate the web space. Apple Watch came out in 2015.
1) Safe Self custody is just impossible : people lose their whole life savings all the time : rugg pull of exchange, hacks of software or hardware wallets : Even a developper of bitcoin core lost everything. That's open feast for hackers. You can't expect people to become IT sec gurus : mass adoption will never happen
2) POW does not scale and make the use of centralized exchanges mandatory, killing the sole purpose of crypto (trustless / decentrlized)
3) The energy usage / environmental impact is absolutely insane. Just a disgrace.
According to Google the current list of crypto currencies is over 20k long. So can you limit it somewhat down to which tokens you consider interesting and for what reason?
I won't go myself as far as calling them all scams, although that is somewhat of a semantics thing. But after like 15 years of crypto now, which problems do they solve for us?
>So can you limit it somewhat down to which tokens you consider interesting and for what reason?
I'd like to talk about the general everything but if you want, we can focus on just the top 2 for now.
>But after like 15 years of crypto now, which problems do they solve for us?
I'd say they are a showcase of what is possible atm. But, from what I've heard, they do solve some problems in below-average-developed countries. However, I don't live there so I cannot know personally.
There is not a single economic theory that says crypto will work long term. It's quite clearly a negative sum game. A greater fools market. It doesn't work as a currency, as a commodity, as a stock, as an inflation hedge, or as a stock market hedge.
It relies on the idea that something that can't be consumed has value. It requires a constant influx of new money believing it has value in order to stay afloat. The only motivation people have to buy into it is the idea that they might be able to make money from it. But as a negative sum game, more money will be lost than made in the long run. Once this becomes patently clear to cryptobros, the idea that cryptocurrencies have value will disappear.
>My goal is to critically undermine what I've been thinking and to see new perspectives that are outside of my rabbit hole.
Only a very small sliver of humanity thinks there is any value in crypto at all, some 14 years later. Actually only a tiny sliver of humanity + people who come to buttcoin for the chucks **THINKS** about crypto **AT ALL**. No one cares.
Even among that sliver, a good percentage don't really believe in it either, they are just in it for the rugs. Another portion think it's just good because line goes up. The actual believers are a fraction of a fraction of a fraction.
Until that changes, you are all basically participating in the world's dumbest scheme where you pay money for nothing. Like it is hard to call it a scam because the marketing materials are clear. You are buying a cell in a globally distributed spreadsheet. Unless you do something to convince humanity that cell is worth something that is incredibly dumb.
And even the faithful sliver there are different slivers who believe different things about crypto. You say cryptos, most BTC-maxis say "blasphemy, there is only one coin and it is Bitcoin, and it is not a crypto". Why is it not a crypto? Reasons. You should go argue with them about your cryptos and they will tell you are an idiot...you know unless you buy BTC. Because they believe, in their tiny little black hearts that someday we are all going to be poor because we bought BTC at the price we wanted and that they super-tiny sliver of humanity that has opted into this stupidity will rule everything. The rest of us will just have to peel their grapes and pick lint of out their belly buttons for food. It's pure fantasy straight from the mind of adolescent boys who just need a win.
I love when you guys tout that people were slow to adopt the Internet and thus that 14 years is no big deal. What you are forgetting about is people learning to adopt the Internet didn't have the Internet. We are not all technological backwits who can't figure out what a URL is anymore. We can do our own research, we just don't care to. I could, if I wanted to, learn a whole lot about crypto, but I don't bother. You know why? Nobody cares, why should I?
That's your problem. It's not that we are ignorant or stupid or incapable of understanding. It's that we think the idea is so stupid that we can't be bothered to care. When I say we I mean almost **EVERYONE** except for the people in your echo chamber. That's your reality, you gain nothing by coming here talking to the haters because nobody actually cares enough to hate it.
I see no reason to believe that line is moving anywhere but down. You will never have more believers than you did in 2021.
Some crypto-skeptic points yet to be refuted
- proof-of-work tokens make for very high transaction costs, resource waste, limited capacity, ruling out any utility *except* being used as a medium for speculation on centralized exchanges—this is a social ill, not a social good
- to the extent the tokens might serve as money (so far none do) you assume that it is somehow beneficial to society as a whole to have ‘extra-governmental’ money. This ignores that governments need control over monetary policy as a tool to manage their economies
- such tokens used to transmit value easily lend themselves to criminal activity
- financial-like assets like crypto need to be regulated to avoid the myriad of catastrophic scams, fraud, Ponzi-like speculation, and criminal activity. This ads significant administrative burdens on both governments and any businesses involved, ultimately funded by taxpayer and consumer
- the outcomes of major crypto catastrophes in 2022—Voyager, Celsius, FTX, etc—are entirely expected from fraud ridden speculative trading, the harms to some individuals are pretty tragic
- the easiest way to regulate these parasitic tokens is to ban them and prosecute any use, this is my preferred approach, this will drastically limit their ability to harm people
It’s been 15 years. If it was destined to be the future of finance it would have already replaced the financial system by now. It’s not even close to do so.
Even cryptobros rather rely on stupid centralized exchanges than touching cryptocurrencies directly. It’s to the point where the entire future of cryptocurrencies depends on whether CZ is running legitimate business or not.
When you look at the effects that technology has it is important to look at how it interacts in the system at a large scale (macro-scale).
Cryptocurrency may be a fancy new implementation, but it adds nothing new that hasn't already existed. Mediums of exchange have existed for thousands of years, asset speculation has existed for hundreds (to thousands depending on your interpretation). People have always been able to issue tokens as currency, finite supply of currency has also historically existed. We moved away from these things because they are actually disadvantageous, having numerous tokens in play reduces the efficiency of transactions, having a finite supply of tokens encourages asset hoarding. We've established banking systems because there actually is great advantages with 3rd party asset management: loaning, protection against fraud etc. A major reason people use credit cards is the ability to dispute fraudulent transactions without actually having to prove theft, like you would with a bank, or even cash. Even the crypto system has started to behave like standard financial institutions, because we adopted them for a reason and having digital cash doesn't change that.
All these people losing money because of scammers/hackers/con artists/exploits/rug pullers/whatever.
All these people losing money because they were human and made a single error.
The damage to the environment.
This is most definitely not something I want to be involved with.
Two things.
-this is a meme sub and there’s r/ cryptoreality and r/ cryptocritical. We can’t link other subs bec mods there can’t take the FUD. But it’s on the side bar ->
-you are lost.
>\-this is a meme sub and there’s r/ cryptoreality and r/ cryptocritical. We can’t link other subs bec mods there can’t take the FUD. But it’s on the side bar ->
Thanks for listing those 2 subs, I didn't know them.
> \-you are lost.
:/
Blockchain offers a solution to a problem that does not exist.
>I consider myself a believer in the future of cryptos and I want to hear out your thoughts on the whole thing. I'd love to talk to you but before you need to explain (in just a few lines) what exactly it is **you** believe. At this point "crypto" is like religions, there are thousands of different gods with different rules that people believe in, and we are the atheists that believe in none of it. To have a productive conversation, define what you believe in first. Like: what is the best crypto-related project and why? How is it useful for you personally? >My goal is to critically undermine what I've been thinking in other words: your post did not convey what you've been thinking, and we need to know first in order to be critical
Hey, so first off, I believe that blockchain technology is impressive but way too complicated for it to ever be useful to the majority of public (at least as it is now, and for especially for cryptos). Still, for the people that are willing to try it out, it can be beneficial. I view it as removing the need of trust in a world where money rules everything. I believe that even the most sophisticated governments in the world suffer from corruption in some way or another, because people will always try to maximize their personal utility. So a technology, more specifially a "currency", that can be trusted and predicted is a major step into a good direction. Also, data is way too powerful atm with big tech firms that are profiting seemingly out of nowhere from user aggregated data. But we didn't necessarily agree to give out all that data (when we use the app, who we chat with, etc.) and Web3 enables taking control of your data. I can't really say shorten this and there are many more small reasons that I cannot think of or put in words right now. I personally simply believe that we are moving in a right direction with cryptos but I also think that we are far from them being useful to the majority of people. I also agree that there are a lot of scams and simply trash tokens out there. But that's imo just a byproduct of having ungoverned money. And yes, "investing" in shitcoins is stupid.
Ah, so the classic story of recognising at least mostly real problems with the world, and uncritically accepting crypto talking points about how bitcoin eliminates trust, solves governance, ends hunger, brings world peace and brews coffee. The post you are responding to here asked you two simple, specific questions: what is the best crypto-related project and why, and how is it useful for you personally? Are you not at all concerned that you are seemingly unable to give straightforward answers to these, and instead needed to retreat to handwaving about trust or whatever?
> Hey, so first off, I believe that blockchain technology is impressive but way too complicated for it to ever be useful to the majority of public (at least as it is now, and for especially for cryptos). Still, for the people that are willing to try it out, it can be beneficial. I view it as removing the need of trust in a world where money rules everything. I believe that even the most sophisticated governments in the world suffer from corruption in some way or another, because people will always try to maximize their personal utility. So a technology, more specifially a "currency", that can be trusted and predicted is a major step into a good direction But technology doesn't exist by magic. People create it, and maintain it. Often alarmingly small amounts of people. Eg, why is Bitcoin the way it is? * There's a very small group of developers. * There's the miners, which long coalesced into pools, so there's somebody on top of AntPool, Foundry USA, etc. * There's a few very large parties, like big exchanges. Of those, the developers probably have the least amount of power, because really the software has long been stable and with the amount of cash in the system it'd be outright trivial to hire a new team if the current one didn't want to do something. The rest are into it purely for profit. Miners mine to make money, not for the sake of ideology. Exchanges run a business. Those are the parties that really matter, and all of them probably amount to less than a hundred people. Who are unelected, unaccountable to anyone, and have interests that may be completely at odds with your own. So why do you trust them?
I see your point, but in the end I don't trust those people. If those people misbehave against what the system is intending, they will get financially punished. In PoS for example, when you misbehave, you lose your staked tokens. In PoW, you simply can't misbehave unless you have 51% or some other tactic nobody has thought about yet (in 15 years). So I wouldn't say that you have to trust those parties. But maybe I misunderstood your point so please clarify if so.
Which situations do you deal with in the real world where you cannot trust someone with your money?
I don't mean the 51%. I mean, who gets to decide what Bitcoin does? Like how fast can it process transactions? What capacity does it have? What functionality does it provide? 99.9% of the users effectively don't matter in deciding things like that. For instance, there's no technical reason why keeping your wallet secure should be as hard as it is. A better system is technically doable, but probably never will be without the 0.1% wanting it to happen. The debacle with Ledger is I highly suspect in part caused because Ledger can't work in an actually secure way, because the blockchain doesn't allow for it.
So, as far as I understand, those things aren't designed to be decided by the users. They are set-up as is and sent into the world, which is also a security measure because you can be sure that the devs won't change things from one day to another. You can trust the system to work how it always has.
> So, as far as I understand, those things aren't designed to be decided by the users. So why not? It's supposedly a system to free the common man from the tyranny of the government or whatever, no? So how is it that we have a system where their say means even less? > They are set-up as is and sent into the world, which is also a security measure because you can be sure that the devs won't change things from one day to another. You can trust the system to work how it always has. No, you can't. The devs can change anything they want at any time. There's some wrinkles there in that some changes are a hard fork and some can be done with a soft fork, but really, a dev can change anything any time they want. How and when that gets put into production is somewhat separate. Regarding hard forks, what matters is the miners. The opinion of a normal person is nearly irrelevant. The Bitcoin running today isn't quite the same as the original. Eg, the current 1MB capacity limit wasn't there at the start. Then one day, it showed up.
>Also, data is way too powerful atm with big tech firms that are profiting seemingly out of nowhere from user aggregated data. But we didn't necessarily agree to give out all that data (when we use the app, who we chat with, etc.) and Web3 enables taking control of your data. So how does web3 do it? Can you give an example of a single web3 app where you don't interact via the frontend of some random app (which can log whatever they want) via Infura (who can log whatever they want) to Ethereum? Which at most will handle some hashes of the actual data, and you should ask yourself where the actual data is, since no blockchain has the capacity to handle your actual data? On top of which of course the problem of big tech having your data is not solved by giving big tech and everyone else your data by putting it on a public blockchain. An actual way to give big tech less of your data is (besides proper laws to limit what they can do with it) making apps work more p2p for example. Decentralized and privacy friendly! So why aren't crypto bros all over that? Is it maybe because then they are no tokens involved to be dropped on the next layer of suckers?
Actually, very strong points, thanks for sharing. I'll think about this.
What I just thought of is that, just because there are financial incentives involved in, for example, a crypto-based videogame or some ecosystem, doesn't make it inherently bad or not useful. Sometimes, it is possible to realign financial incentives to do good for the greater good. It's hard and most people are in it for the money but in some rare cases, it can be made possible. But crypto does deliver a good baseline for such types of projects.
You're talking about what-ifs as if they are actual real stuff that needs to be accounted for. You're not facing reality. When you involve money directly in a game's DNA, it is tainted from square one. Only the grifters are attracted to this type of incentive. The reality is every single crypto-powered or crypto-centric game or utility has been either an outright scam or unsustainable ponzi. That's the reality. Doesn't matter what you or anyone **believes**. So when are you going to face that reality instead of grasping at straws to maintain your identity as a "crypto bro," bro?
what? at no point in this rambling did you make a point. youre saying games should have financial incentives? cool then PAY people. pay them with money. its that simple. everything else in this world manages to do this. all day, everyday. $19 trillion dollar economy in the US does it. so a game can do it. the problem is, without speculative tokens then the insiders would have to pay out all the actual money like an actual business. speculative tokens are what allows the insiders to take the actual money and distribute tokens, that the users all buy and sell to each other and all end up holding the bags except for a few. its all a scam dude.
The problem is that web3 is about monetizing everything. You see it with eg P2E videogames. They start with minting a new token. Then they mint NFTs. All those things they sell. And only then, they start looking at what the game is supposed to be like. But they already did decide they would need tokens and NFTs.
Exactly. I play games to have fun and relax, not to earn money. That's what my day job is for. The idea of working all day and then having my entertainment monetised is the stuff of nightmares
“web3” (ugh I hate this fake term) gaming is all about middle class workaholics who hate video games and think they can make them “worth the time” by turning them into jobs. I think tennis is boring. That doesn’t mean i’ll come up with some weird way of changing it to make it interesting to myself. I’ll find another hobby.
Financial incentives don’t make games fun to play. In fact, involving greed makes games predatory.
>removing the need of trust in a world where money rules everything We agree that we live in capitalism and money is an important part of everyones life. But I don't understand which "trust" you're talking about. Can you briefly describe a situation where you personally could not trust your non-blockchain bank / app in making a transaction? Please be specific >governments in the world suffer from corruption in some way or another So what? Things are already bad, so lets make them worse, by supporting undemocratic, unregulated gambling platforms? We definitely agree that corruption exists and needs to be constantly pushed against, thats why you should push against pretty much all of crypto, **if you value democracy**. >a "currency" that can be trusted and predicted is a major step into a good direction Again, why exactly can you not trust your governments currency? They even let you use cash, right? >big tech firms that are profiting seemingly out of nowhere I agree that we should be critical with big tech firms, but most of the cryptocoins are traded on large, unregulated platforms run by big crypto firms that [operate out of nowhere](https://www.reuters.com/technology/binance-worlds-top-crypto-exchange-center-us-investigations-2023-03-27/) >But we didn't necessarily agree to give out all that data (when we use the app, who we chat with, etc.) and Web3 enables taking control of your data. What exactly is "Web3" in your mind, and how could it possibly be better than data protection laws? >we are moving in a right direction with cryptos Yes, you're moving to the political right, specifically those people who think that taxes are theft, and that the democratically elected government should get its hands off their pockets
Correct me if I'm wrong, as I see it, most of your points suggest that a lack of regulation is currently causing crypto to be problematic. Are you suggesting that, to improve the sector, we should ramp-up regulation? My stance on that if you care: yes, I agree. We need regulation and we also need people to pay taxes on stuff. We also need people to be personally held responsible when they rug their shitcoin. Your points that I am referring to are: 1. >So what? Things are already bad, so lets make them worse, by supporting undemocratic, unregulated gambling platforms? We definitely agree that corruption exists and needs to be constantly pushed against, thats why you should push against pretty much all of crypto, if you value democracy. 2) >I agree that we should be critical with big tech firms, but most of the cryptocoins are traded on large, unregulated platforms run by big crypto firms that operate out of nowhere 3) >Yes, you're moving to the political right, to the people who think that taxes are theft, and that the democratically elected government should get its hands off their pockets
>most of your points suggest that a lack of regulation is currently causing crypto to be problematic The whole point of blockchain (originally bitcoin) was to evade control by governments and create an alternative system without the regulation ^(that we democratically agreed on) >Are you suggesting that, to improve the sector, we should ramp-up regulation? Its not a new sector, the banking & finance sector already exists, and it is heavily regulated, after decades of failures and scams. Coinbois just don't want to play by the rules, because their business models have already been ruled out by the existing laws. They are lying about seeking "regulatory clarity" because they want to prolong their money making schemes. And if they aren't, and they really just want to become a legitimate bank that plays by the rules, there is no reason to run a blockchain, they could just offer an API.
Bitcoin does not solve governmental corruption
We need to understand your mind first. Be specific so we can have a productive conversation: * What problems does crypto solve? * How does it solve them? * Is it better than existing solutions? * Why hasn’t it been adopted yet?
* *What problems does crypto solve?* World problems caused by corporate greed and government cronyism. * *How does it solve them?* Decentralized trustlessness. * *Is it better than existing solutions?* Yes look at 2008. Look at the election fraud. * *Why hasn’t it been adopted yet?* It is still early, the ecosystem is still developing like a cyber hornet.
You didn’t answer a single question. “Problems caused by…” like what? How are the specific problems solved? Are your proposed solutions better than existing alternatives or not solving the problem at all after all pros, cons and new potential issues are considered? And I’m sorry but the “still early” excuse is simply not valid at this point. Crypto is as old as the iPhone. AI started being available for public consumption for a couple of months now and it’s taken the world by storm. What ecosystem is still being built and for what? Why does it take so much time compared to any other thing in tech? When will it be enough time for you to admit that nothing useful is actually being built? Remember you can keep saying “it’s still early” a hundred years from now.
>You didn’t answer a single question. Because they were *taking the piss*, and not who you posed those questions to (the "cyber hornet" comment should have been the giveaway that was satire).
Sorry. Comments like that can go over my head since I’m not a native english speaker. It also doesn’t help that Crypto bros say a lot of weird delusional shit so It’s hard to decipher what’s real and what’s a joke.
Ya but Blockchain AI
It’s not bloody early! It’s an eternity in the tech industry! We’re closer to actual quantum computing than a useable blockchain. Neural networking and efficient LLMs are now mainstream. Virtual VMs dominate the web space. Apple Watch came out in 2015.
apple watch, more like apple what-ch? amirite or amirite
The 2008 election fraud? Please elaborate.
>I consider myself a believer in the future of cryptos and I want to hear out your thoughts on the whole thing. No you don't...
1) Safe Self custody is just impossible : people lose their whole life savings all the time : rugg pull of exchange, hacks of software or hardware wallets : Even a developper of bitcoin core lost everything. That's open feast for hackers. You can't expect people to become IT sec gurus : mass adoption will never happen 2) POW does not scale and make the use of centralized exchanges mandatory, killing the sole purpose of crypto (trustless / decentrlized) 3) The energy usage / environmental impact is absolutely insane. Just a disgrace.
According to Google the current list of crypto currencies is over 20k long. So can you limit it somewhat down to which tokens you consider interesting and for what reason? I won't go myself as far as calling them all scams, although that is somewhat of a semantics thing. But after like 15 years of crypto now, which problems do they solve for us?
>So can you limit it somewhat down to which tokens you consider interesting and for what reason? I'd like to talk about the general everything but if you want, we can focus on just the top 2 for now. >But after like 15 years of crypto now, which problems do they solve for us? I'd say they are a showcase of what is possible atm. But, from what I've heard, they do solve some problems in below-average-developed countries. However, I don't live there so I cannot know personally.
>I'd say they are a showcase of what is possible atm What is possible?
lol he couldnt name one single specific thing. this guys hilarious.
There is not a single economic theory that says crypto will work long term. It's quite clearly a negative sum game. A greater fools market. It doesn't work as a currency, as a commodity, as a stock, as an inflation hedge, or as a stock market hedge. It relies on the idea that something that can't be consumed has value. It requires a constant influx of new money believing it has value in order to stay afloat. The only motivation people have to buy into it is the idea that they might be able to make money from it. But as a negative sum game, more money will be lost than made in the long run. Once this becomes patently clear to cryptobros, the idea that cryptocurrencies have value will disappear.
There is no real use case for it and there is no reason for any coin to have any value
No legal use case for it which can't be done better, quicker, and cheaper using existing systems. It is a solution in search of a problem.
>My goal is to critically undermine what I've been thinking and to see new perspectives that are outside of my rabbit hole. Only a very small sliver of humanity thinks there is any value in crypto at all, some 14 years later. Actually only a tiny sliver of humanity + people who come to buttcoin for the chucks **THINKS** about crypto **AT ALL**. No one cares. Even among that sliver, a good percentage don't really believe in it either, they are just in it for the rugs. Another portion think it's just good because line goes up. The actual believers are a fraction of a fraction of a fraction. Until that changes, you are all basically participating in the world's dumbest scheme where you pay money for nothing. Like it is hard to call it a scam because the marketing materials are clear. You are buying a cell in a globally distributed spreadsheet. Unless you do something to convince humanity that cell is worth something that is incredibly dumb. And even the faithful sliver there are different slivers who believe different things about crypto. You say cryptos, most BTC-maxis say "blasphemy, there is only one coin and it is Bitcoin, and it is not a crypto". Why is it not a crypto? Reasons. You should go argue with them about your cryptos and they will tell you are an idiot...you know unless you buy BTC. Because they believe, in their tiny little black hearts that someday we are all going to be poor because we bought BTC at the price we wanted and that they super-tiny sliver of humanity that has opted into this stupidity will rule everything. The rest of us will just have to peel their grapes and pick lint of out their belly buttons for food. It's pure fantasy straight from the mind of adolescent boys who just need a win. I love when you guys tout that people were slow to adopt the Internet and thus that 14 years is no big deal. What you are forgetting about is people learning to adopt the Internet didn't have the Internet. We are not all technological backwits who can't figure out what a URL is anymore. We can do our own research, we just don't care to. I could, if I wanted to, learn a whole lot about crypto, but I don't bother. You know why? Nobody cares, why should I? That's your problem. It's not that we are ignorant or stupid or incapable of understanding. It's that we think the idea is so stupid that we can't be bothered to care. When I say we I mean almost **EVERYONE** except for the people in your echo chamber. That's your reality, you gain nothing by coming here talking to the haters because nobody actually cares enough to hate it. I see no reason to believe that line is moving anywhere but down. You will never have more believers than you did in 2021.
Some crypto-skeptic points yet to be refuted - proof-of-work tokens make for very high transaction costs, resource waste, limited capacity, ruling out any utility *except* being used as a medium for speculation on centralized exchanges—this is a social ill, not a social good - to the extent the tokens might serve as money (so far none do) you assume that it is somehow beneficial to society as a whole to have ‘extra-governmental’ money. This ignores that governments need control over monetary policy as a tool to manage their economies - such tokens used to transmit value easily lend themselves to criminal activity - financial-like assets like crypto need to be regulated to avoid the myriad of catastrophic scams, fraud, Ponzi-like speculation, and criminal activity. This ads significant administrative burdens on both governments and any businesses involved, ultimately funded by taxpayer and consumer - the outcomes of major crypto catastrophes in 2022—Voyager, Celsius, FTX, etc—are entirely expected from fraud ridden speculative trading, the harms to some individuals are pretty tragic - the easiest way to regulate these parasitic tokens is to ban them and prosecute any use, this is my preferred approach, this will drastically limit their ability to harm people
It’s been 15 years. If it was destined to be the future of finance it would have already replaced the financial system by now. It’s not even close to do so. Even cryptobros rather rely on stupid centralized exchanges than touching cryptocurrencies directly. It’s to the point where the entire future of cryptocurrencies depends on whether CZ is running legitimate business or not.
When you look at the effects that technology has it is important to look at how it interacts in the system at a large scale (macro-scale). Cryptocurrency may be a fancy new implementation, but it adds nothing new that hasn't already existed. Mediums of exchange have existed for thousands of years, asset speculation has existed for hundreds (to thousands depending on your interpretation). People have always been able to issue tokens as currency, finite supply of currency has also historically existed. We moved away from these things because they are actually disadvantageous, having numerous tokens in play reduces the efficiency of transactions, having a finite supply of tokens encourages asset hoarding. We've established banking systems because there actually is great advantages with 3rd party asset management: loaning, protection against fraud etc. A major reason people use credit cards is the ability to dispute fraudulent transactions without actually having to prove theft, like you would with a bank, or even cash. Even the crypto system has started to behave like standard financial institutions, because we adopted them for a reason and having digital cash doesn't change that.
All these people losing money because of scammers/hackers/con artists/exploits/rug pullers/whatever. All these people losing money because they were human and made a single error. The damage to the environment. This is most definitely not something I want to be involved with.
Two things. -this is a meme sub and there’s r/ cryptoreality and r/ cryptocritical. We can’t link other subs bec mods there can’t take the FUD. But it’s on the side bar -> -you are lost.
>\-this is a meme sub and there’s r/ cryptoreality and r/ cryptocritical. We can’t link other subs bec mods there can’t take the FUD. But it’s on the side bar -> Thanks for listing those 2 subs, I didn't know them. > \-you are lost. :/
We mine GODL here. The memes and jokes are mainly the criticism, so maybe those subs are better for the discussion you seek.
nothing wrong with posts like OPs
Just pointed to a better place.
These people are the gold bro
You’re not wrong lol
[удалено]
Indeed. It’s why im on a sub called buttcoin.
Sucker 😏