from the video description: it seems like this is basically an ad for the crypto wallets this guy is selling?
from the video description:
Armani Ferrante joins Garrett and Mert to discuss what crypto wallets get wrong. Armani is a product genius and the founder behind Anchor, Backpack, xNFTs and Mad Lads. In this episode, we cover the innovations behind Backpack and xNFTs, why demand generation is everything...
it seems like this is basically an ad for the crypto wallets this guy is selling?
Feel like this is the biggest thing preventing cryptocurrency from taking off. Everyone offering any constructive critique is shilling something else. Anyone promoting crypto is a bagholder. I...
Feel like this is the biggest thing preventing cryptocurrency from taking off. Everyone offering any constructive critique is shilling something else. Anyone promoting crypto is a bagholder. I think the tech has potential but no one has figured out how to separate it from greed.
the original Bitcoin whitepaper was published in 2008. cryptocurrency and the blockchain have had 15 years to show off their "potential". that's a long time in general, but a lifetime in the tech...
I think the tech has potential but no one has figured out how to separate it from greed.
the original Bitcoin whitepaper was published in 2008.
cryptocurrency and the blockchain have had 15 years to show off their "potential". that's a long time in general, but a lifetime in the tech industry.
at a certain point I think we need to admit that similar to the Hashcash system for spam prevention that preceded it, cryptocurrency is interesting as a technology but lacks meaningfully useful real-world applications.
I mean...bitcoin does have a very obvious real world use case, but it's just an asset/store of value. Maybe it shouldn't be, but the market says it is because it's filling a few niches. The...
I mean...bitcoin does have a very obvious real world use case, but it's just an asset/store of value. Maybe it shouldn't be, but the market says it is because it's filling a few niches.
The underlying tech of blockchain has realworld, in use, use cases.
The ZILLIONS of other coins is where shit gets real murky. Bitcoin has long term issues that will one day be a problem, and then maybe something else will matter more, but most of these "coins" probably shouldn't be coins, or are looking for a problem to solve.
IF crypto winds up more integrated in society, most of it will be on the backend, much like an IP address. I don't see a world where you have 30 different coins sitting in some wallet somewhere, even if that's the reality of the backend.
The "greed" issues everyone brings up are issues for every single technology everywhere, and if you can't overcome that your tech doesn't fill a purpose.
Bitcoins one obvious use case is crime. It's great for fraud and evading government sanctions. It's wild swings in price make it a terrible "store of value" . The underlying tech is so specific it...
Bitcoins one obvious use case is crime. It's great for fraud and evading government sanctions.
It's wild swings in price make it a terrible "store of value" .
The underlying tech is so specific it lacks any broad use case. It's a " solution in search of a problem.
Crypto is gonna end up like high end MTG and Pokemon cards. Valuable to a very narrow group of individuals.
Crime is a lucrative business. There will always be black markets, tax evasion, freedom fighters/terrorists, vice dealers, and all sorts of others who want some sort of unregulated asset. It used...
Crime is a lucrative business. There will always be black markets, tax evasion, freedom fighters/terrorists, vice dealers, and all sorts of others who want some sort of unregulated asset.
It used to be gold and jewels, crypto is easier to transfer with the downside of being easier to track.
There's also a shitload of grey market use where the exact same sorts of things would be used along with cash, that bitcoin has wedged in on.
So yes, it's an ok store of value. It is vastly more risky than other traditional stores of value due to the swings, but it's also a hell of a lot easier to acquire, store, and pay for services with. If you've got $1 million in crypto or gold for some shady deal, one of those is a hell of a lot easier to transport.
This already puts it in an asset class beyond speculative/rare collectables, although there's some overlap with art. The "underlying tech" depending on your definition already has uses, just not in currency. Bitcoin is an interesting use of a method of decentralized validation and the fact it's still chugging around years later pretty much proves it has some use case. I do see it failing eventually for other tech/financial reasons (a HUGE upside of bitcoin, and crypto in general is the lack of regulation, which will go away as regulatory agencies catch up), and I'm suspicious if there's any value beyond "bitcoin" and then "something that's bitcoin without bitcoin's tech issues".
Even still, one of the major upsides of bitcoin is it being "feature locked". Unlike basically every other project, be it because the creator is dead or disappeared, bitcoin hasn't changed in forever. This also helps add some consistency to the product.
I'm gonna respectfully disagree with everything you just said. Bitcoin is uniquely suited for crime because of its lack of recourse. Code is law? Mistype a character? Gone. Click on the wrong...
I'm gonna respectfully disagree with everything you just said.
Bitcoin is uniquely suited for crime because of its lack of recourse. Code is law? Mistype a character? Gone. Click on the wrong link, bye. " Excuse me local police man, I mistyped my seed phrase and now all my Disney Dollars belong to someone else." .....click dial tone. It is literally the best thing to use to scam people. it isn't useful, intuitive or secure enough for the average user. (And by secure I mean secure against human nature and stupidity)
To your point, criminal organizations use it to bypass sanctions launder money. I feel like this is the only thing keeping it afloat. The thing keeping this unstable plate spinning alive is major whales who understand that their is very little real money left in this system. They wont cash out because the illusion of value allows them to keep the scam going. It sets the table for all the wonderful scams and outright illegal activity.
Feature locked is an upside? I feel like you could have just written "this is good for Bitcoin"
The "tech" exists and has existed for 15 years now. The sun is setting on this line of thinking. Anyone can use it for something useful. Shit, I bet there is someone out there right now using Blockchain for something very specific where it is the best solution to their specific problem. It just isn't the solution for anyone else.
I don't disagree. But that's a use case, and again, mostly due to lack of official regulation. Bitcoin is, in most cases, extremely transparent. Tracking a wallet has some issues if it's new, but...
Bitcoin is uniquely suited for crime because of its lack of recourse. Code is law? Mistype a character? Gone. Click on the wrong link, bye. " Excuse me local police man, I mistyped my seed phrase and now all my Disney Dollars belong to someone else." .....click dial tone. It is literally the best thing to use to scam people. it isn't useful, intuitive or secure enough for the average user. (And by secure I mean secure against human nature and stupidity)
I don't disagree. But that's a use case, and again, mostly due to lack of official regulation. Bitcoin is, in most cases, extremely transparent. Tracking a wallet has some issues if it's new, but tracking transactions to and from it is not. Making a coin/wallet that handles these things better is again just a matter of regulation need, and of course, yes, no one wants it because they're profiting off the lack of both.
To your point, criminal organizations use it to bypass sanctions launder money. I feel like this is the only thing keeping it afloat.
I think people miss that while yes, illegal activity keeps bitcoin afloat, it's VERY afloat and the definition of illegal activity varies a lot. College students buying LSD or cocaine, Cartels doing human trafficking, and people in countries with absurd inflation trying to avoid using their local currency are all a part of the system. It clearly shows a demand for something in that niche, and bitcoin currently fills it.
Feature locked is an upside? I feel like you could have just written "this is good for Bitcoin"
I mean, anything is an upside or a downside depending, but yes? When was the last time real currency rules changed? It happens ALL THE TIME in crypto and it's a major problem. The stability of bitcoin is one of the reasons it's stuck around. There can't be changes (maybe sorta kinda, another issue).
The "tech" exists and has existed for 15 years now. The sun is setting on this line of thinking. Anyone can use it for something useful. Shit, I bet there is someone out there right now using Blockchain for something very specific where it is the best solution to their specific problem. It just isn't the solution for anyone else.
Not sure what you're getting at here because this is exactly what i'm talking about? Blockchain has some interesting uses in security when you want decentralized validation of data. It's a SUPER niche use and mostly for backend security systems with multiple validators. It arguably predates crypto and bitcoin (maybe not the exact tech but the concept).
Crypto doesn't really have a use case. It's a distributed trust/concensus system at it's core. The problem is that no one wants that. Even in the use case of money, people want to be able to...
Crypto doesn't really have a use case. It's a distributed trust/concensus system at it's core. The problem is that no one wants that. Even in the use case of money, people want to be able to reverse a fraudulent transaction. Well, that requires a central authority which completely invalidates the distributed trust since now it's irrelevant. A central authority is at the core of every damn crypto I've ever heard, but if that's the case it's much simpler for the central authority to be the content host. The only thing crypto ads is the ability to waste electricity.
Even if there's some miraculous system that doesn't require a central authority, there's still the majority issue. If any user or group gained majority share of the system, they could then insert anything they wanted to. And what are you going to do to stop them? Go to another chain that's just as vulnerable? Go to the non existent central authority to complain?
I mean i'm not arguing 90% of this. I'm just pointing out that "doesn't have a use case" and "has billions if not trillions transacting around" is not really equatable. I agree that the majority...
I mean i'm not arguing 90% of this. I'm just pointing out that "doesn't have a use case" and "has billions if not trillions transacting around" is not really equatable.
I agree that the majority of the use case has probably already been found, and is on shaky ground, and there's all sorts of issues with long term computation and bad actor issues with validators, and that's just for bitcoin and not the sea of other coins that are basically just trash.
Again it's found a major use case in grey/black markets simply because it's not like you had a central authority to undo a transaction before. There are some interesting tech solutions to that (there are coins that have such systems built in and wallets that handle this as well, but that's a whole other thing), so if it were just that I think we'd see more, but again this is getting way off the topic.
I just don't see the point in over exaggerating downsides or upsides. It is in use. It is a weird/sketchy/strange niche use for many people, but it's got a use.
That is true of fiat currency but there are centuries of laws designed around protecting and guaranteeing it's value which are imposed by the government. Cryptocurrency doesn't really have that to...
That is true of fiat currency but there are centuries of laws designed around protecting and guaranteeing it's value which are imposed by the government. Cryptocurrency doesn't really have that to a meaningful extent.
Gold and other material-based currency has value because those materials have real-world uses in addition to market value because of their scarcity.
Sorta kinda yes no? Currency in general is sorta just debt. Assume no money. I agree to do your taxes for you if you feed me dinner. I did your taxes, you gave me food. A possibly equitable trade....
Sorta kinda yes no?
Currency in general is sorta just debt.
Assume no money.
I agree to do your taxes for you if you feed me dinner. I did your taxes, you gave me food. A possibly equitable trade.
Well maybe i'm not hungry, so you give me a "voucher" instead equal to the amount of food worth what I could've gotten. You "owe" me. Obviously the next step is to just say that you specifically don't owe me, but someone somewhere will honor this "debt" for a similar value.
From that POV, the value of any currency is the value of the society that honors it. This is partially social, but also tied to the societies ability to produce. If it's just you, me, and a guy who makes shoe laces...well the value of that voucher is questionable. In the modern age, it's you, me, and empires that produce trillions in value every year. The actual "value" is the societies production/ability to output, which far outstrips the value of gold or any other precious material. It's not "we agreed this is worth $1 million". It's "This society can produce $1 trillion, and you own X% of that"
Came back to Tildes after posting this a few hours ago, most interesting thing about the comments is that no one is directly addressing the points in the video, but rather having a meta topic...
Came back to Tildes after posting this a few hours ago, most interesting thing about the comments is that no one is directly addressing the points in the video, but rather having a meta topic discussion on if crypto has value. Interesting but amusing!
from the video description:
it seems like this is basically an ad for the crypto wallets this guy is selling?
Feel like this is the biggest thing preventing cryptocurrency from taking off. Everyone offering any constructive critique is shilling something else. Anyone promoting crypto is a bagholder. I think the tech has potential but no one has figured out how to separate it from greed.
the original Bitcoin whitepaper was published in 2008.
cryptocurrency and the blockchain have had 15 years to show off their "potential". that's a long time in general, but a lifetime in the tech industry.
at a certain point I think we need to admit that similar to the Hashcash system for spam prevention that preceded it, cryptocurrency is interesting as a technology but lacks meaningfully useful real-world applications.
I mean...bitcoin does have a very obvious real world use case, but it's just an asset/store of value. Maybe it shouldn't be, but the market says it is because it's filling a few niches.
The underlying tech of blockchain has realworld, in use, use cases.
The ZILLIONS of other coins is where shit gets real murky. Bitcoin has long term issues that will one day be a problem, and then maybe something else will matter more, but most of these "coins" probably shouldn't be coins, or are looking for a problem to solve.
IF crypto winds up more integrated in society, most of it will be on the backend, much like an IP address. I don't see a world where you have 30 different coins sitting in some wallet somewhere, even if that's the reality of the backend.
The "greed" issues everyone brings up are issues for every single technology everywhere, and if you can't overcome that your tech doesn't fill a purpose.
Bitcoins one obvious use case is crime. It's great for fraud and evading government sanctions.
It's wild swings in price make it a terrible "store of value" .
The underlying tech is so specific it lacks any broad use case. It's a " solution in search of a problem.
Crypto is gonna end up like high end MTG and Pokemon cards. Valuable to a very narrow group of individuals.
Editing some bad typos
Crime is a lucrative business. There will always be black markets, tax evasion, freedom fighters/terrorists, vice dealers, and all sorts of others who want some sort of unregulated asset.
It used to be gold and jewels, crypto is easier to transfer with the downside of being easier to track.
There's also a shitload of grey market use where the exact same sorts of things would be used along with cash, that bitcoin has wedged in on.
So yes, it's an ok store of value. It is vastly more risky than other traditional stores of value due to the swings, but it's also a hell of a lot easier to acquire, store, and pay for services with. If you've got $1 million in crypto or gold for some shady deal, one of those is a hell of a lot easier to transport.
This already puts it in an asset class beyond speculative/rare collectables, although there's some overlap with art. The "underlying tech" depending on your definition already has uses, just not in currency. Bitcoin is an interesting use of a method of decentralized validation and the fact it's still chugging around years later pretty much proves it has some use case. I do see it failing eventually for other tech/financial reasons (a HUGE upside of bitcoin, and crypto in general is the lack of regulation, which will go away as regulatory agencies catch up), and I'm suspicious if there's any value beyond "bitcoin" and then "something that's bitcoin without bitcoin's tech issues".
Even still, one of the major upsides of bitcoin is it being "feature locked". Unlike basically every other project, be it because the creator is dead or disappeared, bitcoin hasn't changed in forever. This also helps add some consistency to the product.
I'm gonna respectfully disagree with everything you just said.
Bitcoin is uniquely suited for crime because of its lack of recourse. Code is law? Mistype a character? Gone. Click on the wrong link, bye. " Excuse me local police man, I mistyped my seed phrase and now all my Disney Dollars belong to someone else." .....click dial tone. It is literally the best thing to use to scam people. it isn't useful, intuitive or secure enough for the average user. (And by secure I mean secure against human nature and stupidity)
To your point, criminal organizations use it to bypass sanctions launder money. I feel like this is the only thing keeping it afloat. The thing keeping this unstable plate spinning alive is major whales who understand that their is very little real money left in this system. They wont cash out because the illusion of value allows them to keep the scam going. It sets the table for all the wonderful scams and outright illegal activity.
Feature locked is an upside? I feel like you could have just written "this is good for Bitcoin"
The "tech" exists and has existed for 15 years now. The sun is setting on this line of thinking. Anyone can use it for something useful. Shit, I bet there is someone out there right now using Blockchain for something very specific where it is the best solution to their specific problem. It just isn't the solution for anyone else.
I don't disagree. But that's a use case, and again, mostly due to lack of official regulation. Bitcoin is, in most cases, extremely transparent. Tracking a wallet has some issues if it's new, but tracking transactions to and from it is not. Making a coin/wallet that handles these things better is again just a matter of regulation need, and of course, yes, no one wants it because they're profiting off the lack of both.
I think people miss that while yes, illegal activity keeps bitcoin afloat, it's VERY afloat and the definition of illegal activity varies a lot. College students buying LSD or cocaine, Cartels doing human trafficking, and people in countries with absurd inflation trying to avoid using their local currency are all a part of the system. It clearly shows a demand for something in that niche, and bitcoin currently fills it.
I mean, anything is an upside or a downside depending, but yes? When was the last time real currency rules changed? It happens ALL THE TIME in crypto and it's a major problem. The stability of bitcoin is one of the reasons it's stuck around. There can't be changes (maybe sorta kinda, another issue).
Not sure what you're getting at here because this is exactly what i'm talking about? Blockchain has some interesting uses in security when you want decentralized validation of data. It's a SUPER niche use and mostly for backend security systems with multiple validators. It arguably predates crypto and bitcoin (maybe not the exact tech but the concept).
Crypto doesn't really have a use case. It's a distributed trust/concensus system at it's core. The problem is that no one wants that. Even in the use case of money, people want to be able to reverse a fraudulent transaction. Well, that requires a central authority which completely invalidates the distributed trust since now it's irrelevant. A central authority is at the core of every damn crypto I've ever heard, but if that's the case it's much simpler for the central authority to be the content host. The only thing crypto ads is the ability to waste electricity.
Even if there's some miraculous system that doesn't require a central authority, there's still the majority issue. If any user or group gained majority share of the system, they could then insert anything they wanted to. And what are you going to do to stop them? Go to another chain that's just as vulnerable? Go to the non existent central authority to complain?
I mean i'm not arguing 90% of this. I'm just pointing out that "doesn't have a use case" and "has billions if not trillions transacting around" is not really equatable.
I agree that the majority of the use case has probably already been found, and is on shaky ground, and there's all sorts of issues with long term computation and bad actor issues with validators, and that's just for bitcoin and not the sea of other coins that are basically just trash.
Again it's found a major use case in grey/black markets simply because it's not like you had a central authority to undo a transaction before. There are some interesting tech solutions to that (there are coins that have such systems built in and wallets that handle this as well, but that's a whole other thing), so if it were just that I think we'd see more, but again this is getting way off the topic.
I just don't see the point in over exaggerating downsides or upsides. It is in use. It is a weird/sketchy/strange niche use for many people, but it's got a use.
Someone isn't going to spend marketing money on how they're holding their assets in cold storage as a stable store of value.
Unless the cynical shilling (and other problems) is caused by some bigger, systemic flaw within crypto as a concept.
Although "The Cynical Shilling" is a marvelous name for a new cryptocurrency.
Cryptocurrency only holds social value, so if the problem with it is how society interacts with it then it's a fundamental problem with the concept.
I have no interest in cryptocurrency, but isn't that true of conventional currency--fiat or gold--and, frankly, everything else?
That is true of fiat currency but there are centuries of laws designed around protecting and guaranteeing it's value which are imposed by the government. Cryptocurrency doesn't really have that to a meaningful extent.
Gold and other material-based currency has value because those materials have real-world uses in addition to market value because of their scarcity.
Sorta kinda yes no?
Currency in general is sorta just debt.
Assume no money.
I agree to do your taxes for you if you feed me dinner. I did your taxes, you gave me food. A possibly equitable trade.
Well maybe i'm not hungry, so you give me a "voucher" instead equal to the amount of food worth what I could've gotten. You "owe" me. Obviously the next step is to just say that you specifically don't owe me, but someone somewhere will honor this "debt" for a similar value.
From that POV, the value of any currency is the value of the society that honors it. This is partially social, but also tied to the societies ability to produce. If it's just you, me, and a guy who makes shoe laces...well the value of that voucher is questionable. In the modern age, it's you, me, and empires that produce trillions in value every year. The actual "value" is the societies production/ability to output, which far outstrips the value of gold or any other precious material. It's not "we agreed this is worth $1 million". It's "This society can produce $1 trillion, and you own X% of that"
Just adding to this in case anyone likes wikipedia rabbit holes, what you're describing in the first section is double coincidence of wants
Came back to Tildes after posting this a few hours ago, most interesting thing about the comments is that no one is directly addressing the points in the video, but rather having a meta topic discussion on if crypto has value. Interesting but amusing!
Yeah same with me and the original reply, I walked away and came back to a heated debate. It’s so polarizing.