Line Launches Its First Cryptocurrency 'Link'(linecorp.com)
linecorp.com
Line Launches Its First Cryptocurrency 'Link'
https://linecorp.com/en/pr/news/global/2018/20
23 comments
The interesting point here is that they aren't doing an ICO. This reads to me more like a blockchain exploration of a rewards system from a large company.
Far less likely to be a 'pump and dump' than the me too altcoin of the week startups who focus on ICOs and being listed on bigger exchanges instead of what value is actually being created.
Far less likely to be a 'pump and dump' than the me too altcoin of the week startups who focus on ICOs and being listed on bigger exchanges instead of what value is actually being created.
I wonder why all the new crypto projects are so complex.
When Bitcoin was invented, it was already a pretty complex solution to a problem that indeed should be tackled with new technology: Make payments easier and more independent of third parties.
So far, Bitcoin has not achieved this well. Yet, I think there will be technology that does.
But all those new projects are super complex. As if it is already time to build whole new ecosystems on top of the crypto tech we have.
But we don't have very useful technology yet.
When Bitcoin was invented, it was already a pretty complex solution to a problem that indeed should be tackled with new technology: Make payments easier and more independent of third parties.
So far, Bitcoin has not achieved this well. Yet, I think there will be technology that does.
But all those new projects are super complex. As if it is already time to build whole new ecosystems on top of the crypto tech we have.
But we don't have very useful technology yet.
> […] Make payments easier and more independent of third parties.
>
> So far, Bitcoin has not achieved this well.
The second goal is achieved spot on, it was one of the main reasons why Bitcoin was created in the first place.
The first goal, well, that one is a bit more complicated. What's missing are good apps with decent UX. Though keep in mind that wallet apps should be seen as something separate from the bitcoin protocol. The protocol is solid, proven, it's here to stay. What needs to improve are the apps. And out of the many apps. I usually recommend coinbase app. It's still the easiest way to get started (buy crypto using fiat), even if it's developed by a third-party.
The second goal is achieved spot on, it was one of the main reasons why Bitcoin was created in the first place.
The first goal, well, that one is a bit more complicated. What's missing are good apps with decent UX. Though keep in mind that wallet apps should be seen as something separate from the bitcoin protocol. The protocol is solid, proven, it's here to stay. What needs to improve are the apps. And out of the many apps. I usually recommend coinbase app. It's still the easiest way to get started (buy crypto using fiat), even if it's developed by a third-party.
The second goal is achieved spot on
First of all: To make a Bitcoin payment you need to install native software. At this point you are already 100% at the mercy of the author of that software. They can do whatever they want. To your secret keys and other data on your machine.
Second: Bitmain could ramp up their hashrate or group with another big miner, control the chain and reverse your transactions.
Third: As we have seen with Ethereum and the Dao fork, when the people in power decide to reassign value, they do. In this regard, a blockchain is not different from a government controlled currency.
As things currently are, I feel way more in control of fiat then of crypto.
I don't see wallet apps and miners as third-parties. These parties have inherent interest in crypto succeeding. If miners start attacking the network that hurts the value of the currency. In my view a third-party would be your ISP (that wants to deep inspect your packets to see who you are transacting with), or an government.
You are in control of fiat only if you are in control of your government. Not many countries are democratic. And even those who are, are often only so on paper.
You are in control of fiat only if you are in control of your government. Not many countries are democratic. And even those who are, are often only so on paper.
> "I feel way more in control of fiat then of crypto."
I have to agree. I know it wasn't meant to turn out this way, but with crypto almost all the wealth and power has been concentrated in the hands of a tiny number of unelected often anonymous and largely corrupt individuals. At least with the government we have (limited) role in their selection, know who they are, and let's face it they're almost certainly less corrupt than the shady characters now in control of crypto.
I have to agree. I know it wasn't meant to turn out this way, but with crypto almost all the wealth and power has been concentrated in the hands of a tiny number of unelected often anonymous and largely corrupt individuals. At least with the government we have (limited) role in their selection, know who they are, and let's face it they're almost certainly less corrupt than the shady characters now in control of crypto.
So you're saying a technology that has spawned a new market doing volume to the tune of $500 million per day is 'not very useful'? I disagree.
Anyway, a lot of the complexity in this space is indeed over-engineering and me-too engineering for problems that are already solved but that need to be 'customized' ever so slightly. In LINE's case they want the tech to line up with their business model so just forking Bitcoin is not necessarily an option for them (though perhaps they are using it on the backend or in some aspect of their architecture / accounting system).
Maybe their new system will fail, maybe it won't - but definitely if they are doing anything close to Bitcoin volume I wouldn't write it off as failure.
Anyway, a lot of the complexity in this space is indeed over-engineering and me-too engineering for problems that are already solved but that need to be 'customized' ever so slightly. In LINE's case they want the tech to line up with their business model so just forking Bitcoin is not necessarily an option for them (though perhaps they are using it on the backend or in some aspect of their architecture / accounting system).
Maybe their new system will fail, maybe it won't - but definitely if they are doing anything close to Bitcoin volume I wouldn't write it off as failure.
> So you're saying a technology that has spawned a new market doing volume to the tune of $500 million per day is 'not very useful'?
Well, actually that's pretty obvious. Most of the volume you speak of is just trading. Trading isn't very useful, especially when it's just speculations on speculations on virtual things that nobody really trusts enough to actually go whole-hog on.
Well, actually that's pretty obvious. Most of the volume you speak of is just trading. Trading isn't very useful, especially when it's just speculations on speculations on virtual things that nobody really trusts enough to actually go whole-hog on.
Yep. Trading doesn't create any kind of value by itself. Instead there's (obviously) friction involved, i.e. costs (small or big, doesn't matter, it's necessarily larger than zero). If all there is is trading then it'll all grind down to waste heat after enough time.
Person who trusts it enough to actually go whole-hog on it here: you are wrong.
Nobody really uses the internet, most of the traffic you speak of is just usenet boards and people pirating books. The internet isn't very useful especially when you can get all the information you need at the library. Nobody really trusts all these servers in different locations, it's to slow to actually go whole-hog on anyway.
The benefits of the internet at the time were time to access information, and the varying types of information (much of which couldn’t be provided by a library, such as email, or porn.) Bitcoin doesn’t win either of these scenarios: it’s somehow slower to transact in digital currency (specifically Bitcoin) than even hand to hand exchange of physical money - it’s faster for me to walk down the block and pay for a sandwich than for me to pay online with Bitcoin and have someone deliver it. Bitcoin isn’t really accepted anywhere. You can take cash anywhere and pay for anything. Same with credit for the most part.
Solve these issues and your argument might make sense.
And a friendly reminder that blockchain PoW systems are incredibly bad for the environment.
Solve these issues and your argument might make sense.
And a friendly reminder that blockchain PoW systems are incredibly bad for the environment.
[deleted]
Creating unscaleable energy wasting ponzi scheme mostly for darknet use is something which I personally call ultimate failure. Maybe not a technical failure, but it is sad chapter in humans history.
No, the sad chapter in human history was the era of fiat money in whereby governments monopolized and printed/inflated money supplies unchecked and without recourse. Thankfully that era is over, there is now competition in money itself which will help to peacefully remove this dangerous tool which has resulted in economic devastation & disparity worldwide; not to mention its financing of black ops, wars, cartels, and the grandest scams of all.
who enforces the value of crypto really though? what if china just one day starts enforcing a law where to run any mining you have to have an official license(that only state actors get). everyone else gets raided and shutdown. it's easy to see where professional mining rigs are for power companies due to their power consumption.
when is crypto TRULY going to be decentralized and not just limited to agents with immense mining power and exchange? what's the difference in crypto for the end user right now in non-first-world countries is what I want to know.
There is no easy way to convert existing assets into crypto without a framework nor to mine a economically significant chunk of crypto without an economically significant investment.
creating a wallet is easy sure but where do I find someone who can transmit value into my wallet so I can start transacting? there is a lack of an element of "bootstrapping" in crypto for the vast majority of users.
when is crypto TRULY going to be decentralized and not just limited to agents with immense mining power and exchange? what's the difference in crypto for the end user right now in non-first-world countries is what I want to know.
There is no easy way to convert existing assets into crypto without a framework nor to mine a economically significant chunk of crypto without an economically significant investment.
creating a wallet is easy sure but where do I find someone who can transmit value into my wallet so I can start transacting? there is a lack of an element of "bootstrapping" in crypto for the vast majority of users.
> when is crypto TRULY going to be decentralized and not just limited to agents with immense mining power and exchange?
You don't need to mine in order to use bitcoin.
> There is no easy way to convert existing assets into crypto without a framework
You can buy bitcoin at numerous places, or ask for it in payment.
> where do I find someone who can transmit value into my wallet so I can start transacting?
The same place you find someone who can transmit value into your bank account. Employers, customers, family and friends.
You don't need to mine in order to use bitcoin.
> There is no easy way to convert existing assets into crypto without a framework
You can buy bitcoin at numerous places, or ask for it in payment.
> where do I find someone who can transmit value into my wallet so I can start transacting?
The same place you find someone who can transmit value into your bank account. Employers, customers, family and friends.
Money is a service provided by a government.
People have always been able to print their own money, and have always been able to trade records of debt owed.
I really don't see it as some system of control to escape from.
People have always been able to print their own money, and have always been able to trade records of debt owed.
I really don't see it as some system of control to escape from.
If this happens a sad chapter, I'd think that this is more cheerful than the utter horror that happened during the 20th century.
The whole point of blockchain/cryotpcurrency was for (1) decentralization and (2) transparency, to instill (3) trust and (4) removal of red-tape fees/processes from traditional agencies/banks/domestic-government/medical/data-compliance/national-relationships, etc. At least that's how I see it. The use cases are more niche than people are led to believe in my opinion.
There are some actual use cases for cryptocurrency in Venezuela right now, and countries that have instable currency / government trust. Other examples, Zimbabawe. Decentralization can be a good thing. I see value in that, essentially becoming your own bank. There's security in that model to some extent, and also huge gaping risks as well (e.g. alot of cryptocurrency heists, volatility in a somewhat new market, emerging technology). I'd rather have my money in a bank under FDIC with 250,000 insurance coverage, split into multiple portfolios
Most of the money and volume just comes from overhype and trading. This might be biased, but traders like jumping on bandwagons, its what they enjoy. Trading doesn't really create value, at least for virtual things that most people don't have an entire grasp of. Just explaining how crytocurrency works is already complicated as is, its almost as bad as javascript fatigue.
I won't say that blockchain technology is entirely not useful. I have been told that its been incredibly useful in the medical industry due to (4) red tapes processes HIPPA data compliance, etc. Other examples would include energy markets, digital identity, supply chain mgmt, and asset tokenization. All very traditional red-tape processes involved that can be circumvented. Basically, blockchain/cryptocurrency is essentially an a high level API anyone can access but is only given partial CRUD permissions unless they have a private key to that wallet/secured-data block etc
I still think the cryptocurrencny market is getting oversaturated though. I'm always skeptical of when blockchain/crytocurrency gets thrown around though, its very buzzwordy.
Unless points (1)(2)(3)(4) are met, I can't get behind a project using cryptocurrency/block chain. Always start with the simplest solution first. I'm very skeptical of messaging app succeeeding off using blockchain/cryptocurrency, most people I know accept that privacy infringement is going to happen and backing up your files/systems locally is always a thing.
There are some actual use cases for cryptocurrency in Venezuela right now, and countries that have instable currency / government trust. Other examples, Zimbabawe. Decentralization can be a good thing. I see value in that, essentially becoming your own bank. There's security in that model to some extent, and also huge gaping risks as well (e.g. alot of cryptocurrency heists, volatility in a somewhat new market, emerging technology). I'd rather have my money in a bank under FDIC with 250,000 insurance coverage, split into multiple portfolios
Most of the money and volume just comes from overhype and trading. This might be biased, but traders like jumping on bandwagons, its what they enjoy. Trading doesn't really create value, at least for virtual things that most people don't have an entire grasp of. Just explaining how crytocurrency works is already complicated as is, its almost as bad as javascript fatigue.
I won't say that blockchain technology is entirely not useful. I have been told that its been incredibly useful in the medical industry due to (4) red tapes processes HIPPA data compliance, etc. Other examples would include energy markets, digital identity, supply chain mgmt, and asset tokenization. All very traditional red-tape processes involved that can be circumvented. Basically, blockchain/cryptocurrency is essentially an a high level API anyone can access but is only given partial CRUD permissions unless they have a private key to that wallet/secured-data block etc
I still think the cryptocurrencny market is getting oversaturated though. I'm always skeptical of when blockchain/crytocurrency gets thrown around though, its very buzzwordy.
Unless points (1)(2)(3)(4) are met, I can't get behind a project using cryptocurrency/block chain. Always start with the simplest solution first. I'm very skeptical of messaging app succeeeding off using blockchain/cryptocurrency, most people I know accept that privacy infringement is going to happen and backing up your files/systems locally is always a thing.
a new market doing volume to the
tune of $500 million per day
They have an exchange after all too called bitbox https://www.coingecko.com/en/exchanges/bitbox
New cryptocurrency press releases that read like press releases and spend all the time talking about company partnerships rather than the difficulties and trade-offs of decentralization almost always end up being pump-and-dump schemes in my experience.