Crypto has become the ultimate swamp asset(economist.com)
economist.com
Crypto has become the ultimate swamp asset
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2025/05/15/crypto-has-become-the-ultimate-swamp-asset
161 comments
https://archive.is/HpY1R
The history of crypto is pretty much a story of technical people creating something interesting with a cyberpunk/ open ethos - then the financial industry realizing it can be exploited to make money in ethically dubious ways, while simultaneously destroying the philosophy behind it. The bitcoin paper is still one of the most elegant technical documents I’ve ever read, a decade+ since it was published.
I’m not sure why this simple narrative isn’t more common, but one guess is that the media is largely dominated by institutional players (deeply plugged into finance) and the simultaneous “death” of cyberpunk & cypherpunk as original culture, rather than just a video game aesthetic. Makes me wish that Satoshi had released bitcoin in 1995 or 2005, when that culture was still alive.
I’m not sure why this simple narrative isn’t more common, but one guess is that the media is largely dominated by institutional players (deeply plugged into finance) and the simultaneous “death” of cyberpunk & cypherpunk as original culture, rather than just a video game aesthetic. Makes me wish that Satoshi had released bitcoin in 1995 or 2005, when that culture was still alive.
Crypto is the way it is because there are behaviors that are driven by perceived anonymity. We’ve seen it time and time again and fail to learn or understand the lessons.
I’m a child of the 90s. The exuberant promise of the wonders of free access to information really fell short and transformed the world in odious ways. We gave access to a vast swath of human knowledge, but instead consume gambling, porn and think the world is flat.
Crypto is no different. We created a means to transfer wealth like the modern financial system without any controls… and shocking… we created a fertile environment for cons and criminals of all stripes to operate at greater scale than ever before.
I’m a child of the 90s. The exuberant promise of the wonders of free access to information really fell short and transformed the world in odious ways. We gave access to a vast swath of human knowledge, but instead consume gambling, porn and think the world is flat.
Crypto is no different. We created a means to transfer wealth like the modern financial system without any controls… and shocking… we created a fertile environment for cons and criminals of all stripes to operate at greater scale than ever before.
> Crypto is the way it is because there are behaviors that are driven by perceived anonymity.
See Penny Arcade comic from 2004:
* https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19/green-blackboa...
See Penny Arcade comic from 2004:
* https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19/green-blackboa...
Further crypto is slower, less efficient and a way less convenient to use than centralised systems powered by traditional databases.
So while the regular internet might be host to Wikipedia as well as social media, the ONLY people switching to crypto payments are those who are willing to take the hit to evade the authorities.
So while the regular internet might be host to Wikipedia as well as social media, the ONLY people switching to crypto payments are those who are willing to take the hit to evade the authorities.
Because the people who control the narrative are _redistributors_, not _builders_.
Broadly speaking, I divide people into builders and redistributors according to their primary approach to life - not just their job but their belief system - both how they seek to keep themselves fed and what they enjoy doing.
The thing is, builders are driven by the need to create and that's what occupied most of their time and energy. Sure, they publish their stuff but that's not their primary driver.
Then redistributors notice what they've built and see ways to make money off of it. And because good advertising is way more effective at convincing people to give you their money than simply having a good product, in the end it's them who end up building the narrative because it's them who invest way more time into publicizing the thing.
---
(Note I am not saying all redistributors are bad, there are plenty of honest and socially positive jobs which don't build stuff but have a positive outcome for everyone involved. But I feel like increasingly more and more of the population is preoccupied by how to make the most money with the least effort.
Maybe I need better terminology and split redistributors into two categories.)
Broadly speaking, I divide people into builders and redistributors according to their primary approach to life - not just their job but their belief system - both how they seek to keep themselves fed and what they enjoy doing.
The thing is, builders are driven by the need to create and that's what occupied most of their time and energy. Sure, they publish their stuff but that's not their primary driver.
Then redistributors notice what they've built and see ways to make money off of it. And because good advertising is way more effective at convincing people to give you their money than simply having a good product, in the end it's them who end up building the narrative because it's them who invest way more time into publicizing the thing.
---
(Note I am not saying all redistributors are bad, there are plenty of honest and socially positive jobs which don't build stuff but have a positive outcome for everyone involved. But I feel like increasingly more and more of the population is preoccupied by how to make the most money with the least effort.
Maybe I need better terminology and split redistributors into two categories.)
I'm not so sure that cyberpunk is dead, it's just that Billy Idol has better things to do with his time than try to co-opt something his manager read about in WIRED. The broken-circuit-boards-and-leather NiN aesthetic lasted for so long that it can't really be revived, which is 100% fine. I think now that a ten year old laptop that can run Linux, tor, and i2p is worth $20 means that now is more cyberpunk than ever.
Maybe a better way to rephrase my point: money won and took over other sources of value. Technology became the biggest section of the economy.
Case in point: this site is called Hacker News and it’s run by a venture capital investment firm. Those two things (hacker/cyberpunk culture and VCs) would probably have seemed almost antithetical in the 90s.
Case in point: this site is called Hacker News and it’s run by a venture capital investment firm. Those two things (hacker/cyberpunk culture and VCs) would probably have seemed almost antithetical in the 90s.
Your original point is clear. In the 90s, these technologies and movements did not mandate supplication to authority, which meant some area where punk could still breathe. And atrophied.
I think money won some thousands of years before cyberpunk showed up.
Hippie and punk were really the same thing, with different haircuts. Both were useless beyond selling lifestyle.
"cyberpunk" always carried an aesthetic baggage that accomplished nothing, but there was still something there, and it is still there, if you know where to look. I think the deterioration of the political situation in the US and Europe has people dusting off their cyberpunk inclinations. I know that it has lit a fire under me.
Hippie and punk were really the same thing, with different haircuts. Both were useless beyond selling lifestyle.
"cyberpunk" always carried an aesthetic baggage that accomplished nothing, but there was still something there, and it is still there, if you know where to look. I think the deterioration of the political situation in the US and Europe has people dusting off their cyberpunk inclinations. I know that it has lit a fire under me.
I’m not so sure that’s a valid dichotomy. The cypherpunks were heavily anti-government libertarians and probably overlap a lot with the local VC crowd over a certain age. The cypherpunk I remember best was a horrible person who used to rant incessantly about gassing Jews on ba.foods and other usenet groups. To cast them as anti-capitalist altruists or even slightly left leaning is not very accurate.
> The history of crypto is pretty much a story of technical people creating something interesting with a cyberpunk/ open ethos - then the financial industry realizing it can be exploited to make money in ethically dubious ways, while simultaneously destroying the philosophy behind it
This is not 1995 anymore, when there was an air of naive optimism about technology, and everyone thought that would only be a force for progress and good.
When crypto was on the rise, many people warned against it. There were many who were skeptical.
Those who were building it were in on the grift. Gesturing to some shadowy cabal of people that subverted crypto into something it was not meant to be is just giving a pat on the head to people that were willingly building something very destructive for their own damn benefit.
"I was just summoning demons because they look cool, I didn't expect those evil cultists to sacrifice a child in a pentagram" is not a valid line of defense.
This is not 1995 anymore, when there was an air of naive optimism about technology, and everyone thought that would only be a force for progress and good.
When crypto was on the rise, many people warned against it. There were many who were skeptical.
Those who were building it were in on the grift. Gesturing to some shadowy cabal of people that subverted crypto into something it was not meant to be is just giving a pat on the head to people that were willingly building something very destructive for their own damn benefit.
"I was just summoning demons because they look cool, I didn't expect those evil cultists to sacrifice a child in a pentagram" is not a valid line of defense.
Ideological capture is something that any system inevitably faces once it becomes large enough. But the point is to evolve and grow, not stagnate on a fixed concept.
Personally, I think Solana does the best at balancing the original cypherpunk ethos while ultimately driving towards the future with crypto being the rails for natively programmatic global commerce.
Personally, I think Solana does the best at balancing the original cypherpunk ethos while ultimately driving towards the future with crypto being the rails for natively programmatic global commerce.
There is no cypherpunk ethos in a 100% premine.
The FTX collapse of 2022 was a blessing disguised as a curse. All of the VCs and speculators offloaded their SOL during the bear market.
You have to remember that for about a year and a half, everyone thought Solana was dead / doomed to fail.
You have to remember that for about a year and a half, everyone thought Solana was dead / doomed to fail.
> the media is largely dominated by institutional players
and also tech journalism as a whole is pretty abysmal to begin with
and also tech journalism as a whole is pretty abysmal to begin with
Speaking as someone who had a passion for journalism and wanted to become a journalist when I was in high school at the end of the '90s, these days I am comfortable with that industry being completely eradicated.
How did we get here? The Telecom Act of 1996 legalized cross-media ownership and an unprecedented degree of consolidation across all forms of media, news and otherwise. Those rules existed to promote local journalism and independent voices. We now have no local journalism and no independent voices that are staffed and budgeted for doing real, investigative journalism.
Now journalists say what their corporate parent tells them to say; the ones who refused were fired years ago. The ones who stuck around work really hard to obscure this fact because they're clinging to their jobs in a declining industry. We went from a press that was the envy of the world to a cartel of decaying shills. Either reform the industry and break up the monopolies or just terminate it and fire everyone.
How did we get here? The Telecom Act of 1996 legalized cross-media ownership and an unprecedented degree of consolidation across all forms of media, news and otherwise. Those rules existed to promote local journalism and independent voices. We now have no local journalism and no independent voices that are staffed and budgeted for doing real, investigative journalism.
Now journalists say what their corporate parent tells them to say; the ones who refused were fired years ago. The ones who stuck around work really hard to obscure this fact because they're clinging to their jobs in a declining industry. We went from a press that was the envy of the world to a cartel of decaying shills. Either reform the industry and break up the monopolies or just terminate it and fire everyone.
Commerce subsidizes journalism. Or art. Or any other "hobby", where i do something, that feels right for me.
I have time on the side, because working for the man gives me the freedom to do things other than surviving.
Long lives commerce and capitalism.
I have time on the side, because working for the man gives me the freedom to do things other than surviving.
Long lives commerce and capitalism.
This comment obscures/deflects from the issue. The issue is not that journalism is commercial.
The issue is that journalism is monopolized. The industry was restructured into an anti-competitive cartel.
It is oligarchic now, not capitalistic (it is no longer a free market).
The issue is that journalism is monopolized. The industry was restructured into an anti-competitive cartel.
It is oligarchic now, not capitalistic (it is no longer a free market).
I've followed crypto since late 2011, and the ideology today is completely detached from what it used to be. Back in the day you had crypto maximalists that mainly viewed it as freedom from authority, regulations, and traditional banking. No more expensive fees for sending cash, no more third parties like PayPal to charge fees and potentially freeze your money. Detaching your wealth from political systems.
Yes, a lot of techno anarchist and ancaps were part of the scene - with grand dreams of defi taking over the world.
These days it has just evolved into play money for finance bros and hedge funds, and more lately, a mechanism for circumventing corruption for the powerful and wealthy.
Yes, a lot of techno anarchist and ancaps were part of the scene - with grand dreams of defi taking over the world.
These days it has just evolved into play money for finance bros and hedge funds, and more lately, a mechanism for circumventing corruption for the powerful and wealthy.
I'm not sure the evolution you're describing is as much of a change as it might superficially appear to be. The modern crypto participants may look different than the original enthusiasts, but the philosophy of being free from authority and regulations is still 100% there. It's just that instead of it being about scrappy cypherpunk rebels, it's about billionaires who want to use their wealth to supplant governments and usher in a techno-feudalism future or whatever. Of course some folks are just in it for the get rich quick scams, but there is an obvious ideology around the cryptocurrency space today that is still anti-authority but for all the wrong reasons.
Yeah. It reveals the basic truth that if we have no government, laws or regulation we ultimately end up with the rich and powerful controlling things and doing what they want.
It’s the natural result of the technology’s original goal to be “unstoppable” and beyond regulation or laws.
Makes it a perfect place to run investment frauds, scams, Ponzi schemes and other activities that would be illegal in the regular financial sector. Also attracts criminals, tax evaders and money launderers.
Meanwhile it’s slow and cumbersome enough that anyone not seriously motivated to operate beyond the reach of the law stick with existing systems for convenience.
Makes it a perfect place to run investment frauds, scams, Ponzi schemes and other activities that would be illegal in the regular financial sector. Also attracts criminals, tax evaders and money launderers.
Meanwhile it’s slow and cumbersome enough that anyone not seriously motivated to operate beyond the reach of the law stick with existing systems for convenience.
That's the thing where if you have significant assets your family members get kidnapped until you irreversibly transfer those assets to criminals, right?
I'm not sure how crypto continues to gain mainstream adoption in the face of that, no matter how much excitement there is for it in the current US administration.
My previous argument was that a technology where losing your password means you lose your net worth was incompatible with how human beings actually work. This kidnapping thing appears to be getting a whole lot more media coverage than that.
I'm not sure how crypto continues to gain mainstream adoption in the face of that, no matter how much excitement there is for it in the current US administration.
My previous argument was that a technology where losing your password means you lose your net worth was incompatible with how human beings actually work. This kidnapping thing appears to be getting a whole lot more media coverage than that.
The irreversible transfer is a large part of the attraction isn't it? Your business policy may be "no refunds", but customers paying with credit cards have a decent chance of a refund from Visa or MasterCard. Now your "no refunds" business, which might be on the scammy side, has to deal with Visa's lawyers per charge backs.
Irreversible transactions make scammy businesses more profitable.
Irreversible transactions make scammy businesses more profitable.
Sure, that's attractive to vendors. It's not attractive to consumers.
Hence advocating cryptocurrency based on other aspects of it. Irreversible transactions plus decentralized means scammy businesses are more profitable and harder to be rid of.
Kidnapping and ransom existed before crypto
Reducing the barrier to successfully executing a kidnapping-for-cash turns out to make that crime more common.
That’s not his argument. You must ensure the anonymity of criminals in order to also protect the anonymity of your innocent relatives.
Yeah but “being your own bank”, keeping all your savings under the mattress, makes your house a lot more inviting target.
Likewise being able to ransom people half way across the world and knowing there is an irreversible way you can get them to transfer the money across borders makes ransomware possible.
Likewise being able to ransom people half way across the world and knowing there is an irreversible way you can get them to transfer the money across borders makes ransomware possible.
So did pump and dump scams, but crypto brought in a new golden age of pumping and dumping. It's a matter of scale and ease of execution.
Getting kidnapped happens against victim's will, whereas getting into a global PvP casino, taking a risk and getting burned is self-inflicted. Sure, it's easy to fall into it when everyone, especially celebrities shill these scams but still, nobody's holding gun to anyone's head here. I've bet on wrong thing many times but ultimately it was my choice
Are you really arguing that victims of scams deserve it if no violence or coercion was involved?
Absolutely not, it's not up to me or you to decide whether someone deserves to be scammed. Just saying it's a gamble many choose to take.
That's sort of the point, I think. It's like buying an index tracker in the underground economy.
eh, it was fair to say that 8 years ago...
now it's way easier to track public blockchain transaction chains on Bitcoin, Ethereum and the like than it is to track bank transfers across countries
now it's way easier to track public blockchain transaction chains on Bitcoin, Ethereum and the like than it is to track bank transfers across countries
Sure but you skip across borders, use mixers, over the counter trades and dodgy offshore exchanges.
It’s not that hard to cover your tracks. And sometimes it doesn’t matter if your beyond the reach of the authorities in the country the crimes were committed.
It’s not that hard to cover your tracks. And sometimes it doesn’t matter if your beyond the reach of the authorities in the country the crimes were committed.
Yet once you strip out speculation the underground economy is still by far the predominant user of blockchain transactions.
Bank transfers are A) linked to a passport and B) can be blocked.
Bank transfers are A) linked to a passport and B) can be blocked.
That's the thing, fighting against kings and monarchs with a stranglehold on the colonies means you get invaded by a world superpower, right? Who would tolerate fighting for freedom if it means getting murdered? Such a short sighted pursuit that won't lead to anything better, it is foolish. Clearly we should bow down before the supreme authority and accept their benevolent ruling. /s
History has this way of repeating itself. And it seems the blind will never see. Those who can see, just keep working. Talk is cheap. We will drag humanity into the future kicking and screaming if needed, because we know what waits for us on the other side.
History has this way of repeating itself. And it seems the blind will never see. Those who can see, just keep working. Talk is cheap. We will drag humanity into the future kicking and screaming if needed, because we know what waits for us on the other side.
Well, this article is about the difference between USA (with its first businessman president) and the rest of the world. The businessman president offers the cheapest talk, and the greatest return on investment for those who can afford a private audience. The accelerationist future — is this what you mean by kicking and screaming?
Kidnapping for ransom was a thing in human history even before money was invented.
And money could be lost in many other irreversible scenarios, like fire, government confiscation or devaluation.
So was speculation.
Crypto is just another value carrier. Password is just a risk factor, like trust in govt is.
So was speculation.
Crypto is just another value carrier. Password is just a risk factor, like trust in govt is.
Banks can potentially act as gateways that prevent large transactions that are otherwise possible with crypto. They can do this simply by saying that for any amount above a certain level, you need to attend in person.
The whole "time immemorial" argument is a little silly when we put it in the context of modernity: we have safeguards people didn't have "before money was invented" because we're the beneficiaries of a sophisticated set of social rules intended to protect people. Getting rid of those safeguards because they're recent is fairly likely to make our lives worse.
The whole "time immemorial" argument is a little silly when we put it in the context of modernity: we have safeguards people didn't have "before money was invented" because we're the beneficiaries of a sophisticated set of social rules intended to protect people. Getting rid of those safeguards because they're recent is fairly likely to make our lives worse.
My point wasn't just to awe crypto. For me it is just another asset/vehicle for diversification.
And you never know when safeguards will turn against the beneficiaries, like Freedom Convoy https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-banks-ottaw...
And you never know when safeguards will turn against the beneficiaries, like Freedom Convoy https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-banks-ottaw...
Crypto should be taking off in use in the AI age. Right now I have credits I paid open AI for so I can use their API. I have anthropic credits, I have some credits in a video generator app.
A2A is becoming a thing, and now it's a realistic thing to potentially expose an agent on a public endpoint to do useful work. Agents working with agents is a very clear future direction.
But everything is a closed ecosystem. But with the addition of a few extra fields to an Agent card (chain name, accepted tokens, cost) and perhaps a transaction addition to the task/send interface. We could build a network of agents working for agents. Compatible with each other. It doesn't have to be all on-chain. It's just the economic layer. You host the agent, the agent accepts payments. The agent makes payments. All the crypto tech we need already exists.
Use USDC, don't have to worry about speculation driving up costs. Use a network like SOL, AVAX, SUI and the transaction will be finalized in seconds.
Credits should be transferable, and not locked in little ecosystem.
We could take it one stop further. Prices could be dynamic. If GPU usage is high, cost should be high. If demand low, price should be low. Outages are a pricing issue, not a technical issue.
A2A is becoming a thing, and now it's a realistic thing to potentially expose an agent on a public endpoint to do useful work. Agents working with agents is a very clear future direction.
But everything is a closed ecosystem. But with the addition of a few extra fields to an Agent card (chain name, accepted tokens, cost) and perhaps a transaction addition to the task/send interface. We could build a network of agents working for agents. Compatible with each other. It doesn't have to be all on-chain. It's just the economic layer. You host the agent, the agent accepts payments. The agent makes payments. All the crypto tech we need already exists.
Use USDC, don't have to worry about speculation driving up costs. Use a network like SOL, AVAX, SUI and the transaction will be finalized in seconds.
Credits should be transferable, and not locked in little ecosystem.
We could take it one stop further. Prices could be dynamic. If GPU usage is high, cost should be high. If demand low, price should be low. Outages are a pricing issue, not a technical issue.
Sure, but a) this doesn't require blockchain, and b) there's no incentive for the various players to make credits portable.
I'm tired of the "this doesn't require blockchain" argument. The alternative is a centralized entity that controls payments. Is that REALLY your preferred solution?
Yes. Nothing about this needs to be modeled for adversarial agents.
The alternative is continually watching over my shoulder for some sort of scam because I have no recourse.
And agents just make it easier.
And agents just make it easier.
It's the AI companies' preferred solution. You're free to host your own agent that takes crypto, but the other agents you expect your agent to interact with will want you to buy non-transferable credits up front. Why would they join in on a decentralized system that doesn't benefit them?
I am not following where (in your initial message) you stated that “centralized entity that controls the payments is not good”
Are you talking about a stablecoin crypto? Because why would I buy tokens on a chain where the value of the tokens can change wildly from day to day? How do the services that accept those tokens value them and charge appropriately?
Yes, I’d rather start a bank chartered with my own rules that leverages regulation, and only use the existence of crypto as an odorous alternative when negotiating service fees with Visa.
So you're saying cryptocurrency remains a solution in search of a problem?
clearly, that is not what I said. What I said is there is a very big problem (closed ecosystem of incompatible credit systems) that can be solved using this technology that does payments really well.
Can I go to any grocery shop, check out, and pay by sticking my watch to a terminal for one second? Can I go to any website, have my browser fill in the credit card details, and click "pay"? Can I submit a dispute if I get charged incorrectly?
Because that's my bar for "does payments really well".
Sure, I can't spend my Amazon gift cards for my Warframe platinum. Yeah, Amazon could strike a deal with Digital Extremes. And maybe I could even use that platinum on Fortnite skins. But their respective deals will happen in dollars, not dogecoins.
Because that's my bar for "does payments really well".
Sure, I can't spend my Amazon gift cards for my Warframe platinum. Yeah, Amazon could strike a deal with Digital Extremes. And maybe I could even use that platinum on Fortnite skins. But their respective deals will happen in dollars, not dogecoins.
Apparently one of the old school decentralized RPC providers (pocket network) has pivoted into being a way to access open data sources in a permissionless way. I think this is what you’re talking about?
https://pocket.network/case-study-building-a-decentralized-d...
I don’t disagree that it would be nice to be able to do this, but barring some black swan-esque event that changes how people see these things, it’ll probably always be somewhat niche compared to more permissioned or centralized systems. That or the decentralized systems will need to be VERY competitively priced to make the value-prop a bit more of a slam dunk for making this more widespread outside of philosophically-aligned hardliners and idealists
https://pocket.network/case-study-building-a-decentralized-d...
I don’t disagree that it would be nice to be able to do this, but barring some black swan-esque event that changes how people see these things, it’ll probably always be somewhat niche compared to more permissioned or centralized systems. That or the decentralized systems will need to be VERY competitively priced to make the value-prop a bit more of a slam dunk for making this more widespread outside of philosophically-aligned hardliners and idealists
> Crypto should be taking off in use in the AI age. Right now I have credits I paid open AI for so I can use their API. I have anthropic credits, I have some credits in a video generator app.
Sounds like things are working just fine without the extra cryptocurrency step.
Sounds like things are working just fine without the extra cryptocurrency step.
You can do this using OpenRouter; they accept USDC I think
I want a protocol, not a company that will act as a proxy.
that's neat
IMO the website is terrible. Instead of putting what actually is transmitted up and front it just tells you to use their wrapper libs as middleware with 0 reference to the wire protocol.
What HTTP headers are used? What's the body of the HTTP 402 response? The docs don't say any of that, they just say `npm install x402`.
What HTTP headers are used? What's the body of the HTTP 402 response? The docs don't say any of that, they just say `npm install x402`.
Yeah lets combine two technologies that need lots of energy.
Climate change is still a problem
A tired old debate devoid of facts. The chains I advocated for are proof of stake, and AI is a useful system worth the energy it uses. Should we not consume energy at all?
You've stated you're tired in several threads. Maybe you should take a break from the internet for a few minutes?
I highly doubt that the majority things AI is used for is useful.
I see lots of spam videos, pictures and texts that flood insta, Youtube etc. to monetize on ad revenue or simply scam people.
I think cryptocurrency aren’t any better if you compare legit uses vs criminal ones.
> Should we not consume energy at all?
No need for a strawman. Prevention of wasteful use doesn’t mean no use at all.
I see lots of spam videos, pictures and texts that flood insta, Youtube etc. to monetize on ad revenue or simply scam people.
I think cryptocurrency aren’t any better if you compare legit uses vs criminal ones.
> Should we not consume energy at all?
No need for a strawman. Prevention of wasteful use doesn’t mean no use at all.
> A tired old debate devoid of facts.
You are advocating for more fucking cryptocurrency.
You don't get to ignore any response as "a tired old debate devoid of facts".
You are advocating for more fucking cryptocurrency.
You don't get to ignore any response as "a tired old debate devoid of facts".
He wasn't ignoring anything, he was pointing out that that criticism is based on outdated information. Almost all modern blockchain designs (from the past ~10 years) do not promote energy waste via PoW.
It's fine to point out the energy waste of more traditional PoW chains (particularly Bitcoin, which accounts for the bulk of PoW), but to frame that as a problem with blockchains in general is misguided.
It's fine to point out the energy waste of more traditional PoW chains (particularly Bitcoin, which accounts for the bulk of PoW), but to frame that as a problem with blockchains in general is misguided.
PoS is sort of hard to bootstrap. ETH moved to it which was quite an achievement, but it’s difficult to see how it might have started that way.
If Bitcoin fails then it seems to me the bottom will fall out of all of crypto So all of it still depends on PoW propping up BTC.
If Bitcoin fails then it seems to me the bottom will fall out of all of crypto So all of it still depends on PoW propping up BTC.
I wouldn't say there any major technical hurdles to bootstrapping PoS, the project just has to decide where the initial tokens should go - insiders, ICO, airdrops, etc. Many modern chains have been PoS from the start, like Cardano, Solana, Algorand, Avalanche, NEAR, etc.
Or do you mean in the sense that (some argue) the most fair way to do an initial token distribution is PoW with no premine?
Or do you mean in the sense that (some argue) the most fair way to do an initial token distribution is PoW with no premine?
A problem of cryptocurrencies.
Blockchains are useful and need less power.
Bitcoin is still the biggest player in the cryptocurrency world, so still a lot of wasted energy.
Bitcoin is still the biggest player in the cryptocurrency world, so still a lot of wasted energy.
The next logical step is US Treasury Bonds to be redeemed in Crypto. The current administration is proposing a 2026 budget that adds $5 trillion in new debt (more spending than revenue). Jerome can't print money that fast.
Even the Fed is counting on the "economy to grow faster than the debt". It's like a fiction world. I fully expect a "crypto equivalence" executive order for things where the US can muscle trade partners.
Even the Fed is counting on the "economy to grow faster than the debt". It's like a fiction world. I fully expect a "crypto equivalence" executive order for things where the US can muscle trade partners.
I would be interested to know from a developer working in Crypto about how is the day-to-day work experience compared to working in a similar role in, say, a hedge fund. The latter is fast paced and I have heard that the former is too but would be interesting to hear from people actually in the seats.
Where would the crypto millionaires spend their money? They have to chase some real world assets such as homes, jacking up prices for those. So, for someone who invested in the real world assets, they see their asset value going up. It hardly matters where you invest. It's all in the same pond.
I just think its wild you all have subscriptions to the economist
Why? Probably the easiest and quickest way to get a read on everything that’s going on outside of tech and therefore understand the global context our industry sits in…
My local libarary has a subscription, I can access articles through their app.
There are some sites that sell them at a discount.
I don't. It's not that hard to read anyway. You can use the archive.ph version https://archive.ph/HpY1R
or the bypass paywalls extension, or probably a number of other ways.
or the bypass paywalls extension, or probably a number of other ways.
Crypto was a huge mistake. It should have been rigorously regulated right out of the gate to the point of being unusable for anyone. I have yet to see a use case that doesn’t amount to buying drugs or defrauding rubes.
Sending money without government interference to relatives living in countries with strict foreign exchange controls (Argentina, Lebanon, Turkey...) is one quite legit use case.
Cryptocurrency also empowers kleptocrats, dictators and warmongers to bypass sanctions and international banking controls, making it more likely that politically and economically oppressive states will thrive and persist for longer. The benefit to the individual is marginal compared to the benefits to actors that might limit that individual's other freedoms. Also, foreign exchange controls aren't the only form of taxation and there's nothing stopping governments from increasing taxation on something else to make up the difference.
Most arguments for cryptocurrency are just as weak as this one.
Most arguments for cryptocurrency are just as weak as this one.
Kleptocrats, dictators and warmongers have been around for way longer than crypto. If sanctions worked, the likes of Kim family or Iran's ayatollahs would have fallen in the 90s or 2000s.
Crypto allows my family members to bypass arbitrary restrictions set by one such kleptocrat right now so the benefit is very much more than marginal.
Crypto allows my family members to bypass arbitrary restrictions set by one such kleptocrat right now so the benefit is very much more than marginal.
They had to transfer gold, US dollars or other physical assets to finance their operations before which made them significantly more vulnerable and restricted. Sending crypto to your family is a temporary solution to the problem of the kleptocracy economically handicapping their capacity to generate and retain wealth. Crypto enables the kleptocrat to transfer the wealth they steal from their country internationally with a significantly lower transactional cost and at significantly higher volume.
By sending your family money, as crypto or US dollars, you have to assume some percentage of that money is going to end up in the kleptocrat's pocket. If the funds are eventually settled through official exchanges in the country, its very likely that the government gets a cut of the exchange transactions. If its being settled by unofficial exchanges like street exchange vendors, those individuals probably pay some bribe or tax to operate that eventually makes its way back to the kleptocrat. Additionally you are offering the kleptocrat increased liquidity by operating with crypto. Assume the kleptocrat is the largest buyer of cryptocurrencies in their country.
By sending your family money, as crypto or US dollars, you have to assume some percentage of that money is going to end up in the kleptocrat's pocket. If the funds are eventually settled through official exchanges in the country, its very likely that the government gets a cut of the exchange transactions. If its being settled by unofficial exchanges like street exchange vendors, those individuals probably pay some bribe or tax to operate that eventually makes its way back to the kleptocrat. Additionally you are offering the kleptocrat increased liquidity by operating with crypto. Assume the kleptocrat is the largest buyer of cryptocurrencies in their country.
Let's not assume foreign exchange controls are always bad.
Not saying they are not ... in some cases
Unfortunately to governments and law enforcements that looks identical to organised crime and terrorists sending money.
All three of those countries have restrictions/regulations on converting crypto currencies into local currencies - doesn't crypto just move the the problem to converting it to local currency?
All three of those countries have restrictions/regulations on converting crypto currencies into local currencies - doesn't crypto just move the the problem to converting it to local currency?
When it comes to receiving USD, EUR etc these countries do not tend to have restrictions, as the point of forex restrictions is to keep capital in the country. Hence, these countries are usually quite lax about KYC/AML stuff because they want hard currency inflows, wherever it's sourced from. The utility of crypto comes in when
1. You want to convert the "hard" currency into the local currency
2. You want to convert the local currency back to the hard currency
3. You want to send hard currency back
Often there are official rates set by the central bank in these countries, and then there are black market rates. Banks etc will convert hard currency to local currency only using the official rates, which tends to be a lot lower than the black market rate, so you get shafted by that in the first instance. Then, when you want to convert the local currency back, banks won't sell it to you because the government does not let them sell hard currency to the general population. Finally, sending hard currency abroad is usually de facto (and sometimes also de jure) banned so your money can't leave the country once it's in. And as a last resort if you say screw you I will withdraw e.g. USD notes and take a flight, banks will refuse to give cash hard currency.
Obviously crypto lets you sidestep all that as nothing can prevent you from sending USDT from your wallet.
1. You want to convert the "hard" currency into the local currency
2. You want to convert the local currency back to the hard currency
3. You want to send hard currency back
Often there are official rates set by the central bank in these countries, and then there are black market rates. Banks etc will convert hard currency to local currency only using the official rates, which tends to be a lot lower than the black market rate, so you get shafted by that in the first instance. Then, when you want to convert the local currency back, banks won't sell it to you because the government does not let them sell hard currency to the general population. Finally, sending hard currency abroad is usually de facto (and sometimes also de jure) banned so your money can't leave the country once it's in. And as a last resort if you say screw you I will withdraw e.g. USD notes and take a flight, banks will refuse to give cash hard currency.
Obviously crypto lets you sidestep all that as nothing can prevent you from sending USDT from your wallet.
> is one quite legit use case.
While it is useful for this case, it is not 'legit', in that its purpose is to by-pass (break even) laws of the country with the capital controls. In that sense, money laundering is also a legit use-case.
While it is useful for this case, it is not 'legit', in that its purpose is to by-pass (break even) laws of the country with the capital controls. In that sense, money laundering is also a legit use-case.
Legit from whose perspective though? Around an authoritarian government maybe widely viewed as reasonable/justified, but doesn't sound legitimate to those governments
Or, since it’s important to preserve the anonymity of my Turkish, Argentinian, and Lebanese relatives; it’s important to preserve the anonymity of the bigger users: ransomware C2 operators funding North Korean rockets.
To some particular psychopath out there, I’m sure murder seems fine.
> I have yet to see a use case that doesn’t amount to buying drugs or defrauding rubes
Russian here. My forgotten Bitcoin stash saved my ass multiple times by providing a way to transfer money to a friend abroad who then paid for my western expenses (hosting, VPNs etc.) using his Visa / MC cards.
Also, a lot of programmers who emigrated from Russia to countries such as Georgia in 2022 were using USDT as a way to receive their salaries.
Russian here. My forgotten Bitcoin stash saved my ass multiple times by providing a way to transfer money to a friend abroad who then paid for my western expenses (hosting, VPNs etc.) using his Visa / MC cards.
Also, a lot of programmers who emigrated from Russia to countries such as Georgia in 2022 were using USDT as a way to receive their salaries.
And also it helps your government to transact with Iran, India, and China in convenient currencies, bypassing US-imposed sanctions and prolonging current war and planning for the future ones.
Buying drugs doesn’t have to be an illegitimate use case. Depends on the person, the drugs, the safety of the marketplace, etc.
WikiLeaks was persecuted. Their credit cards processing was turned OFF. Bitcoin saved them. There have been free speech social media sites BLOCKED by Stripe and all credit cards, and debanked. They switched to crypto. Marc Andressen on Joe Rogan personally knows many dozens of people personally debanked because they were persecured by the government & debanked. Not for drugs or fraud.
Today's society cannot protect people that are easily influenced. Social media has brought remote fraudsters right into your aunt/uncles inbox. Some people are going to get fleeced unless their money is put into something that only dispenses PEZ amounts at a time. This increases if dementia occurs.
Who should regulate it? Due to its nature it is inherently extremely hard to regulate.
The technology is hard to regulate, but the exchanges where the overwhelming majority of fiat-crypto trades happen are regular old businesses which can be regulated or sanctioned just like anything else. Blockchain magic wouldn't stop the feds from seizing Coinbase's assets and hauling Brian Armstrong off to prison if they wanted to.
Yes, the fiat input and output are the only points that can be controlled, but even then they can only be controlled by the local governments. And as you can see all of them are late to the party.
Just like money laundering: choke it at the interfaces with the legitimate financial system.
There is lots of porn that credit card companies and proccessors don't want to touch. Plenty of kink sites have had problems with them, porn sites have blanket restrictions on keywords like hypnosis and shadow ban certain kinds of legal content in order to not get hamstrung by financial restrictions.
Also there are plenty of blackmarket goods that are heavily restricted and legally punished without good cause, and I do not believe just because something is "illegal" that it is automatically bad.
Also there are plenty of blackmarket goods that are heavily restricted and legally punished without good cause, and I do not believe just because something is "illegal" that it is automatically bad.
One of ours biggest customers is mainly used by Ukrainian refugees as easy way to pay abroad. USDC/USDT is simply cheaper and more available to them than regular USD.
It prevents centralized entities being the gatekeepers to the modern financial world. The US maintaining their own digital version of cash would also work, but the government is slow, and does not want to compete against these centralized entities due to being advantaged as the government controls the currency itself.
Payment processors essentially get to dictate what is and is not allowed to be financially viable which is a very powerful form of control over culture.
Payment processors essentially get to dictate what is and is not allowed to be financially viable which is a very powerful form of control over culture.
> It prevents centralized entities being the gatekeepers to the modern financial world.
In theory, but it doesn’t in practice. Most crypto transfers never make it to the blockchain, they happen entirely in SQL databases of exchanges.
Also, Tether has complete control over USDT and can block or reverse any payment or freeze any account it wants. No bank or payment processor in the world has such centralized control over the traditional financial system.
If anything, crypto is more centralized by comparison. Both in terms of payment processors as well as wealth distribution.
In theory, but it doesn’t in practice. Most crypto transfers never make it to the blockchain, they happen entirely in SQL databases of exchanges.
Also, Tether has complete control over USDT and can block or reverse any payment or freeze any account it wants. No bank or payment processor in the world has such centralized control over the traditional financial system.
If anything, crypto is more centralized by comparison. Both in terms of payment processors as well as wealth distribution.
>In theory, but it doesn’t in practice.
In practice neither exchanges or Tether have made any attempts at refusing to allow payments to legal businesses as far as I'm aware. So in practice it does.
In practice neither exchanges or Tether have made any attempts at refusing to allow payments to legal businesses as far as I'm aware. So in practice it does.
Whether they abuse their power is completely orthogonal to centralization. It’s also false. Just look at the amount of customer complaints in the Coinbase subreddit where they’ve blocked legitimate customer access.
What’s wrong with centralized entities? There should be financial gatekeepers. They are much better than whatever crime syndicates benefit from crypto
Crypto is just speed running the 19th century and making us re learn all the reasons why we made the pre crypto regulations.
Crypto is just speed running the 19th century and making us re learn all the reasons why we made the pre crypto regulations.
>What’s wrong with centralized entities?
Because the CEO of one could read a false news article about your site and prohibit you from transacting with them anymore. Your existence is at the whims of a few people.
Because the CEO of one could read a false news article about your site and prohibit you from transacting with them anymore. Your existence is at the whims of a few people.
[deleted]
If you can be objective enough to consider that not everyone likes keeping fiat currency, it was an interesting alternative.
Bitcoin generally appreciated, where fiat had inflation.
While the transaction costs/speed have eliminated this, there was a few years of my life that I both sent money to friends and used a Bitcoin debit card.
Bitcoin generally appreciated, where fiat had inflation.
While the transaction costs/speed have eliminated this, there was a few years of my life that I both sent money to friends and used a Bitcoin debit card.
If you don't like fiat there is always gold. If you really care about value, independent from the monetary system (post-apocalyptic safety), buy tools, grain, generators and oil, though many of these things are perishable and storage comes at a cost.
One must ask whether the Bitcoin valuation has raised 1000% because the fiat has inflated as much, or is it mostly driven by speculation. For reference point, the buying power of fiat currency has not changed dramatically during the same period.
One must ask whether the Bitcoin valuation has raised 1000% because the fiat has inflated as much, or is it mostly driven by speculation. For reference point, the buying power of fiat currency has not changed dramatically during the same period.
It’s funny, because the inflation of crypto comes not from the increase in the supply of individual coins (that’s controlled mathematically) but by increasing the number of cryptocurrencies themselves.
I’m not so sure I buy that. Do nondecreasing counts of NFTs and meme coins account for the psychological source of inflation?
That is a perverse use of "inflation" unless a holder of BTC or ETH were somehow forced to spend some of his BTC or ETH on every new cryptocurrency -- or it happened automatically, and for the holder to prevent it from happening was risky or tedious.
You don't think 1000% returns over the last 5 years is useful to anyone? During the height of inflation?
It's useful for evading illegal US sanctions, and sometimes also works just as a payment method. I paid a hosting provider with it earlier this year, and that actually worked well.
Not sure why you're being downvoted. Most of us don't live in Russia, but if we did, I am totally sure that may HN-ers would come up with ways to evade sanctions. It's either that or leave the country, which I am sure many aren't willing to do.
It's not like anything critical is affected by this. For ordinary people it's things like buying Western games, but those all have workarounds (e.g. through crypto).
- repatriating and distributing cartel drug money
- paying/receiving bribes
- bypassing international sanctions to finance wars
There's a lot of uses for cryptocurrency and only a very small fraction are good for individuals.
- paying/receiving bribes
- bypassing international sanctions to finance wars
There's a lot of uses for cryptocurrency and only a very small fraction are good for individuals.
You can buy drugs and defraud rubes with USD too.
Crypto has many different useful applications. One of the main ones: limited supply (I am aware not all crypto has a cap).
Crypto has many different useful applications. One of the main ones: limited supply (I am aware not all crypto has a cap).
> I have yet to see a use case that doesn’t amount to buying drugs or defrauding rubes.
Hey now. There's also trading child pornography.
Hey now. There's also trading child pornography.
> I have yet to see a use case that doesn’t amount to buying drugs
Society has been struggling for decades to overcome prohibition via political channels, and watching as multiple generations have been damaged by its impact on local economies, civil liberties, and the boon to criminal cartels.
Then, a mathematical solution arises which unambiguously undermines this regime, and somehow that's a bad thing?!
Society has been struggling for decades to overcome prohibition via political channels, and watching as multiple generations have been damaged by its impact on local economies, civil liberties, and the boon to criminal cartels.
Then, a mathematical solution arises which unambiguously undermines this regime, and somehow that's a bad thing?!
It's not a "mathematical" solution. The maths are cryptographic hashes and consensus protocols, means to some end - exchanging value.
You're proposing that it's a technological solution to a societal problem. These only last as long as a particular regulatory body / regime allows them to.
Mining. It has long been infeasible for anyone without prior capital and investment. Ban that - you can easily get a lead through the electricity bill - viola.
Private key custody. Even technologically-inclined individuals mess it up from time to time. Hence the proliferation of centralised services to keep the keys ("wallets") for you. Block the exchange. QED.
You're proposing that it's a technological solution to a societal problem. These only last as long as a particular regulatory body / regime allows them to.
Mining. It has long been infeasible for anyone without prior capital and investment. Ban that - you can easily get a lead through the electricity bill - viola.
Private key custody. Even technologically-inclined individuals mess it up from time to time. Hence the proliferation of centralised services to keep the keys ("wallets") for you. Block the exchange. QED.
Dont forget the “murder for hire” user story
Speculation is a legitimate use case.
There is substantially more to it than that but I will let you chew that over just to point out how blatantly incorrect your prior is.
There is substantially more to it than that but I will let you chew that over just to point out how blatantly incorrect your prior is.
Speculation is as much valuable use case as my nails are to be chewed. Sure, it works, doesn't mean it's a good thing.
An alternative to an inflated, state controlled currency is another use case. The last few years should have made that plenty clear.
Casinos, Financial Markets of all denominations, Horse Racing are also examples of pure play speculation. Speculation is often just a form of entertainment.
Your moral equivocation is utterly irrelevant.
Your moral equivocation is utterly irrelevant.
[deleted]
Money laundering is also a pretty large use case (https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/additional-12-defendants-...)
Let's regulate mathematics. No, it isn't enough...let's regulate physics itself. If we could just control when molecules are allowed to form, we could make it so mean molecules don't exist unless they're allowed to exist by our Council of Very Good People Who Have The Most Money. Since they have the most money, they know better than everyone else. /s
Did you know in some countries, a good loan for someone with perfect credit is 20% apr? Do you know in some countries police can confiscate all the money you have and never give it back? Have you ever heard of civil asset forfeiture? Did you know in some countries, just protesting can have your accounts frozen? Did you know in some countries, sending money can take over 3 days with no knowledge of what is happening to your money during that time? Did you know that Debit and Wire transfer often cost well over $20 to perform?
This list could go on for days. Only fools would speak about crypto so confidently without doing a minimal investigation into its utility.
Did you know in some countries, a good loan for someone with perfect credit is 20% apr? Do you know in some countries police can confiscate all the money you have and never give it back? Have you ever heard of civil asset forfeiture? Did you know in some countries, just protesting can have your accounts frozen? Did you know in some countries, sending money can take over 3 days with no knowledge of what is happening to your money during that time? Did you know that Debit and Wire transfer often cost well over $20 to perform?
This list could go on for days. Only fools would speak about crypto so confidently without doing a minimal investigation into its utility.
> Only fools would speak about crypto so confidently without doing a minimal investigation into its utility.
Only fools would speak about a technological solution without understating the reality, that technology still leans on society, power structures, and ability to enforce laws.
Civil disobedience works as a means to shift the rules, the balance of power; you can't maintain it perpetually. P2P eventually shifted the attention of the recording industry to online distribution. People jumped to Netflix and iTunes, because they became more convenient, while providing good value for the money.
Only fools would speak about a technological solution without understating the reality, that technology still leans on society, power structures, and ability to enforce laws.
Civil disobedience works as a means to shift the rules, the balance of power; you can't maintain it perpetually. P2P eventually shifted the attention of the recording industry to online distribution. People jumped to Netflix and iTunes, because they became more convenient, while providing good value for the money.
Look, I know it is hard for an ego to hear the things I say and the way I say them sometimes. For that, I am sorry. But I am not arguing with you, I am informing you.
Challenging media empires was child's play compared to challenging the world's financial system. Bitcoin has successfully illustrated a new and better way. Presidents have been killed for less. Civil rights activists have been killed for less.
Bitcoin and the crypto economy is now inevitable, just as gasoline vehicles became inevitable, and a nuclear armed world became inevitable. The world is changing, please do not let your self-identity interfere with the reality of this.
When a new and revolutionary invention becomes part of the human mental strata, you cannot take it back. This has never been done before since the knowledge of building a campfire or sharpening rocks. It doesn't matter how powerful, stable, beneficial, or otherwise the old system was. It has been super-ceded by something that outcompetes it.
That's reality. I hope that you and others like you realize it and have a prosperous life.
Challenging media empires was child's play compared to challenging the world's financial system. Bitcoin has successfully illustrated a new and better way. Presidents have been killed for less. Civil rights activists have been killed for less.
Bitcoin and the crypto economy is now inevitable, just as gasoline vehicles became inevitable, and a nuclear armed world became inevitable. The world is changing, please do not let your self-identity interfere with the reality of this.
When a new and revolutionary invention becomes part of the human mental strata, you cannot take it back. This has never been done before since the knowledge of building a campfire or sharpening rocks. It doesn't matter how powerful, stable, beneficial, or otherwise the old system was. It has been super-ceded by something that outcompetes it.
That's reality. I hope that you and others like you realize it and have a prosperous life.
I am not denying the transformative value. I am denying "inevitability".
ionwake(1)
What I'm always missing with these takes is the "what if" component. Nobody really dares to paint the whole picture in articles like this. Authors seem to go as far as to find the moral infraction, and then stop. But that doesn't do what is happening justice.
No, crypto does not need regulation. Law-based order needs crypto regulation. That's a big difference already. But we can go further than that. What if we don't get crypto regulation, what happens to law-based order exactly?
Trump is not the kind of guy to build businesses and create wealth. He more like kinda goes through them. He's not the guy to invest, he's the guy to cash out. Right now, he's cashing out of the US economy. Lots of real value is there for him to extract that is completely unprotected.
Trump is right. All those assets exist, and he can take them, destroy them, and liquidate them. He has that power. He is permitted. It is a programme, and his execution is successful. There's no point saying "but he can't do that, it would be unethical". Sure it's unethical, dumb, and nonsensical, but at face value, he can do all of that. No point in saying "but he can't do that, America would never be the same". That argument is reactionary, of course everything was going to change anyways.
So, let's face it. A president that is not going to miss his chance to join the true billionaires club (10+ b), a ruling class of industry leaders like it existed 120 years ago. Whether he stays president doesn't even matter. Government programmes are going down the drain, America's influence in the world deteriorates, trade volume breaking down, a less smart military will have to deal with more conflicts.
The only question in that turmoil is going to be what constitues a winner. Right now, everybody is buying crypto like lottery tickets, and it becomes self-fulfilling. Mid-term it might be Florida real estate. Long term? Who knows.
I'd actually like for somebody to really paint this picture and fill in the details. Stopping at the first inflection point that is somewhat scary is unproductive, we've been reading those takes for a year now.
No, crypto does not need regulation. Law-based order needs crypto regulation. That's a big difference already. But we can go further than that. What if we don't get crypto regulation, what happens to law-based order exactly?
Trump is not the kind of guy to build businesses and create wealth. He more like kinda goes through them. He's not the guy to invest, he's the guy to cash out. Right now, he's cashing out of the US economy. Lots of real value is there for him to extract that is completely unprotected.
Trump is right. All those assets exist, and he can take them, destroy them, and liquidate them. He has that power. He is permitted. It is a programme, and his execution is successful. There's no point saying "but he can't do that, it would be unethical". Sure it's unethical, dumb, and nonsensical, but at face value, he can do all of that. No point in saying "but he can't do that, America would never be the same". That argument is reactionary, of course everything was going to change anyways.
So, let's face it. A president that is not going to miss his chance to join the true billionaires club (10+ b), a ruling class of industry leaders like it existed 120 years ago. Whether he stays president doesn't even matter. Government programmes are going down the drain, America's influence in the world deteriorates, trade volume breaking down, a less smart military will have to deal with more conflicts.
The only question in that turmoil is going to be what constitues a winner. Right now, everybody is buying crypto like lottery tickets, and it becomes self-fulfilling. Mid-term it might be Florida real estate. Long term? Who knows.
I'd actually like for somebody to really paint this picture and fill in the details. Stopping at the first inflection point that is somewhat scary is unproductive, we've been reading those takes for a year now.
The inevitable bailouts will be breathtaking. We’re in a quadratic adoption phase to legitimize a currency faster than the public discovers its downsides. The first bailout will be in this administration and won’t look like an inflection point. It’ll look like printing fiat into a dark, lucrative, inaccessible hole.
Among average Americans, the biggest advantage for promoters is the widespread susceptibility to scams. FartCoin, $TRUMP, and BitCoin are equally buoyant unless you know just a little about the technology and culture. Demographics might change this before education does. That’s the second inflection point.
The third inflection point is how the politically-connected holders will manipulate hard forks, say due to a quantum breakthrough in Grover. Once we start seeing forged signatures, will we roll Ethereum back to last June? Or back to Tuesday?
Among average Americans, the biggest advantage for promoters is the widespread susceptibility to scams. FartCoin, $TRUMP, and BitCoin are equally buoyant unless you know just a little about the technology and culture. Demographics might change this before education does. That’s the second inflection point.
The third inflection point is how the politically-connected holders will manipulate hard forks, say due to a quantum breakthrough in Grover. Once we start seeing forged signatures, will we roll Ethereum back to last June? Or back to Tuesday?
There won't be crypto bailouts. The goal of crypto is to disperse it into the masses where it can lose all value. It losing value won't lead to any reaction, except for pumping some new crypto.
Trump wouldn’t have 180’ed on it if he wasn’t promised an actual windfall in fiat or land.
I am still wondering what money it was that predominantly went into crypto. Lots of retail investors lucked out between Tesla stock and BTC, but that can't account for all of it. I suspect a lot of shady money coming in from outside the US that raised the water level. Yet people talk about it like it's a co-op pension fund.
National bailouts going into an international fund are going to be a global power readjustment. Fun times.
My personal guess for an inflection point is civil unrest. Doge are already tightening the belts for the lower class. Nobody has really figured out how far they can take it. Police has been arming itself for the last decade or two, that started way before Trump, and they have been ready to thwart any uprising. But I am wondering if something is going to happen regardless. Civil war is only a bad idea as long as there are other options.
National bailouts going into an international fund are going to be a global power readjustment. Fun times.
My personal guess for an inflection point is civil unrest. Doge are already tightening the belts for the lower class. Nobody has really figured out how far they can take it. Police has been arming itself for the last decade or two, that started way before Trump, and they have been ready to thwart any uprising. But I am wondering if something is going to happen regardless. Civil war is only a bad idea as long as there are other options.