And in fact they did just this when their vaults started bleeding money on an unfavourable position (JellyJelly). They handed out a closed source binary and the validators ran it immediately, closing out the market at an arbitrary price.
Hyperliquid being on chain in the traditional sense is fiction. You have a closed source piece of software run by closely controlled "validators" with additionally centralised components.
I think you would be surprised just how close to this depth of field look you can get with phone cameras these days. Its mostly digitally enhanced but it takes a real good eye to tell the difference.
It doesn't by itself, but it's a much better start. You can simply match up addresses with activity from other digital systems. That link is present in a global, transparent, up to the minute, cheap to ingest data source (the blockchain).
Comparing that to any other payment system (or combination of) where there is due process in collecting this information (hopefully accurate and valid) you're going to have a much easier time developing tools to detect and alert with Bitcoin.
A cryptocurrency is generally more easily spendable in an open market. The sell potential that a founder has with 75% of the supply is massive.
If I created a coin today and sold 1% of the supply to you alone, on what basis would you want to store any value in that currency? Given constant buy demand, The currency's market value is defined by what I do. This is why organic price discovery for a currency is important.
I can't remember the last time I could use paper cash. Beyond your daily groceries, everything is usually exclusively paid for digitally.
Surveillance on daily spends is not valuable. What's valuable is things connected to your identity, specifically associations with other individuals and companies.
Transacting the coin itself rarely has any energy footprint. It's the security of the network that requires the mining and that is very separate to signal using it.
Unless the idea is that by using another coin, they don't add to the security requirements. That's a dubious line of thinking.
This is so great to see. One of the big issues with IPFS was that ultimately the end users were mostly using public http gateways and not contributing by "pinning" the content. That is not distributed and therefore as centralized as what we had. There was no easy mechanism for end users to pin the content.
I hope that local nodes and pinning become default from here on.
What I struggle to understand is why the capital can be used with no fee (dydx - 2 wei). Why would someone contribute to such a pool that pays no interest as opposed to staking or lending somewhere else?
This practice is called "Brand bidding" and is actually extremely common among competitors. Occasionally companies will mutually agree to not participate.
It's actually surprising why it's not perceived to be more hostile.
An asset being speculated on does not rule that it does not have inherent value. Every asset has a speculative component, just look at the stock market.
> The beauty of a fiat currency is that you can maintain it's value simply by adjusting supply.
There is very little attractive about the idea that a group can devalue currency on a whim. That's exactly why people opt in to Bitcoin.
> Is there any sign that there is an over-supply of dollar which would justify leaving the dollar until it is crashed?
Should we take this approach, there would be nothing left, including the internet on which we conversate here. There were these exact arguments present against it.
It's unfortunate but the reality is that every advancement in society can and will be used for illegal and immoral activity. It is a matter of the greater good.
We've seen wikileaks deplatformed and there are many more instances that don't come with a legal power.
Not hard to imagine the same happening to "a platform promoting dangerous misinformation" as is the justification from YouTube.
Bitcoin doesn't appreciate on news. It's not a company and it doesn't necessarily have a product that is being constantly worked on. There is the odd software upgrade every few years but the core function never changes.
The value to which people are bidding is primarily 2 things.
1. Tolerance to threats, social or technological. This reduces with time.
2. Its increase in demand (yes, a lot of speculation) relative to the constant reduction of supply. I.e. scarcity.