Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by lawn | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

lawn

> There are no use cases that aren't (already) better served by existing technology.

Repeating for the N:th time on HN.

* Porn

* Donations to wikileaks

* Pot

* Sending money to Venezuela

* Leaving Venezuela with your wealth intact

* Payments without giving all transaction info third parties (PayPal, VISA, etc)

* Digital payments for the unbanked

These are all served better by cryptocurrencies than other alternatives.

A common counterargument is fees are very high on Bitcoin. This is true but it's only an argument against Bitcoin not cryptocurrencies in general. See Bitcoin Cash for example.

View on HN

These are all uses for Bitcoin, not uses for general blockchain tech, so they're not "additional" uses. But for what it's worth, I think Bitcoin itself is superfluous, being covered almost entirely by:

- Gift cards

- PayPal

- Credit Cards

- Cash / Cashier's Checks / Certified Checks / Money Orders / Wire Transfers

It wasn't at all necessary to build Bitcoin, with its planet-destroying proof of work energy usage, to pay for porn. And besides, the essence of anonymous payments using Bitcoin is the tumbler, not Bitcoin itself (which is super easy to track, precisely because it's got a blockchain).

P.S. If your "leaving Venezuela with your wealth intact" is a "national currencies can be unstable" argument, remember that Bitcoin is extremely unstable and has no system in place to regulate or stabilize it. In fact, because it's often at odds with government monetary policy, there's a base instability that will never go away.

You're right I was simply talking about cryptocurrencies.

The point is cryptocurrencies is simply better at the use cases I presented. You're welcome to come with a better alternative, the ones you list simply doesn't cut it.

> It wasn't at all necessary to build Bitcoin

Actually Bitcoin was built to address the print on demand fiat currency driven by debt and unaccountable fractional reserve driven economy we have today. Giving people the ability to actually own their money for real and not just IOUs.

That digital cash is an excellent use case to pay for porn online is just a coincidence, never the purpose.

> with its planet-destroying proof of work energy usage

As opposed to the planet-destroying energy consumption of the fiat institution today? Or the tobacco industry? Or the military? Or any number of stupid usages of energy (which dwarfs the Bitcoin usage) we have today?

That it's somehow "planet-destroying" is just ignorant. It may be inefficient but it's self regulating and it cannot increase endlessly.

> And besides, the essence of anonymous payments using Bitcoin is the tumbler, not Bitcoin itself

Please see Monero or the shielded transactions of ZCash for how real anonymous payments look.

Also the pseudo-anonymous nature of Bitcoin is already better than the precise data we give credit card companies today.

> remember that Bitcoin is extremely unstable and has no system in place to regulate or stabilize it

Bitcoin is very volatile yes. Yet it's amazingly stable compared to the inflation of 4000% in Venezuela. It will also become more stable as it becomes adopted more.

> Actually Bitcoin was built to address the print on demand fiat currency driven by debt and unaccountable fractional reserve driven economy we have today. Giving people the ability to actually own their money for real and not just IOUs.

Bitcoin only has value because it can be turned into those fiat currencies, and is thus only valuable as an extension of them. So either Bitcoin is worthless, or it's essentially a super-encumbered fiat currency. Unlike basically everything else, it's neither a service nor a commodity. So sure, insofar as you can own ones and zeros you can own Bitcoin. But it doesn't matter _at all_ if you can't turn it into Dollars.

> As opposed to the planet-destroying energy consumption of the fiat institution today? Or the tobacco industry? Or the military? Or any number of stupid usages of energy (which dwarfs the Bitcoin usage) we have today?

This is all whataboutism.

> It may be inefficient but it's self regulating and it cannot increase endlessly.

By "self regulating" do you mean "requires more and more energy use to add new blocks"? That's not very comforting. Plus "it cannot increase endlessly" isn't an argument that inspires faith. "Sure the flu might claim a lot of lives. But it can't claim _all_ of them." See?

> Please see Monero or the shielded transactions of ZCash for how real anonymous payments look.

Please see Visa gift cards for how everyone on earth pays anonymously for things online. We didn't need any of that stuff. As a cool bonus, it's extremely unlikely that the $100 you spend on the card won't turn into $50 because a foreign government shut down a Bitcoin exchange.

> it's amazingly stable compared to the inflation of 4000% in Venezuela. It will also become more stable as it becomes adopted more.

I think it would be a bad idea to denominate your wealth in the currency of an unstable government. I also think it would be a bad idea to denominate your wealth in a currency with no regulation and no backing whatsoever. The only good idea here is to denominate your wealth in a currency backed and regulated by a stable, liberal government.

> These are all served better by cryptocurrencies than other alternatives.

Excuse my ignorance, but why would that be the case?

The problem for porn and pot companies is while legal businesses credit card companies don't accept them.

In the case of porn sites they're forced to go through third parties which charge very large fees for each transaction.

Pot stores are also cash only. Unfortunately cash isn't possible to send digital which is what cryptocurrencies essentially want to be (the term "digital cash" is sometimes used). Interestingly there have been reports of pot stores going bankrupt when the nearby ATM has been removed.

The difference between 3rd party services like credit cards, PayPal, Apple Pay etc and cryptocurrencies is that nobody can prevent a payment for any reason.

This is also why it's better to donate to Wikileaks with cryptocurrencies instead of PayPal since PayPal can if they want to freeze Wikileaks account. In fact this has happened [0].

Another difference is that you don't need to trust a 3rd party to deliver your payment. This is why you can't send money to Venezuela via Western Union but you can with cryptocurrencies (as long as they have internet of course).

Leaving Venezuela's border means you'll get searched and forced to leave all your belongings. It's therefore very hard to bring your wealth with you as you'll most probably lose it or you can't carry it. With Bitcoin for example all you need to do is memorize or write down a 12 word seed and you can bring as much money as you want with you.

Finally it's very difficult to make digital payments in today's world if you can't get a bank account. In effect you're locked out of society pretty hard if this would happen to you. Cryptocurrencies are permissionless and is for everyone.

[0]: https://wikileaks.org/PayPal-freezes-WikiLeaks-donations.htm...

Thank you for the comprehensive answer! TIL

Not sure about digital payments for the unbanked. Are there any real cases of someone unbanked paying for something with crypto? I guess I can see how it could happen in theory.

I would if it were easier/cheaper than going to the corner store and buying a Visa Gift Card to make online purchases.

For example many homeless people have smartphones but they can't get a bank account. It can be really hard to pay your bills if you don't have a bank account today.

Adoption wise we have very long to go but the tech is here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com