And why would that be?
Especially for funding the North Korean regime.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-18/how-north-korea-makes...
Great job.
This is very much a positive use case if you value individual freedom. Remember that any wall and border has 2 sides.
I can only name 1 person who is in this position you describe yet they are not fleeing Russia any time soon.
So according to your logic the North Korean hackers who borrowed $2BN in crypto are not criminals in North Korea's eyes despite the US government calling them criminals?
You might want to come with real world examples with a larger impact instead of tiny selective scenarios where almost nobody other than that 1 person would get themselves into.
Firearms and cryptography are two additional examples of things that provide a lot of utility to their users, both innocent and criminal.
This isn't a positive use case. It is a negative one.
So unless you are a criminal or you're sending ransomware to Joan from Nebraska for 0.5 BTC...
Nope.
Bitcoin and others can be officially settled in minutes to hours
https://wise.com/help/articles/2977951/why-is-my-transfer-ta...
But it might not be as pro-crypto as crypto-boosters think. Crypto was supposed to replace orgs like Visa. Now Visa is co-opting crypto.
It turns out that these entities are only getting into crypto for hiking up fees and centralisation, defeating the point of crypto in the first place.
Projects such as UPI in India doesn't use Visa or Mastercard and is rolling out worldwide, the exact solution crypto was supposed to solve, yet 15 years later no progress whatsoever has been made on the crypto front.
So crypto proponents have just been screeching for nothing but price speculation which isn't a use case at all.
>>Name one thing good about crypto
names it
“Welllll that doesn’t count.”
I have used Bitcoin to donate money to organizations the state would prefer me not to, such as Ukrainian defense, or Wikileaks (famously blockaded by banks without/before criminal charges).
There are lots of truly amazing cross-border use cases; permissionless internet money has huge utility.
NFTs allow fans to financially support visual artists via collectibles (potentially with resale value) in exchange for donations. (I say donations because buying an NFT does not purchase the art the NFT represents.)
Usually when I offer these use cases, people move the goalposts, saying how these things are somehow already possible (they aren’t, at least in the same way, or same speed, or same cost, or same level of privacy-preservation).
It’s nice to be able to transact without identity attached to every transaction.
So?
You can do all of this without crypto, there is nothing new or novel that crypto has done here.
> There are lots of truly amazing cross-border use cases; permissionless internet money has huge utility.
Same again, and in fact we have PayPal, Xoom, Wise, etc.,
Instead, you are asking normal people to rely on crypto exchanges to convert their crypto into fiat (with extra costly fees) through a complicated process in order to receive money.
This is neither innovative or novel, it just adds more needless complexity and is a regression from what already exists in the current financial system.
> NFTs allow fans to financially support visual artists via collectibles (potentially with resale value) in exchange for donations. (I say donations because buying an NFT does not purchase the art the NFT represents.)
This highly wash traded 'market' is down big, so by using NFTs you're not really supporting artists at all, you are driving down the 'value' of the collectible down to 0.
> Usually when I offer these use cases, people move the goalposts, saying how these things are somehow already possible (they aren’t, at least in the same way, or same speed, or same cost, or same level of privacy-preservation).
The reason why we have the current system is to reduce the amount of bad actors trying to defraud people, crypto just blows this right open to create a wild west of fraud.
How would the privacy preservation work with businesses, It wouldn't as no business would want to touch crypto and it is not worth the accounting hell for them.
> It’s nice to be able to transact without identity attached to every transaction.
This is called cash.