Anonymity might seem redundant to you and other people who "have nothing to hide". However, in a slightly more dystopian reality -e.g. when we are forced to use CBDCs- the government might choose to block you from using your hard earned money because you posted a criticism of the president on twitter.
Um, I don't really see how cryptocurrencies are going to help you much when that same government just tosses you in jail instead. In fact, there are governments in our present reality that will throw people in jail for saying the wrong thing on twitter, so that really isn't an outrageous thing to imagine.
> in a slightly more dystopian reality -e.g. when we are forced to use CBDCs- the government might choose to block you from using your hard earned money because you posted a criticism of the president on twitter.
I love when people out themselves as having never worked on anything significant. Yeah, sure, for your pocket change, I'm sure you can reasonably protect it. For any significant transaction, I want the ability to reclaim my money if the other side turns out to be fraudulent.
> the other side turns out to be fraudulent Crypto is not here to protect you from falling victim to fraud. It is here to replace a faulty and completely outdated financial infrastructure. The same laws against criminals apply whether they use crypto or not.
If you believe that financial regulations are the "nanny", you probably only have a child-like understanding of things. In that case, condescension is warranted. It means you don't have the experience needed to comment seriously on the topic.
> It is here to replace a faulty and completely outdated financial infrastructure
Yet it performs worse in every measurable metric. How many transactions per second can Bitcoin sustain? Four, lmao.
> The same laws against criminals apply whether they use crypto or not.
One does not need to be a criminal for proper regulations to apply. Again, this is the immaturity of people commenting.
----
I'm late to this, but can you please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN and stop breaking the site guidelines? You did so extremely badly in this thread. "I love when people out themselves as having never worked on anything significant" is a bannable offense just by itself. No more of that, please.
I don't want to ban you, but we need you to post in the intended spirit of the site. If you'd review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules going forward, we'd appreciate it.
The harm that bad information causes is incalculable, so no, I won't stop commenting on stupid posts. Perhaps you need to evaluate your responsibility to the world at large, and your role in supporting disinformation.
If someone believes that banking regulations are the "nanny", they shouldn't be allowed to comment on adult topics. Sorry not sorry.
Does it matter to you that you do more harm than my flames?
YCombinator just funded arguably the worst startup in history, Skip the Interview. Maybe you could do with a little dissension?
Have you heard of the term "accredited investor"? That's 100% a "nanny" regulation that excludes poorer people from opportunities.
> Yet it performs worse in every measurable metric.
You jump to arbitrary conclusions. You probably did the same when it comes to Bitcoin that's why you say factually wrong things like in the comment. For example, do you understand what near-instant settlement means?
> One does not need to be a criminal for proper regulations to apply.
Ad hominem while stating the obvious. Yikes.
> has no insurance
What do you mean by that? Insurances are services not protocols
> no safeguard against volatility
That’s a weird thing to say in a thread about stablecoins
The only time I can ever see a cryptocurrency being worth it is if you do not have any central authority you can trust. If we ever get to the point where you can't trust the courts to somewhat reasonably protect your money, then I think we have worse problems. Especially since you wouldn't have any physical protection from the legal system.