You have summarized my main problem with cryptocurrencies: it's cool to have that technology available, but it doesn't really improve on having first world institutions.

Basically it's great for poorer countries, first world criminals and potentially for a dystopian future.

Ok, so just because it doesn't solve any legal first world problems, you consider it almost worthless?

So do you consider a country like Turkey first world or not? Did you think 10 years ago it was first world?

I don't consider it almost worthless (in fact, I said it's great for poorer countries). I just don't think it solves any first world problems.

You don't understand how decentralized systems that provide cryptographically-assured accountability improves on existing institutions in the first world?

I find that curious. Usually people get lost on the tech side.

Yeah, I don't.

Decentralized systems don't provide cryptographically-assured accountability, they require cryptographically-assured accountability in order to function correctly. If you give up the decentralization requirement, and instead federate authority across well-regulated entities, then you don't need the crypto, not as a base requirement anyway. And you still need the regulation, because all this fancy cryptographical assurance does is prevent man-in-the-middle attacks that arise from the decentralization requirement, and you still need to regulate the input and output--which is where all fraud occurs anyway.

Exactly. The hard problem is to build and maintain the democratic institutions required by a developed country. I find some people seem to be willing to gamble that for a tech solution.

I think crypto has some use as distributed logs. But that's it.

You can't solve a social problem with a computer/tech solution. It just doesn't work.

I usually find it's the opposite to be honest. Most people that I know that have a good understanding of how the technology works are far more sanguine about what it can and cannot do. Whereas those friends and acquaintances who understand the technology the least tend to be far more zealous in its potential.

I don't understand it either. In fact, I don't think it's true at all. I think if you think technology is a substitute for well-functioning democratic institutions you're an ignorant fool.

The technology does not replace democratic institutions, but it makes them enforceable and accountable. The real ignorant fools are those kidding themselves into thinking their "democratic institutions" are well-functioning.

Can you give an example?

Not OP but here is my answer:

You could say that Turkey was a well functioning democracy. But look now with Erdogan, and Turkeys inflation is at 49%.

Having access to some stablecoin like UST could saved a lot of people troubles. Without really having the burden to go buy dollars or euro's in some form or another.

The fact that inflation is at 49% should be the first clue that Turkey does not have well-functioning institutions. In addition to Turkey's numerous economic problems, there was a coup attempt as recently as 2016, and the government has been accused by international human rights groups of using the judiciary to persecute journalists and political opponents. How does Tether, or crypto in general, help solving any of these problems? Not to mention that Tether Inc., the corporation that issues Tethers, has never been audited, and has zero accountability to holders of Tethers. Holding Tethers entails a huge risk.

Did I say hold Tether? No, I said hold UST (Terra's stablecoin).

Turkey was a well functioning democracy, until it wasn't, that was my point.

Did I say cryptocurrency fixes governments? No, I said you can store value in stablecoins when you have malfunctioning governments.

If I lived in Turkey, my wealth was largely stored in UST and NOT Lira.

Not goldbars, not USD or EUR cash, not in banks or any service they provide (except day to day needs of course).

So if you lived in Turkey and had about $200K, where would you store it?

Sorry, I misread UST for USDT.

That's a good example. My current favorite example would be the UK, and the so-called democratic British government. The democratic façade has fallen away spectacularly over the last few years. There is no way to hold anyone to account when there is corruption at the top. They don't even need to hide it anymore.

The borders are gerrymandered, fair voting is hamstrung by FPTP, funding is withheld from constituencies where the MP doesn't tow the party line, and both public money and foreign bribes go into the pockets of the elite few. Clearly a well functioning democracy, a pillar of the West, where government officials may place themselves above the law. Lying in Parliament? Free pass. Calling out lying in Parliament? Ejected from the discourse.

But at least Sir Boris led an inquiry into Sir Boris and found Sir Boris free of guilt.

I really don't think it's so crazy to think that the adequate application of crypto can lead to well-functioning democracies for precisely this reason; we can have real accountability.

> adequate application of crypto can lead to well-functioning democracies for precisely this reason; we can have real accountability

But you don't say how.

Public key infrastructure.

Public key infrastructure will make Boris Johnson accountable? How?

I have. But it was a Pyramidal bank. Just like crypto.