Utopia Talk / Politics / Crypto

Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Sep 09 13:12:17 In order to succeed you must first survive.
nhill Member	Thu Sep 09 13:33:13 Last post for posterity: http://uto...hread=88525&time=1631208621000 And yes...surviving a drawdown is a huge way to grow your wealth, especially if you can re-enter lower. I see that $FTM has dropped 5.91% since I exited my Fantom positions! My spidey-sense was tingling.
nhill Member	Thu Sep 09 13:38:45 And the cool thing is I took my fiat tokens and lended it to people for ~47% APR, so my cash has grown by a few hundred bucks. There's just so many cool ways you can move your money when you start to get into DeFi. Years later and I still feel like I'm only scratching the service. Thinking up new strategies every day. Fun times!
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Sep 09 17:24:48 That is some crazy APY on reaper for that pair atm. So juicy. I'm gonna sleep on it and hope FTM crashes a little more :) Thank you for sharing!
nhill Member	Thu Sep 09 17:35:41 Yep, that APY is nice! A lot is coming from the LP because of the increased trading volume and relative lack of liquidity. The yields will go down as the liquidity is restored. But for now, it's a steal!
nhill Member	Thu Sep 09 19:06:47 lol $AKT that I recommended to you (and others in my network) yesterday just went up 30% after I pitched it here. Who's using me as insider info? Seems like everything I "shill" ends up exploding. It's good tech though, so that's probably why. Just weird that every time I discover something it explodes. People on the same wavelength.
nhill Member	Thu Sep 09 23:35:53 closing BTC short @ 46764 +1%
nhill Member	Thu Sep 09 23:38:58 Notice I'm only signaling $ETH and $BTC here, except one time, I signaled $TLM as an alt primed for pump. That's because I don't want to give away too much alpha ... teach a man to fish BTC and ETH, and they can land a whale on alt coins :) Virtually liquidity is sourced from BTC and ETH at some point. But you can get far enough away to diversify them. $OHM is the best way to diversify, IMO, as it intends to be the safe haven (and has worked that way so far). But if I gave people every move I make they might make a ton of money without understanding why I make the moves...defeats the purpose.
nhill Member	Thu Sep 09 23:43:02 If I was really a shill and wanted to make money of it, it'd be easy for me to make a paid discord or telegram group and post all my moves. Have no need for that stress and overhead. I'm passionate about the technology and want more people to appreciate it like I do, fiat money is secondary.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 02:00:45 haha everything he touches turns into gold! Goes to show you the haters don't even understand how one shills correctly. You don't do it on some backwater forums with 10 active posters!
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 02:15:08 > You don't do it on some backwater forums with 10 active posters! True story. As I said in my first post, nobody here has the net worth for me to care. This entire forum could invest their savings and it'd move $BTC like 0.25% (and I don't even own any $BTC anyways). Who cares. Let's have some fun exploring the digital fabric of the future. :D I'm excited for AAA NFT games to take off. So far, no big publisher has publicly stepped up to fund an online game with Web3 infrastructure. You think they are sitting on their hands, though? ... I don't.
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 02:19:56 The only thing preventing big publishers from deploying a Web3-powered game was gas fees on Ethereum (I know first hand, being involved with some indie games like Gods Unchained, that $ETH gas fees kills games... nobody wants to spent $50 to loot a chest). But now that Solana, Fantom, Tezos, Algorand, et al. have made the fabric affordable? You bet your ass the big publishers are racing to deploy an interactive online game. Lowest hanging fruit on the money tree. Imagine a WoW scale game built from the ground up with Solana powering the infrastructure? Payments, items, guilds, all can be minted. You could mint a guild badge and when your guild becomes famous for world firsts (or whatever), your guild members can sell some on the open market. Possibilities are endless!
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 02:23:06 Regulations shouldn't play a huge role in publishers building on Web3, as they already have their own digital currencies, this would simply be a way of leveraging existing infrastructure (saves dev time), and, more importantly, an existing community (crypto community is all over shitty indie games right now, even ones that are text-based only, a proper game would clean house). I don't even play video games anymore, for the most part. But if one was built on crypto? Hell yeah, I'm in.
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 02:28:55 BTW, it looks like Tezos is poised to be the next alternative chain to explode. I love Ethereum, my first foray into DeFi, but it's a victim of its own success right now. The price and demand (mainly NFT driven) has gone up so much you regularly have to pay $50 for a single transaction. Ethereum 2.0 is a nebulous concept that could still be a year or three away. Alt L1 chains are clearly where the market is heading. Which means I'm not as interested in $MATIC anymore. I never bought back in very much after selling it in May for close to $2. BTC is Boomer crypto, but ETH is starting to become Zoomer crypto.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 03:14:12 Yea games and art are very interesting and largely untapped in this space, but clearly will be important components. Heard that the NFT market is cooling off quite a lot right now, probably a good thing, then have them blow up for real on SOL and FTM. "Ethereum 2.0 is a nebulous concept that could still be a year or three away." ETH ultimately suffers from the same problem as ADA, we already have SOL, FTM, AAEV etc that can deliver speed for almost no cost. And this is a space where things move quickly.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 03:18:56 "Imagine a WoW scale game built from the ground up with Solana powering the infrastructure?" Indeed, this space is ripe for crypto takeover and adoption. All the basic components have been there in the gaming space for a decade. People have earned a living on selling in game currency, it is very compentitive, e-sports, huge part of the internet culture etc. Just waiting for a high quality popular game to either transition or be built from scratch.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 03:28:23 "Alt L1 chains are clearly where the market is heading." It does look like the market dynamic is changing, right? While by and large it is still connected, if BTC crashes so does everything else, the alts are increasingly doing their own thing. We just need to kill the whales, them and their manipulations are a disturbing aspect and I admit I actually see that as a huge turn off and risk to the future of the crypto project. Maybe you can calm my fears.
Seb Member	Fri Sep 10 03:53:37 Nim: "We just need to kill the whales" Funny. When I pointed out that mining activity tends to be inherently concentrating...
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 04:02:56 > Heard that the NFT market is cooling off quite a lot right now, probably a good thing, then have them blow up for real on SOL and FTM. Yup it goes through phases. I'm holding onto a few still, a couple $FTM early NFTs and the Kaiju Cards. Not worries about either. The $FTM ones had a supply of 500 and were one of the first projects. The Kaiju Cards will eventually have a game released that will pump the price of alpha cards. But if you're looking to flip some for the next market phase, it's a good time to buy. Like I said earlier, I took profits on my initial investment and traded up between projects until I held the bag on these. They'll probably flip for a high price in the next cycle, anyways. > ETH ultimately suffers from the same problem as ADA, we already have SOL, FTM, AAEV etc that can deliver speed for almost no cost. And this is a space where things move quickly. Yup... there's an upfront resistance but the longer ETH takes to deliver 2.0, the fewer people will use it. It's written already. I'll trade Ethereum and hold my bag from $1750, but prefer to use other blockchains as that's where the innovation is currently. > Indeed, this space is ripe for crypto takeover and adoption. All the basic components have been there in the gaming space for a decade. People have earned a living on selling in game currency, it is very compentitive, e-sports, huge part of the internet culture etc. Just waiting for a high quality popular game to either transition or be built from scratch. Yup... only a matter of time here. > We just need to kill the whales, them and their manipulations are a disturbing aspect and I admit I actually see that as a huge turn off and risk to the future of the crypto project. This is why I want regulations. The whales can influence the market so much that it hampers the whole ecosystem. Price manipulations & pump and dump (or dump and pump) schemes would preferably be regulated. All exchanges would love to have a piece of the USA action, so clear, reasonable regulations would benefit everyone worldwide (other than the whales, but they should have enough capital already). I can't really calm your fears though, from the trading side. From the DeFi side, though? Really it's quite easy. These auto compounding farms accumulate the underlying crypto, so a long-term mindset will win out. My spidey-sense was tingling yesterday at $FTM all time highs (now down 20%) but even if I hadn't exited into fiat pegs, I wouldn't be worried. I would just understand that I'd have to ride it for a while and accumulate as opposed to selling and buying at a lower price. Both have the same result on a long time frame. But, in general, I would recommend a conservative approach. You've seen a few times this year how fast it can go down. The saying goes: stairs on the way up, elevator on the way down. So taking a conservative approach and booking profits after nice runs will protect your wealth. I feed a lot of my profits into the stock market, as boring as that may sound. But if I make 20K or something in a day, I usually celebrate by moving half to the stock market (paying myself).
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 04:57:39 Nhill "I can't really calm your fears though, from the trading side." I am more or less done with the trading at least for now. It was a fun and profitable way for me to wet my beak, but DeFi is where it is at. Takes less time and more in line with my own character and energy level. Trading is too intense for me and I get too caught up in it! Thus you have calmed my fears, any trade I make is either going into DeFi or sitting in a wallet for a long time, only for the big crashes. I can allocate the time I am spending on learning this much better, if my mind isn't constantly wrapped up in the daily moves. "This is why I want regulations." Yes please. "I feed a lot of my profits into the stock market, as boring as that may sound. But if I make 20K or something in a day, I usually celebrate by moving half to the stock market (paying myself)." I need to open a new bank account with a new bank, my current bank does not allow transfers from Binance. I need to regulate the greed that comes from compounding! I need to start cashing out. I have not forgotten the boomer world of stocks and equity funds. Actually the portfolio I put together for my son, inspired by the information you shared is doing pretty good +4.8% since late may early june I think. Sure the stock market has been going crazy lately, celebrating the end of lock downs, but why doesn't anyone say "look at nhill that wallstreet corporate shill!"
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 05:56:40 Seb Concentration of power is undesirable and while both miners and whales are a manifestation of the phenomena, they are not the same thing. They have different incentives and naturally you would be regulated differently. Nobody in this thread, thinks crypto will solve all the worlds problems or even all the problems of finance, both people in this thread explained this to you at different points. We believe in the underlying technology and the paradigm that is being presented. I am sort of getting tired of this "BTC will solve everything", that I am mostly hearing from the critics, even intellectual people I respect and listen to. They are arguing with an extreme manifestation of the maximalists, basically a strawman. Neither Nhill nor I are maximalists and we are not part of the cult. While we have indeed found something we think is very interesting and possibly world changing, we have a sober and nuanced view about it. We tried explaining, you didn't want to understand. Kindly show yourself out, I don't have time for more of this bullshit.
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 10:58:54 Pretty much. I'm not maximal anything. Crypto as an idea is here to stay, and my prediction is that both our web and financial infrastructure will be running on top of crypto networks within the next 10-30 years (same prediction I made in the very first thread when I came back). But, like any nascent technology, it has the early market chasm to cross before it becomes mainstream. Still very early and fraught with danger. 90% of these projects will fail, if not more. The cool thing is that crypto is investable by nature so it's like we are able to get in on an early stage startup pre-IPO by diversifying. If we can survive the sharks and whales. :) Sad that many people here can't see the writing on the wall and will be left behind, wealth-wise, in the next decades. Can lead a horse to fresh water, but can't force it to drink! But, I know there's lurkers here slowly seeing the light, but too prideful to admit it. 'Tis okay, Dukhat.
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 11:44:48 Seb: However, I don't want to dismiss your point. You think mining causes whales? Not sure I follow.
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 11:51:56 Nim All I see is a sea of red, except $OHM which is green (+5%). This is a very encouraging sign. $OHM generally stays pretty stable in price while we're going up (but you earn a yield on it if you decide to part there), and tends to appreciate on the way down. We may have the budding signs of a true crypto reserve asset. Now we need to see it migrate across chains so I don't have to bridge assets every time I want to park currency. But, overall, I've optimistic on the project.
Seb Member	Fri Sep 10 13:42:51 Nim: Has it occurred to you that mining groups themselves - given they generate coins - might be whales? I'm not suggesting crypto currencies don't solve everything. I'm suggesting it specifically doesn't solve the thing you are looking for it to solve - namely centralisation of economic power and wealth to capital holders and financial institutions. The inability to address or meaningfully refute this critique is sad. But I'm content to be misunderstood for long periods of time. Nhill: I would be absolutely astonished if it didn't. All consensus mechanisms rely on performative waste of something sufficiently costly to prevent someone being able to control the consensus through just creating ever more nodes. Ultimately that favours economies of scale and people with fiat capital. But mining returns are in coins - so if you get consolidation of node operations, then you get consolidation of new coins. And the most efficient way to maximise return on investment in fiat would be to manipulate prices and sell high. Also exchanges themselves. They are well placed to do all the naughty things wildcat bankers did: front running etc. So why not?
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 13:47:16 That sounds pretty nice. Step by step towards a fiat free existence! Fucking binance doesn't let you withdraw FTM on the FTM network. I had to buy BNB (eww) with my FTM, send it to metamask and bridged and swap. On the bright side that made me use bridging.
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 13:56:02 You're absolutely right, just wanted to make sure I was following. Big mining operations certainly aggregate large coin balances and would stand to profit from manipulating the price. Although, they would have more incentive to manipulate it up (like a couple months ago when the price was manipulated $12,000 in an hour), whereas the exchanges have the incentive to manipulate it down (to attract more buyers and fees). You can see this playing out right now. When Bitcoin was in the 50-53K range the volume was 1.6x lower than it is right now in the 44-47K range. Then you have your run of the mill fiat whale that is looking to profit from leverage liquidations. Exchanges profit from volatility, but not prolonged bear markets. And they can literally print liquidity ($USDC, $USDT, $GUSD, etc.) out of thin air that has suspect backing. So the incentive is there and it goes back to the need for regulations to protect retail investors. It's a dog eat dog world right now, and why I've not advised people to invest in crypto here. But explore the tech, and learn some trading to hedge risk? Sure! That's part of the fun. Let's not confuse the tech with the big banker centralized exchanges, here. You can find projects that have no liquidity outside of decentralized protocols, and I spend quite a bit of time in that realm. Unfortunately, the fiat ingress point is $BTC so you can't ever fully decouple from CEX influence, yet.
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 13:57:25 > Fucking binance doesn't let you withdraw FTM on the FTM network. I had to buy BNB (eww) with my FTM, send it to metamask and bridged and swap. On the bright side that made me use bridging. Did you use the SpookySwap bridge?
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 13:58:10 But congratulations! Bridging is a huge step and opens up a whole new world of possibilities. I'm on about 7 chains at the moment.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 14:08:57 "Did you use the SpookySwap bridge?" Indeed, I'm a reaper farmer now :)
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 14:26:44 Seb "The inability to address or meaningfully refute this critique is sad." My dear seb, I don't care to adress this for you any more than has already has been adressed. We believe in the technology and the paradigm that is being presented. The current instantiations of blockchain finance will without a doubt inherit some of the sins of the past, they are more the incubators of what shall come. If you don't agree, you can fuck off. Nobody is selling you anything and I am personally not interested in anything you have to say about this. Clear enough?
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 14:37:17 Seb You seem to be confusing the centralization of money with the centralization of technology. Try to disconnect the two with your mental model. Money will naturally be centralized. Bitcoin and crypto don't change the structure of salaries and equity. Nobody is claiming that. They decentralize and open-source the financial technology underpinning our finance system so that everyone has a fair shot. That doesn't mean unfair systems can't be made with crypto. It's a delicate understanding. Everyone is able to see exactly how the systems work, and they are executed as code. But I can certainly code a smart contract that gives my wallet address 10x more money than everyone else after each transaction. The point is-- banks and institutions are doing unethical things behind the scenes, and in crypto they can't do that anymore. They have to do unethical things in the open, like Richard Heart is doing with his HEX cryptocurrency. Remember, centralized exchanges have nothing to do with crypto tech other than them leveraging it to transfer assets. But their code isn't on the blockchain, it's not open-source, and isn't relevant to decentralization. Decentralized exchanges work very well, but aren't able to onboard fiat funds. That's why I'm saying 10-30 years. Once you can opt to transact and bank wholly in cryptocurrency, fiat ingress points will lose their relevance. Now, I know this can be taken the wrong way. I don't think Fiat is going anywhere. I simply think over 50% of all financial activity will eventually happen in DeFi (10-30 years from now).
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 14:40:07 Cryptocurrency does nothing to change Pareto Distribution (and no, I don't mean the Pareto Principle) of wealth, nor is it even attempting to do that. The whole "Bitcoin fixes this" narrative is incredibly cringe cult behavior simply trying to rope in another buyer to increase their own personal net worth. Those are human activities, and have nothing to do with the code.
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 14:42:45 > Indeed, I'm a reaper farmer now :) Awesome! My target for $FTM is around $1.30-$1.35 right now, but if BTC/ETH take another nosedive, we could see $0.90. I wouldn't let it bother you though. That's calculations in fiat. $FTM will be on its way to new all time highs sooner or later, so simply accumulating in the $FTM-$TOMB LP will be a very good move on higher time frames.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 14:44:31 "I don't think Fiat is going anywhere." Cautious and conservative as always ;-)
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 14:50:09 That's how I roll. :)
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 15:32:23 I'm ready for a nosedive! "The whole "Bitcoin fixes this" narrative" I am not explaining this for you, but see it more as a summary of my understanding, feel free to correct anything you think is wrong! Only very specific things may be fixed, problems relating to opacity, custodial risk and I am thinking along all institutional structures, state and finance, denying people basic financial service because [insert reason], autocratic seizure of assets. Stuff like that. Now, I can envision that those things, may in turn subdue some of the unethical human behavior of humans. Transparency and social stigma can have that effect, even if as you say merely being in the open will allow those concerned with the ethics to make better choices. There is the potential for greater social good, not some utopia, but better than what we have.
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 15:54:23 Definitely. It's a huge upgrade on our global ethics, as it'll make financial activity transparent and auditable. People think cryptocurrency is private but it's very much not intended to be. Even if you use a privacy coin like Monero + DeFi (called Dero), all that hides is your transactions. All the code you execute is still publicly auditable. Crypto also adds supply predictability and 24/7 global liquid markets so if your government (cough Venezuela cough) decides to print an unlimited amount of money, you can protect yourself. Of course, you can do that right now by buying S&P 500 ETFs, so, on the surface, this advancement isn't quite as big as people make it out to be. But it does make it more accessible. I presume it's much easier to tell a Venezuelan to buy Bitcoin than it is to tell them to buy an S&P 500 ETF. Governments should like this feature. :) As they can debase their currency and pay off debts while their citizens still have a modicum of protection. But, like all things, that is ripe for abuse if every country frantically tries to devalue its currency to reduce debt. There's nothing free in economics, so I'm not suggesting this is a good thing. I'm merely pointing out the incentives governments are seeing.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 17:00:18 With you all the way. Not everything is even going to get better, you understand the details better than me, but generically I am going into this assuming that we will also get new sets of problems we didn't have. Who knew that social media give teenagers depression and become a concern for election manipulation. Right! So for this one, eyes wide open. It is being called the wild west for a reason, it's not exactly without perils!
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Sep 10 17:09:09 The art theme on these sites, like reaper and spooky, is really growing on me. You know initially it was off putting, because you have this picture of what a institute that handled money should look like. Then you realize, this is the internet, hacker, millenial tech people. Like a hipster had a child with a hacker :) I mean there are those that look more traditional as well, Liquity, Solfarm Raydium. And these names, boo, moo, tomb, REAPER finance, internet culture is being tokenized :,)
nhill Member	Fri Sep 10 19:34:38 Yes, people getting their money hacked is going to be one of the biggest concerns with crypto, as there is almost no recourse (outside of a hard fork which obviously is not an accessible option to the average person and only happens once every few years otherwise). The market will fill that gap with insurance policies and guaranteed custody, but not everyone will leverage it. > The art theme on these sites, like reaper and spooky, is really growing on me. You know initially it was off putting, because you have this picture of what a institute that handled money should look like. Then you realize, this is the internet, hacker, millenial tech people. Like a hipster had a child with a hacker :) That was my biggest problem with Fantom. The sites on it are all Halloween themed. But then I realize it's just an artifact of the community they cultivated and now I'm okay with it. It has more of a decentralized feel, too. Most of the Fantom devs are decentralized instead of things like Uniswap that is run by the Uniswap Foundation (and having to bow down to SEC as a result). As Fantom grows, there will be more pro looking sites, I believe. It's merely an artifact of the small, tight-knit community. Solana is the exact opposite there, having the slick pro-looking sites. Tbh, I prefer the Solana approach but I can get behind Fantom. Their main site now has a nice aesthetic that I hope more projects adopt: http://fantom.foundation It used to be a spooky themed site but now that they are gaining traction it is being taken more seriously. I love the look. Not gonna lie, I initially dismissed Fantom when I saw the aesthetic, based on that alone. I'm picky like that. But eventually I took a look at the tech and fell in love with it, then got to know the community and felt it was a great underdog to back.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sat Sep 11 03:36:52 "It has more of a decentralized feel, too. Most of the Fantom devs are decentralized" This reminds me. Arguably the decentralized ascpect of some coins are questionable or leave a lot to be desired. I was always ready that BTC or the early iterations wouldn't be what I was looking for and arguably neither BTC or ETH are atm, may never be. We can rightfully criticize coins for failing there. But you and I or anyone else getting familiar with the broader community know that it is full of people who really believe in the decentralization aspect as a core idea of what they are doing. We now have a new domain of technology working on making, among other things, decentralization better. That is awesome and equally the reason why I am not hot and bothered about these early iteration being decentralized-ish. Getting tangled in the details of the early instantiations, if that makes you miss the bigger picture, then you are doing it wrong. Sort of like kicking in open doors to soon to be abandoned houses, missing the mansions being built around you.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sat Sep 11 03:38:50 "Not gonna lie, I initially dismissed Fantom when I saw the aesthetic" We have the same sensibilities on this :)
Seb Member	Sat Sep 11 05:27:56 Nhill: Most of the arguments for the benefits of decentralisation of the technology are really arguments about the need to decentralised financial power - particularly role of banks and central banks. But even the tech isn't that decentralised if mining becomes centralised most of the key beneficial features go. "The point is-- banks and institutions are doing unethical things behind the scenes, and in crypto they can't do that anymore." I'm not really convinced by that at all. The pseudonymous nature of accounts and total lack of reporting requirements and difficulty in enforcing traditional regulatory solutions to this make it trivially easy of exchanges etc. to engage in the kind of unethical practices that have long been marginalised in traditional finance. It's really easy (and examples exist) of exchanges front running their clients using their own trading funds that aren't necessarily obviously theirs. When you say it gives everyone a "fair shot", what exactly are your protections against that? Sure you can conduct your trades via smart contracts etc, but to get into the domain where that's possible you still need to move your capital through exchanges etc. and the prices of the things you are reading in are open to manipulation via more traditional exchanges. This kind of issue isn't really about the decentralisation of the technology layer, it's about the power intermediaries have to rig markets, Vs the power of regulators and individuals via courts to unwind illegal transactions, forcibly reassign ownership of capital, and place criminal sanctions on actors that break the law. And then you have huge structural things like the stable coins - if e.g. half the accusations leveled at tether turn out to be true and it comes off peg; it's directly analogous to the role of a central bank - except if the central bank had been run privately and quietly sold off all the gold to its managers. It could have a huge impact on the entire cryptocoin ecosystem. For all the fairness that trading via decentralised apps might have given you to build up large stocks of cryptocoins, intermediaries can more easily walk off with the underlying value which is still the actual dollars, not the cryptocoins or even the stable coins. What you really need to have is a crypto currency issued by the federal reserve or some other actual central bank to act as a real and redeemable stable coin. Such a thing would need to be centrally controlled - but that would at least put a stable fiat/coin exchange rate. This would enable then people to move their capital into crypto currencies that could enable smart contract based exchanges with more clarity on the price. But the question then becomes - why would a central bank do this, given its mission to ensure price stability in its jurisdiction and a stable financial system? It's far harder to enforce regulations they rely on to pursue that mission in the crypto ecosystem - particularly due to non refutability of actual transactions themselves.
nhill Member	Sat Sep 11 09:04:33 You are arguing against the present, and my vision is the future. There are already attempts at making decentralized reserve currencies that are crypto native. No bank needs to be involved. Centralized exchanges are only needed because the majority of transactions are limited to Fiat. That won't always be the case. Yesterday, I payed my cloud computing bill (Vultr) in Ethereum. In 10-30 years everything will be crypto native and all your concerns will become irrelevant. You see the growing pains as the final product and that is a very myopic view. "I'm not really convinced by that at all. The pseudonymous nature of accounts and total lack of reporting requirements and difficulty in enforcing traditional regulatory solutions to this make it trivially easy of exchanges etc. to engage in the kind of unethical practices that have long been marginalised in traditional finance. It's really easy (and examples exist) of exchanges front running their clients using their own trading funds that aren't necessarily obviously theirs. When you say it gives everyone a "fair shot", what exactly are your protections against that?" Already addressed all this. The code that was private and had ways to be overridden depending on your connections (i.e. if you know a loan officer personally in the United States you can get a loan of unfair size relative to your credit, etc.) is now public. Your protection is being able to read and understand code, or find someone that does. Again, you bring up the same old tired arguments that I've decimated months ago. Your concerns are the current implementation, which is only a necessary stepping stone. Your inability to see where this is going makes me understand why I'm financially free with generational wealth. Sometimes I forget. :)
nhill Member	Sat Sep 11 12:17:13 Nim Looks like $ADA is pumping again and the chart looks really nice. It might push up to $3-3.20 IMO. I'm short on it from a macro perspective, but could be a nice trade (I've never owned, shorted, or traded $ADA in any way, just looking at the chart). My position remains the same in that once the smart contract upgrade is deployed people will be like "ok, that's it?" and it'll sell off. But I'm okay being wrong, plenty of opportunities elsewhere.
Seb Member	Sat Sep 11 14:58:33 Nhill: "Yesterday, I payed my cloud computing bill (Vultr) in Ethereum." Though presumably the contract was priced in dollars rather than Ethereum. The key function of central banks and/or govts is to give money a stable value. I don't see how any decentralised system can do that because it's not a function of the money itself, it's about guaranteed redeemability in terms of something of fixed value. Be that gold, or your tax bill. Which is why I think these are not growing pains, these are fundamentally structural. Crypto currencies will remain priced in fiat currencies because most governments - particularly ones with reserve currencies - are going to continue to use those, and they can enforce that and have no incentive to adopt a decentralised crypto currency (and probably no incentive to offer a backed crypto version of their currency either as it reduces their ability to relate financial markets). "Already addressed all this. The code that was private and had ways to be overridden depending on your connections (i.e. if you know a loan officer personally in the United States you can get a loan of unfair size relative to your credit, etc.) is now public. Your protection is being able to read and understand code, or find someone that does." I'm sorry but that does not address either of the two specific points I raised. How does reading the code of the smart contract you are engaged in prevent an exchange front running you moving capital into or out of crypto ecosystem? By definition that's not a smart contract as the fiat is off-chain. How does reading the code of the smart contract prevent price manipulation of the assets you are trading in that's happening *outside* the contract you are trading in? It doesn't. You'd need to read and understand and model *all* the smart contracts that could impact the price of the assets you are trading in - but that ignores the fact there can be other trades that affect the price. "i.e. if you know a loan officer personally in the United States you can get a loan of unfair size relative to your credit, etc." If that loan officer wants to get in trouble with his employer... it sounds like what you've described is actually simply removing something unfair to the financial institution (namely fraud whereby a loan officer fails to implement the policies of the institution). Presumably in a crypto world, lenders are still going to apply credit ratings to their clients. This is far less likely to have an impact on you (unless you are the guy who was getting the cheaper loan) than e.g. systemic booms and crashes generated by fraudsters able to engage in the kind of financial crimes that are blocked by conventional regulation that would be impossible to enforce or redress in a pseudonymised system; particularly one where confiscation of assets is impossible.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sat Sep 11 15:49:13 Nhill ADA does not have a lot of upside for me at this price, I sold all of it some time ago as my focus shifted over to SOL ecosystem and FTM. I don’t have your bandwidth for this stuff :) LUNA! I still know nothing about LUNA technically, but it has made a crazy journey this year and like FTM and SOL held it’s ground these past few days and like SOL even set new all time high. It already has smart contracts and defi investments. I don’t have any money in it, if so I would want to go straight on their DeFi to check it out. So based on this, it looks interesting!
nhill Member	Sat Sep 11 19:55:47 > If that loan officer wants to get in trouble with his employer... it sounds like what you've described is actually simply removing something unfair to the financial institution (namely fraud whereby a loan officer fails to implement the policies of the institution). That's not how loans work in community banks here. A loan officer has complete discretion and can give their friends massive loans. Of course, if their friends default they will be in trouble. :) And yes, I've been the "beneficiary" where a friend of mine that trusted me offered me nearly unlimited credit lines. Didn't take up the offer as I'm highly liquid already, but I'd prefer an unbiased system even when it technically hurts my opportunities. "I'm sorry but that does not address either of the two specific points I raised. How does reading the code of the smart contract you are engaged in prevent an exchange front running you moving capital into or out of crypto ecosystem? By definition that's not a smart contract as the fiat is off-chain. How does reading the code of the smart contract prevent price manipulation of the assets you are trading in that's happening *outside* the contract you are trading in? It doesn't. You'd need to read and understand and model *all* the smart contracts that could impact the price of the assets you are trading in - but that ignores the fact there can be other trades that affect the price." I already addressed this. Centralized exchanges are only an issue because you are forced to interact with fiat money to live day-to-day. Give it 10-30 years and allow it to mature. All your points have a clear path to be addressed (if I can transact exclusively in cryptocurrency, from salary to groceries, then centralized exchanges have no meaning anymore). But you seem to think I have an idealistic view of things. I don't. Cryptocurrency will make things more transparent, and give everyone a fair shot, but that doesn't make it *fair*. I can still run a bot that front runs your decentralized trades and front runs you for liquidity by paying a higher gas price, which will include my transaction before your transaction (most likely, dependent on network conditions). I never said that crypto will eliminate corruption, but it will enable us all to see these transactions on the blockchain and exercise the same advantage should we so choose. That's what decentralized means, how is that not clear to you?
nhill Member	Sat Sep 11 22:12:19 Nim Luna is definitely on my plate to explore, too! I've heard quite a bit about it but basically have a backlog of projects to learn and read about. When I read code + whitepaper sometimes it take 50 hours or more before I'm satisfied ... depending on the project. Right now I'm researching Mina.
nhill Member	Sat Sep 11 22:12:34 BTW, how's your reaper farm going? ;)
nhill Member	Sun Sep 12 03:37:50 Just had an acquaintance message me and tell me he retired. Was able to turn his life savings of ~$65,000 into $6,000,000 from my calls on FTM and SOL (he was leveraged). Changing lives. He's going to start focusing on philanthropic work. But, by all means, be like Seb and stay middle class. Really, it's up to you.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 05:38:09 Nhill Many things have changed in my mind and behavior and priorities since we started talking 5 months ago! One such thing was the crystalization of the opportunity costs in wasting time debating haters, instead of asking question. I honestly don’t care! My flippant attitude is the result of 20 years of going around the same cricle (you are experiencing now) on every topic you can imagine. I know where this discussion you are having with seb is going, no where :) he is doing what I said 5 months ago, back then instantiated with him not understanding the significance of being able to pay with a Binance Visa card and now with not understanding the significance of you paying with eth. But but it’s priced in fiat! He will keep doing this, until defi goes retail, because he either does not get it or because he doesn’t like what is happening. Maybe both. Seb is institutionalized, he spent many years in academia and then many years working for the government. Nothing wrong with that per se, but those environments select for and shape a certain kind of thinking. I am not cut from that cloth, though I do work for a government owned company. So, I am surrounded by sebs ;-) I will tell you, my reaper farm has leaped past my SOL-RAY pair :) you sure know how to pick them!
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 06:20:28 Did that person you know go all in on crypto, threw in the entire farm? If so, very ballsy. The thought has crossed my mind I will be honest and I will probably regret not soing exactly that in 2 years, but I probably would have trouble sleeping!
nhill Member	Sun Sep 12 10:58:31 Yeah I’m trying to give him the benefit of the doubt but it’s clear to me that he does not possess the trait of openness and will die middle class on his hill. But somehow still convince himself he was right, lol. Proof is in the pudding (our bank accounts), already. My charity with him is nearing an end. Nim He used leverage every time I made a call. He knew I was conservative so if I was tentative he felt like it was a sure bet. He wasn’t wrong, but I’d never want anyone to do that. Maybe I flipped a coin and was heads five times in a row. Doesn’t mean that my next flip will be heads. I don’t even use leverage ever (at least not traditionally, I do leverage a bit on AAVE sometimes). I’d hate to see someone get their savings liquidated, so I was a bit upset when he messaged me (internally, not towards him). He risked his entire nest egg on my words. Now he’s set for life. He took profits and is conservative like me now. Great story, but not one I’d recommend. Even thinking about it makes me uncomfortable.
nhill Member	Sun Sep 12 11:03:29 And yes, he bet the entire farm on it. Put it leverage into SOL and FTM when I called them at $25 and 0.22. And then subsequently took profits and entered again after I called a few pullbacks. Made over 9000% gains, all on centralized exchanges legally (he’s a former rabbi from Europe) and cashed out financially free.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 12:20:34 Even not knowing the guy and with the benefit of hindsight, hearing you explain makes ME uncomfortable. The chutzpah on that guy!
Seb Member	Sun Sep 12 13:44:31 Nhill: But presumably in a crypto based system, lenders will still have discretion to set whatever rates they want to whoever they like also. "Centralized exchanges are only an issue because you are forced to interact with fiat money to live day-to-day." That doesn't address the issue. Govts are not going to choose to lose the exorbitant priveledge of having their own currency - so they are still going to do the key things that keep fiat currencies as the basis for pricing and exchange: 1. Demand and accept payment only in national currency 2. Issue payment only in their currency 3. Maintain laws requiring that any good or service sold in the country accept their currency There's no obvious path to exclusively crypto currency day to day - you'll need to move currency into and out of fiat. And you haven't addressed the point about price manipulation of the kind common pre-financial regulations which will reoccur once the crypto ecosystem renders conventional regulatory levers unenforceable.
Seb Member	Sun Sep 12 13:46:03 And again, I'm not accusing you of taking a panglossian view, I'm saying saying that it's likely that on the whole, what crypto currencies do is make the system less transparent, not more transparent
Seb Member	Sun Sep 12 15:00:33 Nim: "ack then instantiated with him not understanding the significance of being able to pay with a Binance Visa card" Nim, back then you raised the binance card as an explicit example of being able to make retail payments with the speed and convenience of visa using a blockchain based system. The point back then was, and remains, that the binance card is not an example of that at all. You do not hold the coins, rather you have an account with binance denominated in coins which they hold. You go off chain the moment you transfer your coins into their binance card linked account. It's mildly more convenient than having to sell your coins and transfer the dollars to a current account with a debit card - but that is essentially what is happening. You effectively sell your coins to binance for a credit denominated in those coins, and then they deduct from that credit when you make fiat payments from their card. It is just A.N.Other bank where you take actual money* and hand it to the bank, they set up an account with an equivalent credit and deduct from that when you use your card. Except with none of the benefits of cryptocurrency and none of the protections of retail banking. They could also go bankrupt overnight taking the contents of your account with them - but at least in the case of a retail bank there are much stronger protections and chance of getting your money back. One of us certainly missed the significance of this. It was not me. This is very different from making a payment *in* ethereum. nhill: "it’s clear to me that he does not possess the trait of openness" This is pretty rich from someone who keep claiming to have addressed an issue when they haven't - that's hall mark behaviour of someone who isn't open to the possibility they are incorrect. "Proof is in the pudding (our bank accounts), already." Plenty of people made out well with Tulip Bulbs, South Sea shares, and Multi layer marketing schemes - their bank balances do not prove anything about the success of the underlying venture. I am investing elsewhere - but this isn't about who has the best trading strategy, this is about tech and horizon scanning and learning via debate. That is possibly one of the stilted characteristics I picked up in academia - improved analytical understanding comes through challenge and debate. I find the attempt to personalise it is deeply weird frankly. One does not find this kind of issue with discussion of the applications of machine learning - it's a faintly cultish attitude that only comes up so frequently and consistently with cryptocurrencies. That itself is an important observation. If you are not open to being able to discuss the future and viability of the technology on societal scales without excessively personalising it, that tells me we are probably not in a dynamic where this conversation is actually productive from my perspective - I shall find other advocates on other platforms. From a political perspective I think it is clear where the wind is blowing now - governments and regulators are not going to embrace crypto-currencies and increasingly crack down on it. The SEC's decision not to allow coinbase the same kind of leeway retail bank lending has and treat fixed rate crypto currency loans as securities is a major point for long term adoption and needs to be factored in. Any scenario based on assumption based on displacing fiat is now pretty questionable. I remain unconvinced that there is a long term future for cryptocurrencies but sincerely hope you continue your run of good luck and, should it collapse like I suspect, come out of it on top. Perhaps, as you say, I am on the wrong side here and am dooming myself to penury, but of the evidence and arguments presented I think I will be making the right choice based on the evidence to hand even if it turns out to be the wrong choice. However, from an academic perspective, you probably ought to work out (cf. Haldane) what your pre-cambrian rabbits are.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 15:26:17 Seb It was explained for you ”explictly” by nhill what I meant after you sebbed it and I confirmed he was correct and admonished your chronic comprehension failure and told you see, not everyone has these problems you have. The thread can still be found. Or we can go all the way back to the first thread about the gas plant, where I ”explicitly” explain to you that BTC is NOT to be compared with a transaction system like visa, but a settlement system like fedwire. I honestly think all the inhibition that normally govern bullshit, lies and fantasy have completely collapsed in your head. You just do not give a fuck what you say anymore do you? LOL I am the one who micro doses, but you are the one permanently hallucinating!
nhill Member	Sun Sep 12 16:07:30 Seb, when I say you lack the trait of openness, it's simply an observation that I have yet to see you admit you are wrong on anything. Yet, I have constantly admitted to failures and mistakes, nearly in every thread I've made which numbers in the doubles digits by now. Like I said, proof is in the pudding. > This is pretty rich from someone who keep claiming to have addressed an issue when they haven't Now, exactly what claim haven't I refuted? Perhaps I missed one of your claims, so if you'd kindly delineate it once more for me, I can most likely repeat my response. > Plenty of people made out well with Tulip Bulbs, South Sea shares, and Multi layer marketing schemes - their bank balances do not prove anything about the success of the underlying venture. Tulip bulbs? Lol. Comparing the cryptocurrency landscape, with use cases from the metaverse, digital collectibles, accessible banking to disadvantaged areas, and a million other practical use cases to rare tulip bulbs? Boy, you are truly clueless and don't even know your history. Lol! This is precisely why people think Academia is a bunch of bullshit (I don't have a Ph.D like you or my brother, but I do have a Master's degree in AI, so I'm somewhat familiar with the ivory tower). All this high-faluting talk and then in one fell swoop revealing zero brain cells. Gonna print this thread out. This is gold.
Seb Member	Sun Sep 12 16:11:30 Nim: I'm sure in your mind this is a killer argument, but it really isn't. You can argue that cryptocurrencies are designed to behave like a B2B system for settling transactions between trusted financial institutions, but then the whole argument about radicalised democratisation and decentralisation is gone. "fedwire for intermediaries that have the scale and information asymetrites with respect to retailers but who cannot be subject to regulation by bodies charged with ensuring transparency and protection of retailers" is crazy talk. You are not looking at the big picture here. Sure, we can go back to the original thread, and it is really clear what you were talking about had naff all to do with visa vs fedwire. http://www...hread=88112&time=1621363438082 "I just got off the phone with my uncle, he is even deeper into crypto. He just explained he has a Binance visa card, that he can use to get take out 250 euros a day from ATMs, or 8000 dollars from forex. But seb will be here 5 years from now talking about how PoW can’t scale. lulz :)" So yes, I stand what I said: binance card is not proof that PoW can scale. It is widely accepted PoW can't scale by the increasing moves to other types of consensus mechanisms*. Binance cards are not on chain - they demonstrate exactly and precisely the point that intermediaries are needed to provide the kind of ease, speed and scale of payments. Nhill argues that this is transitory as crypto based systems will displace fiat. I see very powerful inertial forces that will prevent that - and in theory that is something we can discuss and disagree about. You, on the other hand, don't appear to know what you are talking about. Your posts are a literal string of non-sequiturs. Please, I'd rather talk to the organ grinder, though as discussed above, I don't think that is profitable for either of us. *Which suffer from different issues
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 16:15:57 http://www...hread=88112&time=1621363438082 I saved you the trouble. I simply do not believe someone with a brain to get a PhD in physics can have such a poorly functioning memory. Not possible. Then it is intentional and there simply isn’t anyway that doesn’t come back to you personally. Especially given how frequent this happens. It’s about you dude, I have been trying to tell you for years, but it just does not improve, it just gets worse. You either knowingly tell these lies or convince yourself of the fantasy. Either way impossible to discuss things with you. See this as personal feedback for your stated desire to understand things and stuff better through inquiry and debate. There are personal qualities that you need to work on, to be able to conduct that better. I don’t have any hate for you, wish you and the family the best and everything, but find you annoying and obnoxious and mostly a waste of time to ”debate”.
nhill Member	Sun Sep 12 16:20:40 > this is about tech and horizon scanning and learning via debate. This is precisely what I've been trying to do with you, but you repeat the same tired arguments which have been refuted (e.g. centralized exchanges, which are a problem now but not in the future) and then devolve into the absolute idiocy of comparing cryptocurrencies to Tulip Bulbs. Now, you can fairly compare cryptocurrencies to the tech bubble, and are probably right. That's also how I view it (except I think we are at the beginning of the bubble, not the end). But remember the tech bubble? Everyone thought Web2.0 was dead in the water after it popped, yet here we are ordering shit off Amazon every week. Well, guess what? Web3 is cryptocurrency. I don't think the bubble has even properly started. Most of these really good projects still only have about 10,000-50,000 holders. But crypto will bubble and pop, and you'll be back here once again saying "I told you so!" as the world increasingly adapts it as the next layer of digital evolution. (I assume, but I'd be pleasantly surprised to see some humility from you.) It's also funny how haters focus on trading/investing/price when the price is going down, but when it's going up they're "all about the technology". But I may be unfairly grouping you in with Dukhat here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall a few "I told you so" themed posts when it crashed this year.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 16:23:48 Seb Read the rest of the thread and weep over how nhill understood exactly what I meant. No one explictly or otherwise said any of the bullshit you are now claiming.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 16:26:19 Nhill To be fair, seb did not engage in that, it was dukhat and some of the known forums troll alt accounts.
Seb Member	Sun Sep 12 16:49:54 nhill: "Seb, when I say you lack the trait of openness, it's simply an observation that I have yet to see you admit you are wrong on anything." I can dig out a few threads if you like. Have you? "Yet, I have constantly admitted to failures and mistakes" I haven't noticed any - perhaps we are both suffering salience bias. "Like I said, proof is in the pudding." Depends how we define pudding - pudding is not high returns now. "Now, exactly what claim haven't I refuted?" I posted two points above, around role of intermediaries and systemic price manipulation. you asserted that these had been addressed by claim that code transparency of smart contract addresses them - but that doesn't stack up; or if it does it does not do so in an obvious way. "Tulip bulbs? Lol. Comparing the cryptocurrency landscape, with use cases from the metaverse, digital collectibles, accessible banking to disadvantaged areas, and a million other practical use cases to rare tulip bulbs?" No, I'm comparing your argument that your bank balance now proves anything to the counterfactual that someone who made a killing off tulip bulbs during tulip mania would tell you anything about the underlying non-speculative value of tulip growing as an industry. It would be a single point in time data point, and on it's own says nothing about the distribution or trend. I think you might be being a bit disingenuous here as the point was clear and you are smart enough to follow it. Feel free to print out the thread if you like, confirmation bias is for those that wish to fool themselves. "but I do have a Master's degree in AI, so I'm somewhat familiar with the ivory tower)." I really don't think so, or you wouldn't worry so much about having a PhD or not - arguments stand and fall on their own merits, evidence and coherence and you keep moving the discussion onto irrelevancies. That's sloppy thinking and one thing I can say of proper academia is that the thinking is rarely sloppy in the area of the discipline. Often ignorant of practicalities outside of it, but that's a different matter.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 16:55:24 "Seb Member Fri May 14 12:10:16 Nhill: A technical but meaningless distinction that lacks relevance to the point I was making. Nim raised them in rebuttal to my point in the original thread (data before your return) where I said that a proof of work based system could not scale out to achieve his stated desire of a fully decentralised monetary and financial system replacing existing ones so as to limit the power of state and large financial institutions." This is a lie, here is a reference to the original thread, where I EXPLICITLY mention Lightning network and the layer 2 technology for BTC as the potential thing to replace Visa/mastercard. I NEVER raised the binace visa card in that thread, since I was not even aware of it. see for yourself: http://www...hread=87979&time=1618997840541 "nhill Member Fri May 14 12:27:57 Also, you may have interpreted Nim's statement wrong again. Or perhaps I did, he'll have to clarify. But his story about the Uncle came off to me as an indication of further adoption & acceptance of our new financial ecosystem (doesn't matter that his Uncle may not fully understand the implications)." "Nimatzo iChihuaha Fri May 14 13:31:44 Yeah. Pretty obvious given the context, if your name isn’t seb. **The point is, a year ago there was no Binance visa card, now there is. In another 6 months things will develop and seb will still be here talking about PoW doesn’t scale (because seb doesn’t understand that networks can scale in layers), and the kicker is that PoW isn’t even the only consensus method**. Oh seb..." In my defense that was 5 months ago and while I don't think BTC is going anywhere because boomers have a lot of fiat, I don't really care even less about BTC today, sentiments I conveyed in the original thread: "I am not married to bitcoin, but I am married to my vision for the future and that future needs something like Bitcoin or Monero or Dogecoin. " This I can not defend though, that I mentioned Doge and Monero. These are arguably the worst instantiations. Shame on me. However this was ages ago in crypto years and I know better now, in context while the examples are poor, I am talking about the principle ideas and technology. You NEVER ackowledge instead double down: "So, your stunning argument for the success of crypto ecosystem is how a firm creates an interface that requires you to give over your crypto coins to them, and have a conventional debit card linked to an amount of fiat currency based on a notional unregulated debt they owe to you denominated in cryptocoins." Which I have addressed again in this thread. I don't give a shit to present any "stunning" argument about crypto to you or anyone. *I* believe in it. And even this response oozes the inability to look beyond the current instantiations. Anyway, enough time has been wasted!
Seb Member	Sun Sep 12 16:58:21 Nim: You have appeared to link to the thread I already linked to and quoted from. I'm not sure how that saves me the trouble. Nhill: "This is precisely what I've been trying to do with you, but you repeat the same tired arguments..." Ah, I see, you think debate is where you repeatedly assert the same thing over and over again and insist that it addresses a point when it clearly does not. For example, you can't say "exchanges will not be a problem in the future" without reasonably articulating why and how it should come to pass that fiat currencies would die away. I've set out rationale why I think that cannot come to pass, not only for direct opposition from the state, but also because the very presence and behaviour of exchanges in the here and now are likely to act as a major block to moving to the universal adoption. For crypto-currencies to dominate over fiat, existing capital has to be re-denominated into crypto. How does that happen without movement of money through exchange? Lots of people need to exchange dollars for crypto currency in order for it to make sense to redenominate existing capital in crypto currencies - and the fact that existing exchanges are far less reliable and regulatable than banks are is a huge blocker to that happening. Your argument is like someone saying "yes, the bridge has fallen down, but after we have crossed it, that won't matter". Repeating this phrase over and over does not make "the bridge has fallen down" a tired old argument. But look, it is obvious we are not going to get anywhere now.
Seb Member	Sun Sep 12 17:10:39 Nim: "see for yourself: http://www...hread=87979&time=1618997840541" This link is broken. However you are redefining the threat I was referring to. The one I was referring to in this post: "Nim raised them in rebuttal to my point in the original thread (data before your return) where I said that a proof of work based system could not scale out to achieve his stated desire of a fully decentralised monetary and financial system replacing existing ones so as to limit the power of state and large financial institutions." is the one I linked to earlier. The discussion is about the binance card. It seemed at the time pretty clear to me in the post you made: "I just got off the phone with my uncle, he is even deeper into crypto. He just explained he has a Binance visa card, that he can use to get take out 250 euros a day from ATMs, or 8000 dollars from forex. But seb will be here 5 years from now talking about how PoW can’t scale. lulz :)" that you are offering up the binance card as a counter example that PoW systems will not scale. Otherwise why follow up on the coin with a "But seb will be here 5 years from now talking about how PoW can't scale". The reason it seemed obvious to me is there is no sensible good faith reason to combine the last sentence "Seb will be here 5 years from now talking about how PoW can't scale" with the rest of the sentence unless the two were logically linked with a salient point. However, as I have become increasingly aware, my previous assumptions that you operate in good faith were incorrect and you have been operating like Sam Adams. I.e. you have started to mix personal trash talk into dishonest and/or non-sequitur statements. The fact you are now relying on this fact and accusing me of acting in bad faith for not realising that you were merely throwing an ad-hominem into an anecdote about your uncle's use of binance - the very definition of acting in bad faith - is a vein of deep irony that will be lost on you. Just stop now - we have nothing meaningful to say to each other.
nhill Member	Sun Sep 12 17:19:20 That's progress at least. ;) I thought it was clear that I was using it as a presupposition, not as the argument in itself. Apparently, I did not communicate it clearly enough. You would like to debate the point that centralized exchanges will continue to be necessary. > Repeating this phrase over and over does not make "the bridge has fallen down" a tired old argument. As I said above, we were talking past each other. I laid down a presupposition based on my understanding of the trends. I thought perhaps that 10-30 years estimation made that very clear that there's no crystal clear way to cross the early adopter chasm. And, yes, perhaps salience bias is in play here on my end. It's easy (for me) to group people together here after about 10-20 full threads, so I'm probably unfairly attributing some of the idiocy Dukhat and the clown crew spouts with your own arguments. My apologies.
nhill Member	Sun Sep 12 17:38:23 Seb Are you familiar with The Bitcoin Law that was passed by the Legislative Assembly of El Salvador on 8 June 2021? There's a nation that can soon realize a native ingress (once the infrastructure is finished) into their financial system without the need for centralized exchanges. From there, they can take the Bitcoin they receive as salary and exchange it through smart contracts without the need for a centralized exchange. Of course, they are still subject to price manipulation by whales and exchanges, particularly when importing foreign goods. But when you consider that Bitcoin has, on the whole, always gone up relative to fiat currencies, it may end up giving them a surprise advantage on the international stage. The yearly moving average of Bitcoin price has been in an upwards trend 4 out of the past 5 years. Particularly gives an advantage to companies that know how to scale future contracts (priced in fiat) for their supply chains. Just saying there's advantages too. I agree that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages at this moment in time, but someone had to blaze the trails. Doesn't seem like El Salvador had much to lose. I digress. It does appear to be trending further towards state adoption, rather than away from it. In the meantime, the influence centralized exchanges have over manipulating the price can be mitigated by appropriate laws and regulations. SEC preventing Coinbase from releasing a lending product was, again, a good thing for crypto. It may not be a good thing for the price of crypto, but the more they tax and regulate it, the less likelihood of them being directly antagonistic against it. Once they get a taste of that sweet tax money next year, they'll be quite determined to have it continue, especially as much of that money comes at the benefit of foreign activity.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 17:50:08 http://www...hread=87979&time=1618997840541 Working link. "The reason it seemed obvious to me is there is no sensible good faith reason to combine the last sentence" Actually there is and both me and nhill have explained it for you several times in several thread, I even explain it for your in the nat gas plat (link above). It is your inability to look beyond the current instantiations and their flaws and see the paradigm being presented and the principles at play. PoW being "old news". Things are moving so fast in this space, and we have thousands and thousand of developers and investors very interested in the core principles, pouring money and time into making things better and better. Huge swatch of a new domain of technology "obsessed" with de-centralization and less reliance on fiat. You are not seeing this, because you are not looking at it. *I don't think this is a project that can be falsified on paper or with debate, if it is to be falsified at all it will have to be in practice. The scope is way to big and the potential disruption as well.* "However you are redefining the threat I was referring to. The one I was referring to in this post:" I referenced and quote that seb... and THEN I referenced the other thread for good measure, that I have in principle said the same things, even before Nhill came here. I am that much wiser, but I already understood the core idea, I just couldn't imagine all the possibilities. I do not accept your answer for a second and I will not let you weasel yourself out of this. It was explained in that thread CHRYSTAL clear what I meant, and I know you read it because you quoted and responded, by doubling down and shifted the goal posts. Now the binance Visa card was not very impressive. I don't care, things are moving forward and you validate everything I said back then in this thread with "but but it's priced in fiat". Swoosh. He paid with ETH! The fact that the world is still operating on fiat is not a surprise to anyone, but also not relevant to the development. If you have valuable criticism, if you are even capable of it, both me and nhill are very interested. You seem to have all the qualifications on paper yet for whatever reason this bullshit "debate" style or whatever it is constantly comes in the way, constantly. I was lucky now that all the relevant thread were still there to be googled! But this is not the first time and you have be able to hide behind the ambiguity of your poor memory of past conversations. "However, as I have become increasingly aware" You have not become increasingly aware of anything, my patience with your bullshit has just shrunk to 0 and the opportunity cost of engaging with your, specifically on this topic can be quantified in the currency of your choice. "an ad-hominem" Relevant personal feedback.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 17:58:29 Nhill "The Bitcoin Law that was passed by the Legislative Assembly of El Salvador on 8 June 2021?" I read that according to IMF rules a state has the right to pay with their own currency. That in extension this means anyone who want's to trade with El Salvador (Including payments to IMF), have to accept BTC. Now of course the other country could say fuck you (IMF can't I believe) El Salvador, then we won't sell you shit, so it isn't this giant leap, but a small step.
nhill Member	Sun Sep 12 18:02:05 I think many countries will accept their Bitcoin as legal tender, continuing to increase adoption of cryptocurrency technology. Of course, such tender will naturally use fiat currencies as a price oracle, so it doesn't move the needle on that end, but it's a huge step forward on the technology side of the state argument.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 18:30:39 I don't disagree, fiat is going to be here for a long time. Funny enough and in relation to the last days "debating" and reemergence of the payment question. I am reading about LUNA and they have several payment systems, one operational in South Korea and one in Mongolia, that pays and settles with their stablecoin. "Tokenist: Is Terra more of a settlement network, or a payments infrastructure? How so? Do Kwon: It’s both. Terra’s stablecoins serve as the settlement layer for a broad spectrum of use cases ranging from investing/trading (Mirror), saving (Anchor), payments (Chai), and more. The idea is that with stablecoins baked into the protocol as the primary vehicle for value transfer (instead of a volatile native currency like ETH), more intuitive, user-friendly, and familiar applications can be built on top of the network." "Do Kwon: Last year, Chai processed more than $2.0 billion in transaction volume with more than 2.5 million users — making it one of the most successful and widely adopted applications that uses blockchain technology and is not purely speculative in nature." http://tok...na-mirror-chai-terraswap-more/ They mention on their website it is used by 5% of South Koreas population. Now, be warned I am not aware of how that breaks down into details and components, but as an addition to the constant development in this space.
Seb Member	Sun Sep 12 18:58:29 nhill: "Are you familiar with The Bitcoin Law that was passed by the Legislative Assembly of El Salvador on 8 June 2021?" Yes, but El Salvador is a dollarized economy so I don't really see how that addresses any of the points I raised - it did not (in effect) have it's own currency let along the exorbitant privilege of a reserve currency issuer. I suspect El Salvador will be an interesting experiment. "But when you consider that Bitcoin has, on the whole, always gone up relative to fiat currencies, it may end up giving them a surprise advantage on the international stage." Well, lets think about that for a second. 1. What you are describing: currency prices perpetually rising with respect to goods/services, is strong deflationary pressure. That's not often been associated with a good thing. 2. What would happen if it turns out to be the price of bitcoin is in fact artificially inflated due to stablecoins being overvalued against the dollar (that is to say, not fully backed and so devalued against the dollar in a way the market has not recognised)? You can use El Salvador as a marketplace to covert bitcoins to dollars by making asset purchases in El Salvador for real goods/services that can then be exported and sold in exchange for dollars (or any fiat, but lets say dollars) However, El Salvador needs to import things like, e.g. oil, and to do that it needs dollars as oil isn't sold in bitcoin. Depending on how things shake out exactly, and the extent to which bitcoins price in dollars reflects real exchange as opposed to an incorrect valuation of stable coins, things could get very interesting indeed. On the whole, I think it will not be good for El-Salvador to the extent bitcoin becomes a major flow through the economy. "...can be mitigated by appropriate laws and regulations." I'm not sure they can though. The nature of cryptocurrencies is - I'd argue through design - makes enforcing conventional regulations impossible if the financial system moves on chain. "SEC preventing Coinbase from releasing a lending product was, again, a good thing for crypto." I'm not sure it does: it marks another step towards creating a firewall between cryptocoins and the conventional financial system in many ways: it's not being regulated like a currency, it's being regulated like a security; and there are hard technical limits that prevent those regulations being followed in some cases. It looks more like policing fairly strict firewalls preventing crypto-currencies becoming part of mainstream finance. As for the tax, I think that may start to expose problems too. You can't pay tax in cryptocoins, so we will see how deep and liquid the market is for cashing out coins for dollars. If the worst accusations on stablecoins use as a mechanism to siphon the dollars out of the market is accurate, you could see some pretty stark falls. Nim: "Actually there is" This is the explanation you have chosen to quote in this thread: "The point is, a year ago there was no Binance visa card, now there is. In another 6 months things will develop and seb will still be here talking about PoW doesn’t scale (because seb doesn’t understand that networks can scale in layers), and the kicker is that PoW isn’t even the only consensus method." This is garbage: Binance Card exists to take crypto-coin transactions off chain. It was developed because PoW doesn't scale. You can't point to it as an innovation in blockchain technology because by definition it is not. You can't argue that it addresses my original point - the inability of a PoW based system to replace visa - because it is visa based and requires an intermediary that is less trustworthy and secure than conventional intermediaries you would use to access the visa system; while providing none of the security of a block chain base system. Hand waving and saying that because binance have launched a visa card - which is not a technical innovation at all - it demonstrates some indicator of innovation in the scalability of PoW - is another non-sequitur. It is either technologically illiterate, logically flawed, demonstrates a complete failure to grasp my original point, and fundamentally dishonest (bait and switch) or all three. As I said at the time, there is a reason why I specified PoW based systems. It is not because I was unware of other consensus mechanisms: quite the opposite. I would have simply said "blockchains" otherwise. Really, lets drop it - neither of us think the other is capable of honest debate and frankly you add nothing as your understanding of the technology is terrible.
Seb Member	Sun Sep 12 19:05:14 Nim: Tl;dr you can keep saying "But I explained" - but the chronology does not work. You initiated the whole conversation about Binance, it is clear that you didn't really have a coherent point that addressed the point I had made about PoW, other than a piece of illogical, Samish snark. I'm sorry I did not realise at the time you were so unserious, but my failure to do so is not dishonest, it is a consequence of me taking a bad faith comment by you as a contribution in a debate. But that is what happens when you don't post honestly - you can hardly blame me for that. It is a matter of regret that I have wasted time trying to engage with you; let us desist.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Sep 12 19:58:09 "This is garbage:" Already adressed in that thread and here, ultimately, it wasn't mentioned to impress you, but mock you, as a development in how people can easily access the value they have stored in crypto for use as payment and PoW isn't even a factor, not even a little. Because as I explained in the nat gas thread, there are ways to get around the scalability you assert was PHYSICALLY impossible, in many ways, one of them being the Binance visa card. "was developed because PoW doesn't scale." The Binance visa card works with BNB as well, which uses PoS. And you still don't understand, it doesn't _need_ to scale for this purpose and it doesn't even matter for the crypto project at large, which I said in the very first thread. "It is not because I was unware of other consensus mechanisms: quite the opposite. I would have simply said "blockchains" otherwise." I don't believe you, otherwise you wouldn't have kept dismissing crypto and blockchain in that first thread incessantly talking about waste of energy and PoW, which you did: 1. "cryptos, particularly any Proof of Work based cryptos, are off the charts in terms of energy consumption." Wrong btw. 2. "Because the dirty secret of Blockchain is that if you control more than 50% of the nodes in the network, you can arbitrarily re-write the ledger and enforce a hard fork." 3. "Currently there's no way to do that. The closest is PoW based cryptocoins." That really screams "I know of other consesus mechanisms", right? 4. "All in all, it's difficult to get the economics right to deliver decentralisation and low transaction times, and so massive inefficiency is built in - not from the cryptography of building a Merkel Tree (which is trivial) - but from the competing nodes and proof of work piece which are fundamental to the basic USP of cryptocurrency" Perhaps the most retarded sallad of words in that thread. PoW FUNDEMANDENTAL to the basic USP of cryptocurrency. LOL :) Having used the SOL network, I can tell you transaction times not a concern btw, you don't have time to blink. 5. "That's because banks offer additional services, and many are legacy organisations that are inefficient." This is just interesting to point out, now that we both know these services indeed can and are being provided without banks and their boomer legacy bullshit on DeFi. 6. "At the moment it is impossible to see how Proof of Work based crypto networks can scale to the point they give equivalent performance to say, the VISA payment service" Well, now we know the simplest and least innovative answer to this gordian knot. You simply get a Binance visa card and you are done! What was it you said it was about? "tech and horizon scanning and learning via debate". lol :) Add to that your constant usage of "untrusted" to describe trustless systems." Yea sure that thread and your subsequent bullshit really indicated you understand this very well! "you add nothing as your understanding of the technology is terrible." lol, ok mr PoW-is-fundamental-to-the-USP-of-crypto, OK :)
nhill Member	Sun Sep 12 21:01:03 "Yes, but El Salvador is a dollarized economy so I don't really see how that addresses any of the points I raised - it did not (in effect) have it's own currency let along the exorbitant privilege of a reserve currency issuer." It doesn't, directly. Like I said, I was operating on a presupposition. However, indirectly it does point to a trend of state-level adoption as countries adapt to their method of trade (and give them some credit, El Salvador is a country :p). "What you are describing: currency prices perpetually rising with respect to goods/services, is strong deflationary pressure. That's not often been associated with a good thing." It's important to qualify this vague "not often" statement. Deflation is associated with the strongest economic conditions if accompanied by economic growth. I assume you know this, so I don't want to be pedantic. However, if you would like me to source this claim, I can do so. What suffers in these conditions are Consumer Staples, Utilities, Energy, and Health Care sectors. Basically sectors with inelastic pricing suffer from deflation during times of growth. On the other hand, Tech, Consumer Discretionary, Industrials, and Materials sectors thrive in a deflationary environment, provided, again, that it is accompanied by economic growth. All of this is verifiable and backtested via earnings reports for companies during these conditions. On the other hand, as you mentioned, deflation is the very worst thing you can have during times of economic decline. Stagflation is much better than deflation (hence why the Fed is printing its way out of the pandemic). So, by adopting a currency standard that is deflationary, El Salvador will either look like geniuses or idiots depending on their economic activity. They may have chosen an auspicious time as the pandemic was ending when passed, however, it is now on a resurgence with the delta strain. El Salvador may be in for max pain. :) But it's a very interesting economic experiment. I'm not familiar enough with the macroeconomics of El Salvador, but I assume they rely heavily on exports, and therefore will be at the mercy of global economic conditions which will suffer as a result of the delta strain. > On the whole, I think it will not be good for El-Salvador to the extent bitcoin becomes a major flow through the economy. I suspect it'll be a disaster in the short-term but work out for them quite well once global economic conditions are more favorable. It's a gamble to tell when that will happen though. This quarter is starting to look dovish, and Q4 looks like it could be a disaster. Q1 next year I'm more optimistic about, as the YoY comps will look pretty nice. I'd love to research El Salvador more, though. Your wife is Latin American, correct? Does she have any thoughts? > I'm not sure they can though. The nature of cryptocurrencies is - I'd argue through design - makes enforcing conventional regulations impossible if the financial system moves on chain. On-chain is already a solved problem through decentralized exchanges. They can be front-ran with gas, but it's upfront and honest. Unlike centralized exchanges which can, as you say, print unlimited stablecoins with dubious backing to manipulate the price along with providing critical data with regards to market positioning to their whale friends. On-chain everyone has access to that data. Still boggles my mind that you don't see the benefits of open-source, especially as one with an academic background. Perhaps your Ph.D is a fabricated LARP? ;)
nhill Member	Mon Sep 13 00:02:17 Nim Entering back into my Fantom positions as planned, at $1.30. That $TOMB pump was nice! Thankfully, I think I still ended up in the green missing this one by selling my $FTM-$TOMB LP when $FTM was worth $1.90. This was a nice pullback, really. Cleaned out a lot of leverage and gives smart investors a good entry point (almost -45% from the top). $FTM is a very volatile coin, makes messing with it pretty fun if you can time a good exit. I call it a polite coin, because it gives 30-50% dips to allow people to re-enter and has been doing that since $0.24 when I first hopped on the Fantom train. Of course, if $BTC keeps dipping we won't be able to control the market, but I'm ready for a nice rally here.
nhill Member	Mon Sep 13 00:14:25 Oh what the hell. Might as well put it as a buy signal here too. Buying $FTM at $1.30 ;) Maybe it'll help make up for this ETH long I'm stuck in ;)
nhill Member	Mon Sep 13 00:19:24 Correction: I was wrong (*gasp*), Fantom dipped around 34% from its all time high. For some reason I could have sworn I saw it above $2. Maybe that was on a DEX.
nhill Member	Mon Sep 13 00:21:04 Weird, not hit $2 on any DEXes. One of those doubting reality moments, lol. Maybe another token.
Seb Member	Mon Sep 13 03:01:20 Nim: "The Binance visa card works with BNB as well, which uses PoS. " The Binance card "works" with whatever Binance chooses to take towards crediting your account. The fact remains, technologically it is not a blockchain based product and I'm not at all convinced you understand that by the way you keep raising it. "I don't believe you" the point generalises but it's easier to discuss in the sspecific. PoW was at the time the dominant (and I think still is) consensus mechanism used within the cryptocoin ecosystem by transaction volume. It was easier to focus on the specific and most common mechanism than to write a a 10,000 word article critiquing each and every consensus mechanism, many of which are at this stage irrelevant. However, I caveated specifically because I did anticipate that at some point someone would bring in discussions on other consensus mechanisms. As I mentioned, I did a fair bit of investigation of the potential applications of blockchain in the public sector, including possible use to replace the land registry back in 2015/16. You are projecting, I think. Let us desist. hil: Why do you think I do not value open source? I don't think it's a silver bullet, but it is a bold conjecture from a narrow set of comments about what problems one particular instance of open source can and can't do that I must not recognise the value of open source.
Seb Member	Mon Sep 13 03:05:46 Oh, and I meant to add: You say you don't believe I was aware of other consensus mechanisms, and the first thing you quote clearly and explicitly couches PoW based systems as a subset of the whole. "cryptos, particularly any Proof of Work based cryptos, are off the charts in terms of energy consumption." Do you maybe want to take a moment to reflect on that for a moment and consider in your own mind whether you are actually acting in good faith, or having formed an opinion, hawking around for whatever evidence you can to substantiate it.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Sep 13 03:09:52 "I'm not at all convinced you understand that by the way you keep raising it." Seb in may: "At the moment it is impossible to see how Proof of Work based crypto networks can scale to the point they give equivalent performance to say, the VISA payment service" Nimatzo yesterday: Well, now we know the simplest and least innovative answer to this gordian knot. You simply get a Binance visa card and you are done! What was it you said it was about? "tech and horizon scanning and learning via debate". lol :) Be quiet.
Seb Member	Mon Sep 13 03:18:14 Nhill: I'm not sure a single county constitutes a trend! "I'd love to research El Salvador more, though. Your wife is Latin American, correct? Does she have any thoughts?" Macroeconomics is not her thing. It's a pretty small country though. Iirc the stated arguments for the policy were around remittances, but this would not be the first time that vested interests in small central American States have influenced public policy. My gut instinct is that there was heavy lobbying in this and it's part of someone's exit scheme: a way to exchange bitcoin for dollars. Cf also Liberty Reserve, which is not a direct analogy. "On-chain is already a solved problem through decentralized exchanges." I could conduct a deal with you on one exchange, and manipulate the prices through other exchanges. Regulators would stand a good chance of detecting this in conventional finance, relatively easily trace transactions, and they could freeze trading or confiscate assets. The first two are much harder in blockchain based systems, the latter two iimpossible by design.
Seb Member	Mon Sep 13 03:20:52 Nim: Like I said, you clearly don't understand the point. Getting a Binance card doesn't scale the performance of the blockchain system. It's off chain, and you've moved your money of chain.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Sep 13 03:39:49 One of the first questions people ask is "how do you get access to your money?" These are things you would understand if you understood half the things you claim you do. It doesn't have to look pretty, it just need to work and be easy to attract more people. Someone like my uncle who does not care to understand the underlying technology, he is just interested in the investment opportunity and not paying taxes and still have access to his value. For people like that binance Visa card is an awesome gap filler, even if they do not themselves understand that, even the sebs of the world do not understand it. At no point is PoW an issue or an obstacle to the development. "You say you don't believe I was aware of other consensus mechanisms, and the first thing you quote clearly and explicitly couches PoW based systems as a subset of the whole." You are quite obviously ALL over the place, which is exactly the kind of behavior you expect from someone who know very little. See below. I mean I just took 6 quote from that thread to illustrate that. "proof of work piece which are fundamental to the basic USP of cryptocurrency" And I will admit the USPs of crypto have changed for me a lot since then and learning about DeFi and the gen 3 protocols, but at no point did I think PoW (or any of the consensus mechanism) was one of them. PoW is a technical solution to a problem that few people are interested in and even fewer people need to understand. The USP is the low transaction fees and lightning speeds of say Solana. It's like saying the combustion engine is fundamental to the USP of an car. It's not even wrong.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Sep 13 03:44:52 "you clearly don't understand the point." And you clearly do not understand that your demands that this domain be technologically pure, for you to be impressed, is not something anyone give a shit about. And besides ALL of this is completely irrelevant. As I explained LUNA and their payment system CHAI that settles transactions and payments in their USD denominated stable coins. Already being used in South Korea. But but it's priced in Fiat! But but PoW can't scale and it is a fundamental USP of crypto! Ok boomer! :)
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Sep 13 05:59:34 Nhill I am also buying more FTM here with the SC on Binance. My FTM position is from 1,04. Sold half at 1.63. Well technically I am buying BNB... to quickly bridge and swap to ftm. I want to increase the reaper.farm.
Seb Member	Mon Sep 13 06:58:48 Nim: I don't deny it has use. But it is not an example of scaling on-chain activity to the level that would directly support the modern economy; and as a workaround precludes the full benefits of a blockchain based system and would leave access to the blockchain based system in control of centralised exchanges less well regulated than at present. To remove the role of centralised exchanges (as per discussion with nhill) what is needed is the ability of apps to support the volume, frequency and latency of visa payment system, but on chain. S
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Sep 13 07:41:40 Seb You can not replace the entire financial system and global order over night. It's neither possible, but perhaps more importantly would most likely result in a disaster. This stuff is not ready for that, on that we can agree, but it would most likely also crash and collapse the world economy. They must slowly be built in parallell to allow for an exist into a fully functioning system. Until that time, if it is to emerge, these hybrid solutions fill the gaps and in an easy way give people access to their currency in their day to day lives. It's not an impressive leap in technology, but there is more that goes into building these things and increase adoption. "But it is not an example of scaling on-chain activity" And I never mentioned this as an example of scaling on chain activity, which is very specific technical claim and not something I would say, because I do not claim to have deep knowledge about the technology. I have good enough knowledge, like I have good enough knowledge about a combustion engine and the inner workings of a car. "To remove the role of centralised exchanges (as per discussion with nhill) what is needed is the ability of apps to support the volume, frequency and latency of visa payment system, but on chain." Solana and FTM have the specs for this AFAIK, SOL can handle 3000+ X the volume of ETH 1.0. LUNA is already doing this at some volume in South Korea and Mongolia, on chain. All 3 use proof of stake. I am done with BTC, I still own a tiny amount, mostly for nostalgia.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Sep 13 07:45:51 exist=exit
Seb Member	Mon Sep 13 07:50:48 Nim: Without a consensus mechanism, you can't have distributed, untrusted ledger. What you have instead is a moderately inefficient append only database that needs to be held by a trusted operator. So yes, consensus mechanism is key. It's more like saying "wings are key to the USP of aeroplanes: without wings you cannot get of the ground which means you will not be able to achieve the speed and direct route that makes flying a superior mode of transport for traveling across the Atlantic" You can say all you like that the USP is speed and convenience via a vis a 2 week trip by boat (or whatever it is) and you don't want to know about wings or engines as an end customer. Nevertheless, the wings are key to the USP. No wings, no plane.
Seb Member	Mon Sep 13 07:56:32 Nim: "You can not replace the entire financial system and global order over night" I didn't suggest you need to. Please, these straw man arguments are tiresome. My point is that none of the consensus mechanisms look viable to operate at the scale of visa in principle. Therefore, they will operate alongside fiat systems and centralised intermediaries, and the combination of both ends up putting the consumer in a worse position. To which you appear to be offering as "counterexample" precisely the kind of centralised intermediary that offers none of the consumer protections of a retail bank and none of the protections of direct control of your money that cryptocoins offer. You can see, perhaps, why I have drawn the conclusion you don't understand what you are talking about. Like I said, this is fruitless.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Sep 13 08:17:54 "Without a consensus mechanism" There is a consensus mechanism, it isn't important for what binance visa card is doing. You are just constantly changing the tune on this to not admit that you were wrong in the first place to claim I said it was a scaling of on chain activity. "Please, these straw man arguments are tiresome." They are your arguments and your "I am not impressed attitutude". They ooze unrealistic expectations. Perhaps put more thought into how you are coming off. "Like I said, this is fruitless." Indeed, I gave you 2 examples of protocols using PoS with instant transactions, financial services, DEX etc. I gave another one with a payment layer already deployed in South Korea. And now you apparently you feel like you need explain the important of consensus mechanism. You are a tool.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Sep 13 08:35:38 And btw you lying cunt. You didn't say "consensus mechanism" your said proof of work was a fundamental USP to crypto. And I gave you 3 protocols with proof of stake, and then you switched it to "consensus mechanism is important" lets read this again "You can see, perhaps, why I have drawn the conclusion you don't understand what you are talking about." Absolutely I can see why you have done that, because the bullshit is pouring out of every orifice on your body. Like I said, you have completely given up any semblance of honesty and coherence. You will LITTERALLY say anything.
	show deleted posts