Crypto has its issues, but when used as an actual payment system, it’s a great alternative for online payments, and can give more privacy and anonymity if used correctly
except for the insane fluctuations in currency value and the immense inefficiency of the whole system and all the fraud even in “stable” coins and all the lack of regulation
“Insane fluctuations in currency value”: Someone who makes most of their payments in crypto is likely doing it with a stablecoin, which is a cryptocurrency pegged 1-to-1 to a fiat currency, like the US dollar. So, no more wild fluctuations than the 10% decrease in value the USD has experienced over the past year. Speaking of which, the 100% increase in BTC value this past year certainly is wild, but I don’t think any of it’s holders would consider that a problem.
“Immense inefficiency of the whole system”: If you consider the US military to be the value security for the world’s dominant fiat currency [which you would be foolish not to] Proof of Work security is a large improvement on energy use. Proof of Stake security, which most stablecoins use these days, doesn’t really use any energy worth noting.
“All the fraud”: Credit cards suffer far more fraud than crypto. Perhaps that’s a product of their wider adoption, but that’s where 99% of the fraud is happening.
“The lack of regulation”: One of the hottest topics in US congress over the past several years, for both Biden and Trump regimes, has been crypto regulation. It’s a moving space right now but it seems myopic to call lack of regulation when it’s certainly going to be a moot point by 2028.
Sorry I don’t really consider myself to be some crypto warrior but I do really dislike these decade+ old off the cuff relatively low-information talking points. This is not how you argue against crypto, if you want a strong argument against crypto come at it from an explicitly anti-capitalist lens and accuse it of accelerating global financialization, which it is, like a gas can poured on a campfire. Go big or go home. If you don’t oppose capitalism and you’re just looking for a better money, crypto is not your boogeyman.
As someone who used to be (but no longer is) into crypto: These statements are all technically accurate to some degree, but are missing extremely important nuance.
The stablecoins part is accurate. Most purchases made in crypto are with stablecoins.
What’s missing here is the fact that these stablecoins are issued and controlled by private companies, or would be influenced by them otherwise. For example, Circle issues USDC, one of the most popular dollar stablecoins. (as well as EURC for Euros)
Circle holds real dollars in real bank accounts to back USDC. Circle can also freeze your balance and blacklist addresses, because they don’t want their banks to stop working with them. That’s it. They can unilaterally stop you from using your USDC.
Other mechanisms for keeping a stablecoin at $1, such as algorithmic pegs, failed spectacularly many times, the most famous of which being the Terra disaster.
Some other stablecoins use centralized coins as backing to then issue new coins. (e.g. 1 STABLECOIN is backed by 1 USDC, and can be exchanged freely) These coins could then be in trouble if they’re used enough for fraud, and Circle just blocks the coin itself from exchanging between itself and USDC to maintain the peg, making it worthless. This is an inherent risk. You either use a centralized platform less accountable than card companies, or you use a third party backed by that centralized asset that could face peg issues.
As for the inefficiency, it’s actually true that PoW is being phased out by most chains other than Bitcoin for PoS, which is incredibly energy efficient by comparison. Truly, it’s actually just pretty energy efficient. This isn’t missing much nuance, though you could argue that the financial mechanisms used by the systems running on top of a PoS consensus mechanisms are still complex in their own right.
For the fraud part, this is only half accurate. Fraud in crypto has been on the rise, and while it’s maintained itself at a level lower than credit card fraud, this is also because of the limited scope in which crypto operates. If crypto were to be used in more situations like credit cards are, then there would be more opportunities to be defrauded in the first place.
The majority of activity in crypto operates within speculative markets, protocols offering yield farming and staking, liquidity pooling, vote bribing, and an untold number of other mechanisms that exist. As such, scammers are mostly limited to tricking people in the field of investments.
If crypto was also used to pay your bills, for your purchases at the store, for every rideshare and food delivery app, and to pay friends back for dinner, then the scope of fraud becomes much larger.
Crypto does not have less fraud because it is fundamentally better at preventing it, crypto has less fraud because it’s used in less circumstances.
(There is also an argument to be made that many investments in crypto that don’t work out because of rugpulls, failed promises, unaccountable DAO leaders, etc, aren’t counted in fraud statistics, and that the number should be much higher)
Now, finally, as for regulation, it’s true that crypto has seen much more regulation than it used to have, but it’s only getting a bit stronger, and is nowhere near the sheer quantity of regulations that financial corporations have to follow, though some are technically not necessary for crypto as most crypto is already transparent via the blockchain’s very structure, and thus doesn’t require some of the transparency regulations corporations often follow.
Crypto still lags far behind, and there’s a degree to which it physically can’t be regulated in the first place. For example, you can’t regulate how the Uniswap exchange handles user funds, because the code for Uniswap has already been immutably deployed to its respective chains.
If a system is built on rejecting authority, there will always be a degree to which justifiable authority that could protect people becomes impossible by its very nature.
I’m not wholly against any possible use of crypto. If someone being, say, censored by payment processors is able to use crypto to send money home to their family, or pay for a thing the corporations currently deem to not be nice for their brand image, that’s all well and fine.
But as a whole, crypto is nowhere near being more beneficial than harmful.
Very useful addendums. I agree with pretty much all of this, I just didn’t say most of it for the sake of brevity. Overall though yes, when taking apart individual arguments quickly like I did one does lose the whole picture in order to be exacting about specific points.
As for crypto being more harmful than beneficial overall? I agree with that too. It’s just that I feel that way about all money under capitalism. For me that kind of goes without saying. Money under capitalism is overall more harmful than beneficial. However, is crypto less beneficial to the average individual than fiat? …In most cases still, also yes lol. But there are plenty of edge cases.
Stronger argument is that deflationary currency is not something someone with an investment mind wants to spend. Which is why there is the same price fixation and attempts to hype up crypto like stocks because most people got into it not to spend it, but hold onto it like an asset. Its why people encourage rebuying crypto if you use it to buy something to replenish their balance to not regret having wasted what could be a house to get a slice of pizza.
Now sure there are stable coins but that is more used by investors to move assets around exchanges to then go and buy other crypto that they believe will return a profit or move into when they believe a dip is occuring so they can reenter later to expand their assests by buying low. Pretty much most crypto communities are highly fixated on price as opposed to treating it like currency that should be spent. It’s always this is the next big thing, it is going to moon, hodl, etc.
So I guess point is as much as people like to act like they are anticapitalist the culture of crypto once prices started going up is pursuit of capitalism and wealth hording. The values people claim to have was most present when crypto was new and people were giving it away, having fun spending it, and transacting it. But, then greed took over as people saw people becoming millionaires and billionaires for holding what they got early.
It’s ironic looking at it now given the state of dogecoin but that maintained the original spirit of crypto for a really long time before it too skyrocketed in price and got pulled into the same asset category.
You speak of Gresham’s Law, which is “bad money beats good money”. For payments, people would rather part with an inflationary asset than deflarionary because of future value. Definitely the thing that has settled the argument over Bitcoin’s primary use case.
Agreed re: the faux anticapitalism. I mean, ideologically I think of myself as anticapitalist. But I have to afford things to not be destitute within this economic regime, so I “play the game”. But I wouldn’t delude myself into thinking that advocating for one sort of money over another is in any way a stance against capitalism. In most cases it isn’t even a stance against status quo.
The lack of regulation is pretty much a goal. When a government controls or regulate a currency, your liberty is attacked.
Fraud? What are you talking about?
How is the system inefficient though? Compared to what? I don’t believe it’s fair to compare a decentralized system to a centralized one. Lemmy is much more expensive to run per user than Reddit for example
Fluctuations suck indeed, though they vary, it depends of the crypto
Crypto has its issues, but when used as an actual payment system, it’s a great alternative for online payments, and can give more privacy and anonymity if used correctly
It’s a pyramid scheme.
I imagine you believe the stocks market is also a pyramid scheme?
He’s not wrong…
who?
The person implying that the stock market is a pyramid scheme.
:(
That’s not what a pyramid scheme is
except for the insane fluctuations in currency value and the immense inefficiency of the whole system and all the fraud even in “stable” coins and all the lack of regulation
“Insane fluctuations in currency value”: Someone who makes most of their payments in crypto is likely doing it with a stablecoin, which is a cryptocurrency pegged 1-to-1 to a fiat currency, like the US dollar. So, no more wild fluctuations than the 10% decrease in value the USD has experienced over the past year. Speaking of which, the 100% increase in BTC value this past year certainly is wild, but I don’t think any of it’s holders would consider that a problem.
“Immense inefficiency of the whole system”: If you consider the US military to be the value security for the world’s dominant fiat currency [which you would be foolish not to] Proof of Work security is a large improvement on energy use. Proof of Stake security, which most stablecoins use these days, doesn’t really use any energy worth noting.
“All the fraud”: Credit cards suffer far more fraud than crypto. Perhaps that’s a product of their wider adoption, but that’s where 99% of the fraud is happening.
“The lack of regulation”: One of the hottest topics in US congress over the past several years, for both Biden and Trump regimes, has been crypto regulation. It’s a moving space right now but it seems myopic to call lack of regulation when it’s certainly going to be a moot point by 2028.
Sorry I don’t really consider myself to be some crypto warrior but I do really dislike these decade+ old off the cuff relatively low-information talking points. This is not how you argue against crypto, if you want a strong argument against crypto come at it from an explicitly anti-capitalist lens and accuse it of accelerating global financialization, which it is, like a gas can poured on a campfire. Go big or go home. If you don’t oppose capitalism and you’re just looking for a better money, crypto is not your boogeyman.
As someone who used to be (but no longer is) into crypto: These statements are all technically accurate to some degree, but are missing extremely important nuance.
The stablecoins part is accurate. Most purchases made in crypto are with stablecoins.
What’s missing here is the fact that these stablecoins are issued and controlled by private companies, or would be influenced by them otherwise. For example, Circle issues USDC, one of the most popular dollar stablecoins. (as well as EURC for Euros)
Circle holds real dollars in real bank accounts to back USDC. Circle can also freeze your balance and blacklist addresses, because they don’t want their banks to stop working with them. That’s it. They can unilaterally stop you from using your USDC.
Other mechanisms for keeping a stablecoin at $1, such as algorithmic pegs, failed spectacularly many times, the most famous of which being the Terra disaster.
Some other stablecoins use centralized coins as backing to then issue new coins. (e.g. 1 STABLECOIN is backed by 1 USDC, and can be exchanged freely) These coins could then be in trouble if they’re used enough for fraud, and Circle just blocks the coin itself from exchanging between itself and USDC to maintain the peg, making it worthless. This is an inherent risk. You either use a centralized platform less accountable than card companies, or you use a third party backed by that centralized asset that could face peg issues.
As for the inefficiency, it’s actually true that PoW is being phased out by most chains other than Bitcoin for PoS, which is incredibly energy efficient by comparison. Truly, it’s actually just pretty energy efficient. This isn’t missing much nuance, though you could argue that the financial mechanisms used by the systems running on top of a PoS consensus mechanisms are still complex in their own right.
For the fraud part, this is only half accurate. Fraud in crypto has been on the rise, and while it’s maintained itself at a level lower than credit card fraud, this is also because of the limited scope in which crypto operates. If crypto were to be used in more situations like credit cards are, then there would be more opportunities to be defrauded in the first place.
The majority of activity in crypto operates within speculative markets, protocols offering yield farming and staking, liquidity pooling, vote bribing, and an untold number of other mechanisms that exist. As such, scammers are mostly limited to tricking people in the field of investments.
If crypto was also used to pay your bills, for your purchases at the store, for every rideshare and food delivery app, and to pay friends back for dinner, then the scope of fraud becomes much larger.
Crypto does not have less fraud because it is fundamentally better at preventing it, crypto has less fraud because it’s used in less circumstances.
(There is also an argument to be made that many investments in crypto that don’t work out because of rugpulls, failed promises, unaccountable DAO leaders, etc, aren’t counted in fraud statistics, and that the number should be much higher)
Now, finally, as for regulation, it’s true that crypto has seen much more regulation than it used to have, but it’s only getting a bit stronger, and is nowhere near the sheer quantity of regulations that financial corporations have to follow, though some are technically not necessary for crypto as most crypto is already transparent via the blockchain’s very structure, and thus doesn’t require some of the transparency regulations corporations often follow.
Crypto still lags far behind, and there’s a degree to which it physically can’t be regulated in the first place. For example, you can’t regulate how the Uniswap exchange handles user funds, because the code for Uniswap has already been immutably deployed to its respective chains.
If a system is built on rejecting authority, there will always be a degree to which justifiable authority that could protect people becomes impossible by its very nature.
I’m not wholly against any possible use of crypto. If someone being, say, censored by payment processors is able to use crypto to send money home to their family, or pay for a thing the corporations currently deem to not be nice for their brand image, that’s all well and fine.
But as a whole, crypto is nowhere near being more beneficial than harmful.
Very useful addendums. I agree with pretty much all of this, I just didn’t say most of it for the sake of brevity. Overall though yes, when taking apart individual arguments quickly like I did one does lose the whole picture in order to be exacting about specific points.
As for crypto being more harmful than beneficial overall? I agree with that too. It’s just that I feel that way about all money under capitalism. For me that kind of goes without saying. Money under capitalism is overall more harmful than beneficial. However, is crypto less beneficial to the average individual than fiat? …In most cases still, also yes lol. But there are plenty of edge cases.
Stronger argument is that deflationary currency is not something someone with an investment mind wants to spend. Which is why there is the same price fixation and attempts to hype up crypto like stocks because most people got into it not to spend it, but hold onto it like an asset. Its why people encourage rebuying crypto if you use it to buy something to replenish their balance to not regret having wasted what could be a house to get a slice of pizza.
Now sure there are stable coins but that is more used by investors to move assets around exchanges to then go and buy other crypto that they believe will return a profit or move into when they believe a dip is occuring so they can reenter later to expand their assests by buying low. Pretty much most crypto communities are highly fixated on price as opposed to treating it like currency that should be spent. It’s always this is the next big thing, it is going to moon, hodl, etc.
So I guess point is as much as people like to act like they are anticapitalist the culture of crypto once prices started going up is pursuit of capitalism and wealth hording. The values people claim to have was most present when crypto was new and people were giving it away, having fun spending it, and transacting it. But, then greed took over as people saw people becoming millionaires and billionaires for holding what they got early.
It’s ironic looking at it now given the state of dogecoin but that maintained the original spirit of crypto for a really long time before it too skyrocketed in price and got pulled into the same asset category.
You speak of Gresham’s Law, which is “bad money beats good money”. For payments, people would rather part with an inflationary asset than deflarionary because of future value. Definitely the thing that has settled the argument over Bitcoin’s primary use case.
Agreed re: the faux anticapitalism. I mean, ideologically I think of myself as anticapitalist. But I have to afford things to not be destitute within this economic regime, so I “play the game”. But I wouldn’t delude myself into thinking that advocating for one sort of money over another is in any way a stance against capitalism. In most cases it isn’t even a stance against status quo.
It cool to know there is a term for currency people don’t want to spend. That was a fun read.
The lack of regulation is pretty much a goal. When a government controls or regulate a currency, your liberty is attacked.
Fraud? What are you talking about?
How is the system inefficient though? Compared to what? I don’t believe it’s fair to compare a decentralized system to a centralized one. Lemmy is much more expensive to run per user than Reddit for example
Fluctuations suck indeed, though they vary, it depends of the crypto
By inefficiency I just mean transactions per kWh. It’s insane how expensive cryptocurrencies can get.
Sadly true for PoW cryptos. Luckily, PoS exists, but it might not work with every crypto.
More kWh = more secured chain, that’s currently how it works. At this point blocks are going to be mined anyways, so let’s fill those blocks
If your argument hinges on avoiding regulation, then it’s guaranteed to fail. Having oversight is not a bad thing.
The idea of positive self-regulation, especially of a currency in a capitalist system, is pure fantasy.
Perhaps, but bitcoin isn’t exactly the best example of that.
Yes, I believe bitcoin is not a good crypto overall. It’s only the oldest and most famous one, but fails on many sides
Yes. It was an amazing proof of concept, but it has been surpassed on all fronts.