Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_j1wi1m4 wrote

Honesty I don’t know what people see in crypto to be honest. It seems to be a scam in my eyes.

82

2MegaWhats t1_j1ws7uf wrote

Imagine if your bank was run by know-it-all techbro libertarians. Really who needs regulations?

52

nmarshall23 t1_j1wq5ic wrote

Crypto is libertarian performance art trying to prove their outlandish economics work.

Sadly libertarians seem to have the collective memory of a goldfish. And never learn from past failures.

34

2MegaWhats t1_j1wxip7 wrote

Libertarian-ism is the "Flat Earth Theory" of economics.

13

UrbanGhost114 t1_j1wvmx0 wrote

It keeps proving why it will always fail though, so there's that.

7

prqd112 t1_j1wzoct wrote

bitcoin is. shitcoins are speculation.

−12

pjx1 t1_j1wknzo wrote

Crypto is a repeat of the Tulip Market Crash

18

madsci t1_j1x4fsk wrote

This should be required reading. The psychology was well known 170 years ago.

Heck, I experienced that myself in elementary school. Our school went through a number of weird bubbles. One was adhesive grip tape for skateboards. The few skaters in the school would use it to decorate their decks but somehow the entire school got in on colored grip tape speculation.

No one cared about the intrinsic value, as long as they thought they could turn a profit.

12

FUDnot t1_j1y9gor wrote

this argument has been used againts crypto at least 5x per year for a decade.

−2

jwktje t1_j1ykrj7 wrote

And for what reason?

0

KaliGracious t1_j1yo20s wrote

Because ignorant morons refuse to try to understand how crypto works

−3

Konras t1_j1y6dxz wrote

People missed on Bitcoin and now desperately looking for next thing that will inflate their savings. All the talk about safe and decentralized system is a bullshit excuse or a belief of few purists.

12

cosignal t1_j1ydvmp wrote

It’s all bullshit. The federal government can track and seize your every move with bitcoin, it’s no different than regular currency. There’s no argument to be made towards bitcoin other than the possibility of making money off its speculative value. At this point it’s just a meaningless volatile security with few real-world applications.

8

Pretend-Weird26 t1_j1yrg6o wrote

Have anyone else see the video were a privet firm uses the blockchain to track a guy's transactions? Seriously check it out. It is not just the Government that can track you. Anyone can track a bitcoin transaction. All I need is your wallet ID or a transaction I can tie to you, and I can get most of your deals. At least with traditional banking it takes the government to track. Facebook cannot look at your transactions.

1

CatProgrammer t1_j1zvt6l wrote

Hence the existence of things like Tornado Cash, which recently got in trouble for facilitating money laundering (though the actions taken against people related to the tool may have overstepped constitutional bounds).

0

BlazinAzn38 t1_j1z597f wrote

I mean for a lot of things it was simply gambling but they could put on the mask of “I’m investing” when it wasn’t to make themselves feel legitimate. For others it was seen as a way to beat the 1% who are in the stock market because coins could do 500% MoM (ignoring it could also decline 5000% in minutes). Just a lot of desperate people looking for a way to make themselves wealthier which is a sad state of affairs

1

Garland_Key t1_j1z5r16 wrote

Because it is. Just don't confuse Bitcoin with the crypto industry.

0

7366241494 t1_j1xed1y wrote

The collapse of these many centralized institutions proves the need for crypto. The point has always been sound money and self-custody.

Putting money into the trust of third party exchanges was easy for new users but was never in the spirit of crypto.

DeFi solutions have existed for years that never have any possession of customer funds (“noncustodial”) No such FTX scam is possible on noncustodial exchanges (e.g. dydx) These solutions have not (yet) been popular due to less familiar user interfaces and higher fees.

Custodians like FTX, Celcius, BlockFi, (Chase, BoA, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns…) etc are the problem. Crypto already has the solution but people have to use the noncustodial tools instead of taking the old familiar paths.

−10

asked2manyquestions t1_j1xkdss wrote

Unless, people want centralization.

We created banks for a reason. People didn’t want to lug their money around everywhere or bury it in their backyards.

People don’t want to be their own banks. They don’t want to deal with the complexities in crypto. That’s why they use these centralized exchanges.

Centralized exchanges and the fact that people keep using them despite the multiple scams, frauds, etc is proof that the decentralization argument used by crypto supporters is and always was a false argument.

The concept of crypto has consistently been rejected by the public and the vast majority of crypto activity is no longer people that actually believe in decentralization. Now it’s mostly people trying to get rich quick.

True decentralization, like the type Satoshi described in his white paper is dead.

His vision was peer to peer payments. The closest version of that that we have today in mass use are centralized exchanges.

And even the ones that pretend to be decentralized still don’t offer true peer to peer transactions. You’re still relying on a third party in the middle to route transactions.

Much like most of the claims in the crypto community, their use cases only work when we eliminate all on-ramps and off-ramps to the blockchain and convert 100% to a crypto economy.

As long as there are on-ramps and off-ramps, centralization is required.

And while an all crypto economy sounds good on paper, just wait until you see the transaction fees when you move every monetary transaction in the world over to crypto.

And the biggest claim on why we need crypto? High bank transaction fees. LOL.

Crypto, solves zero problems and only creates new ones.

12

7366241494 t1_j1y8z6b wrote

Complexities in crypto are getting easier all the time. Interfaces are improving.

True decentralization is only getting started. You are wrong that distributed exchanges have a third party. Many do not and are truly peer to peer.

And transaction fees for things like Lightning Network payments are minuscule. Far far less than using a credit/debit card. Far less than a wire. Far faster than ACH. Perhaps you have old information about transaction fees? I can’t understand why you’d argue that banks are cheaper.

−2

asked2manyquestions t1_j1yiila wrote

Yes, yes, yes, it’s improving all the time. Just getting started. We’re at the beginning.

Any other patently false propaganda slogans I missed?

Bitcoin is 13 years old.

Let that sink in for a bit before you say things like “is only getting started.”

I didn’t say distributed exchanges have a third party. I said the distributed exchange is itself a third party.

Satoshi designed a peer to peer payment platform. It’s literally the first sentence of the white paper abstract.

The only problem is that for it to be a true peer to peer platform, buyers and sellers have to trust each other unless they’re going to show up in a parking lot with cash to exchange for Bitcoin.

So third parties stepped in to perform that function, thus making it no longer a peer to peer payment platform and introducing a form of centralization.

Everything after that, involves centralization.

That’s why I said that calling anything with on-ramps and off-ramps to fiat makes true decentralization impossible.

So it’s a technology doomed to failure. It either has to rely on centralization, meaning calling it decentralized is dishonest, or it requires every transaction in the world to convert to crypto.

Also, let me circle back to your comment about complexities getting easier. That’s not true because the complexities are baked into the product.

The fact that after 13 years of crypto you can still lose money by mistyping a wallet address, with zero chance of ever recovering your funds, is how it’s supposed to work.

Additionally, billions of dollars have been lost/stolen due to hacked wallets, people forgetting their recovery phrase, etc.

And proudly, the crypto world celebrates that as proof of how secure the technology is.

Saying that it’s getting easier is plainly false.

And, ironically, the only real solution I’ve ever heard offered is to have a trusted third party be a custodian for your wallet keys which sounds an awful lot like a bank.

To your last point, it sounds like you are the one with an incomplete view.

I live in Thailand. Last year I had to transfer several hundred thousand dollars from my account to my wife’s account at a different bank (making a home purchase).

Transaction fee was $0.00

Call me when there’s a lightning network that pays me to move money because zero is a small cost.

I also bring money into my Thai bank account from my U.S. bank accounts every quarter.

I’ve done that via Bitcoin a few times and I always end up paying more than TransferWise.

Plus, it’s a bigger pain in the ass.

I have to transfer money to an exchange, buy Bitcoin (fee involved), transfer it to my Thai exchange wallet (fee involved), sell the crypto on the Thai exchange (fee involved), and then have the money sent to my Thai bank.

On TransferWise, I log into my bank and send money to TransferWise (no fee), I tell TW to send it to my Thai bank account (fee involved), and it just shows up.

Just as a real world example, I transferred $3k from the US to my Thai bank last week. The only fee I paid was $19.69 and the exchange rate was dead-on with the official exchange rate so no FX gouging.

I just punched buying $3,000 USD worth of Bitcoin and the fee on just one leg of this multi step process would have been $44.70.

Plus every buy and sell incurs hidden fee called a spread. There’s a price Bitcoin if offered for sale (higher) and a price you can sell Bitcoin (lower).

So, crypto is not fundamentally cheaper.

3

7366241494 t1_j1zkxrz wrote

The internet took 30 years to go from ARPANET to Facebook and it wasn’t trying to overthrow an entrenched global industry like banking. 11 years after TCP/IP was created, we didn’t even have the World Wide Web yet.

You are somewhat wrong about mistyping addresses. There are checksums which prevent simple errors.

Buyers and sellers absolutely do not need a third party unless there’s fiat involved.. This is a fiat problem not crypto.

Your problems seem to be with on- and off- ramps not with crypto to crypto transactions. I’ve sent large amounts of Bitcoin internationally as well and it was much better than using a bank wire, both in terms of time and cost.

Again, it sounds like mostly you have an issue with your Bhat on and off ramps and the local Thai Bitcoin exchange, not with crypto transfers themselves. Please never pay $40 to move Bitcoin. Lightning would be 1¢.

−1

asked2manyquestions t1_j220ix9 wrote

Wow, it’s like just hearing the same stuff being regurgitated.

Please, if you’re going to be an advocate for crypto, at least be a good one.

These BS talking points might work on weak minded people desperate to get rich quick but some of us actually know quite a bit about this topic and aren’t buying it.

ARPANET was a government sponsored program that was mainly used by researchers and academics.

It caught on as people outside that community began to realize the potential.

Your argument is completely disingenuous (as are many crypto arguments) because in the 1980s and early 1990s a home computer was quite rare.

People couldn’t adopt a technology they had no idea existed and that they had no way to access.

The big difference between the internet and crypto is that as soon as people did become aware of the internet, usage grew and, really, has never stopped growing as more and more devices are still being added to the internet.

Crypto, on the other hand, constantly goes through boom and bust cycles based almost entirely off the premise that newbies can get rich.

It’s more like a perpetual pyramid scheme than it is anything like the internet, which has actual utility people almost can’t live without.

> Buyers and sellers absolutely do not need a third party unless there’s fiat involved.. This is a fiat problem not crypto

And I have now made this point for the third time because you keep ignoring it.

Crypto decentralization is doomed to failure unless 100% switch to crypto because as long as people exchange fiat for crypto, crypto isn’t decentralized.

That’s why crypto is such a farce. Satoshi created Bitcoin right around the time of the great financial crises in 2008.

One of the underlying assumptions is that the world will spiral into a period of massive hyperinflation rendering most fiat worthless.

That was the whole reason for decentralization.

I have a friend who wrote two books about crypto at that time and his books are filled with making the case that when people are bartering bullets and guns for food, crypto will be king. Easy to travel with, can’t be stolen, etc.

But when that didn’t happen. And, the crypto community, as it always does, simply changed the definition of success.

> Your problems seem to be with on- and off- ramps not with crypto to crypto transactions.

No, my problem is with calling something that is centralized, decentralized because too many people in the crypto community are too ignorant of what decentralized means to understand the vast majority of crypto is actually very centralized.

Basically, the entire DeFi space is just a bunch of people that are telling their marks that things are decentralized when, really, the true objective is replacing who is control of the centralization.

Every time crypto touches the physical world, it has to be centralized.

And that just means that all you’re doing is changing the name of the people that profit.

It doesn’t solve any new problem, it’s just a wealth transfer.

In 13 years, tell me even one thing that crypto does that’s easier, less complicated, or is superior to the existing system.

Even transferring money from my US bank to my Thai bank involves half the number of steps and is cheaper.

And that was the premier use case for crypto, moving money across borders.

It can’t even do that better.

> You are somewhat wrong about mistyping addresses. There are checksums which prevent simple errors.

You were smart to caveat that with the word “somewhat” because you welll know that this isn’t true. Just go to any crypto sub on Reddit and you’ll see plenty examples of people losing their coins by sending them to a wrong address.

But, you know, it’s only been 13 years and they haven’t solved this basic problem. The future must seem so bright to people like you. Imagine one day, crypto being as safe and easy to use as . . . What we already have. LOL.

> I’ve sent large amounts of Bitcoin internationally as well and it was much better than using a bank wire, both in terms of time and cost.

A bank wire? You’re comparing Bitcoin to a bank wire?

This is what we call using a selective example.

Is it easier and cheaper than using TransferWise? Or local solutions like DeeMoney?

No, it’s not. And if you go around the expat community, you’ll find very few expats that use crypto for transferring money across borders.

Hell, most don’t even use bank wires. Bank wires aren’t really intended for small transactions.

So, you’re using the wrong tool and then declaring it inferior to crypto. Nice one. LOL.

> Again, it sounds like mostly you have an issue with your Bhat on and off ramps and the local Thai Bitcoin exchange, not with crypto transfers themselves. Please never pay $40 to move Bitcoin. Lightning would be 1¢.

Please check what I said, I quoted the $40 fee for Coinbase, you know, one of the largest crypto exchanges in the world.

I didn’t even bother checking the price of what it would cost me on the sell side because the buy side was already more expensive.

0

Ahab_Ali t1_j1wer8k wrote

>North Dimension was where FTX customers were told to wire money if they wanted to trade on its exchange, according to a complaint filed Wednesday by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
>:::
>North Dimension was no Crazy Eddie of crypto. The website is rife with misspellings and bizarre product prices; for example, item listings sometimes showed “sale” prices that were hundreds of dollars above a regular price. And customers finding their way to the site may have had trouble actually buying products once they got there. Clicking on a laptop, say, would generate this pop-up: “Fee free to send a message. We collaborate with ambitious brands and people; we’d love to build something great together.”

People trusted this company with millions of dollars of their wealth? What do the poorly run exchanges look like?

51

Chinpokomaster05 t1_j1xo4sn wrote

Never heard of North Dimension until now. FTX's website stated to wire money to their Silvergate Bank account. North Dimension was never mentioned before, at least in my limited dealings with FTX.

Seems like North Dimension owned the Silvergate Bank accounts. Makes sense now since most people didn't know retail banks wouldn't do business with many things related to crypto.

7

campoanywhere t1_j1zh4ie wrote

I traded very heavy on FTX and other exchanges, and never heard of this site. Strange because nobody I know has either

1

JackFunk t1_j1wwluc wrote

Just more sketchy shit. SBFs "plausible deniability" tour looks more desperate every day.

48

redditor54 t1_j1y9d4u wrote

worst yet, I think it might work. He AND his parents and whoever else he payed off are throwing the kitchen sink at it. I wont be shocked if he get a slap on the wrist and disappears from media like a ghost, people with connections man.

12

NicoleEastbourne t1_j1yo3ps wrote

I dunno about that. Two of his colleagues made deals with prosecutors pretty quickly. I don’t think this ends well for SBF.

18

Steinrikur t1_j1yuxj4 wrote

I doubt it. He took money from rich people.

If he had only been scamming the poors, he would probably get off with probation.

18

namenotpicked t1_j1z371r wrote

If he only lost the "poors" money, then he'd definitely only see a slap on the wrist. His problem is that he now lost the elite's money, and they always get their pay back in some way. He's not going to get off easy.

5

FuckThisPostTruthEra t1_j1zagyj wrote

What I’m realizing is that if I’m gonna scam people, scamming poor and lower middle class people is the way to go. Once you fuck with the elites, they get SO angry lol see: That fake German heiress story. They got bamboozled and scammed and instead of hiding their moronic shame, they cried to authorities. But if that goes down for any other class of person, authorities don’t do shit.

6

RainbowCatastrophe t1_j1zvifh wrote

Americans need to demand that not a cent is spent on protecting him if he avoids jail time. He can pay for his own bodyguards, cause if they let him walk then I'm sure there will be a number of people ready to do something drastic and there is no reason taxpayer dollars should be spent protecting his ass.

He needs to be in custody for his own protection, and affording him any alternative is betraying the public that he defrauded.

1

Beneficial-Credit969 t1_j1zntx2 wrote

Yep I’m calling it SBF is getting acquitted. I believe there are too many powerful people who were involved and even profited. I don’t think he’s going to do a day in jail. Even though with this type of fraud he should be gone in for at least a decade.

1

waconaty4eva t1_j1xs30h wrote

It had many uses. But, to park your hard earned dollars at an unregulated fund speculating on crypto is insane.

5

jimbalaya420 t1_j1ycbpy wrote

It's odd ftx is completely irrelevant to the common person but a bunch of rich are up in arms

5

DamNamesTaken11 t1_j1ys8sg wrote

Seriously, how did they get so much money to begin with?!

How did that not raise red flags to anybody who was thinking of investing with them? If I tell Fidelity, Charles Schwab, or any of the other investing/exchange firms that I want to put my money into an account that they manage, they say make the check out to their company name, not some (supposedly) third party.

3

cybaz t1_j1zf3w8 wrote

That is the biggest takeaway for me, how did so many people think this guy was capable of managing billions of dollars? He graduated from MIT and worked for a Hedge fund which is impressive, but there are hundreds of people who have done that. He was managing funds in Quickbooks, which should have been an immediate red flag that this guy was in over his head and played League of Legends on investor calls which should have shown that he didn’t have the discipline to run a company.

2

seimungbing t1_j1zascs wrote

you dont go into a casino and ask where they got their money from. buying crypto as investment is the same as betting against house.

1

daviddevere t1_j202b2s wrote

SBF going full Santos on this one . . SBF not a criminal rather he is criminal-ish . .

1