|
|
|
|
|
by knorker
1885 days ago
|
|
> This is really a complaint against Proof of Work based consensus protocols. I wouldn't say so. The multi-level marketing ponzi scheme things would still be present. > "Cryptocurrency" is also kind of a dumb term. Yes, but "crypto" means something else. > Everyone seems to still think this is about creating new currencies. It's not. It's about greed and creating money for yourself. Currencies are just more direct. Everything else is just either incidental, or propaganda. |
|
After seeing a few of your replies on this thread I'd like to comment on this: what I see is someone who's using their own personal beliefs as justification on why something isn't useful, failing to understand others have their own beliefs and situations that make the technology useful to them.
For me, and others, there is a deep value in a decentralized, fault tolerant, fast, global, user controlled, immutable ledger of payments and store of value. You might argue that we have existing centralized solutions to these problems, which you believe are better, but that doesn't invalidate the inherit value I (and others) attribute to such a system. Being able to transact across the world in seconds for less than a bank wire and without a central authority is useful. Yes a centralized authority like PayPal can do it faster and with less resources, no that doesn't mean the decentralized method is useless.
Holdings: 5% of my net worth in various proof of stake coins, hoping to recoup money I lost to inflation not playing the equities game so I can afford a home.