[Havoc]

I find the disconnect between mainstream "political opinion" and the actions of the big banks more interesting.

Lets assume that crypto as a whole is a 50/50 proposition. And it is certainly a giant question mark (50/50 is symbolic)...cause there are certainly open questions.

...and yet we've got people on this forum describing it as "funny money" while major investment banks are opening crypto desks. That makes me go hmm...

...on balance I'm leaning towards IB usually has a good nose for money and where the political winds will blow (or be made to blow by force)

[oblio]

Banks, even major ones, are frequently doing business with very shady characters.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/dec/17/hsbc-fined-...

If they smell money, they'll do it.

Just because they do it, it doesn't mean it's not "funny money". Both could be true at the same time.

[BrissyCoder]

> and yet we've got people on this forum describing it as "funny money" while major investment banks are opening crypto desks

Jamie Dimon spoke to this a while back. Something along the lines of while he sees no future in crypto and would never invest, if there is customer demand then they really have no choice but to cater to it.

[NovemberWhiskey]

Right. You don't have to believe in the value of a thing to make a market in it.

[JSavageOne]

Much of HN is extremely conservative and unimaginative to the point where one should never take these comments seriously when it comes to anything predicting the future. HN completely missed the boat on crypto for example and seems to still think its some scam despite the fact that it enables borderless financial transactions without KYC and banks, decentralized finance, DAOs, and so on. Post about web3, and you'll just have a bunch of geezers complaining about the term "web3" rather than addressing the changes taking place.

Ultimately I think HN is a good place if you want to discuss technical details about super specific topics like Linux kernels, but a terrible place to get a glimpse of the future because most here are too close-minded and stuck in the past.

[beebmam]

The ad hominems you use here don't belong on Hacker News

[SuoDuanDao]

Any suggestions as to where one might find those glimpses of the future? I enjoy HN for the high average IQ of the conversations, but I'm always looking for new venues.

[JSavageOne]

Honestly, no, and it's something I'm looking for as well. Crypto Twitter seems to be the best place for crypto/web3 info, but aside from being way too much noise, Twitter's character limit limits any form of discussion to high-level soundbites.

[wwweston]

> seems to still think its some scam despite the fact that it enables borderless financial transactions without KYC

Not so much "despite" as "because."

[olalonde]

The purpose of KYC regulations are not to prevent scams but to prevent money laundering.

[wwweston]

If that were true, would we all just breath a sigh of relief and say "whew, it's only to prevent money laundering"?

But AFAICT it's not accurate, and KYC checks exist to prevent other forms of illegitimate activity (e.g. loan fraud associated with identity theft) which fit pretty neatly inside most definitions of "scam."

[olalonde]

Lenders were doing "KYC checks" long before KYC regulations of course and I'm sure no one is loaning their Bitcoin without doing thorough "KYC". But I'm not sure how this is related to the topic (sending money).

[JSavageOne]

You clearly don't know what the word "scam" means. Look up the definition of the words you use before you start commenting as if you know what you're talking about.

[wwweston]

Happy to be educated if that's what you're here for. I also don't mind being insulted, as that usually functions as an effective signal that I'm not missing an educational opportunity (unless it's a very clever insult, of course).

There's plenty of domain specific information I'm missing regarding cryptocurrency and I welcome discovering more. But when it comes to dealing in definitions -- examining what things are -- I'm plenty happy to continue to go to bat for observations that flow from relevant definitions: where the crypto-supporting bullet points tend to pile up around removed review/accountability (as with KYC) that seems likely to be more fertile ground for scamming, and where they pile up around reinventing existing functionality with marginal-to-questionable improvements (as with international transactions), it's easy to wonder if it's hype.

And when evangelism gets extra aggressive or resorts to tactics of high-control social groups, that doesn't help.

[JSavageOne]

Make low-effort snarky comments, and you'll get the same back.

Ok, so by your definition cash is also a scam then too because it enables transacting without KYC.

Crypto benefits way more than just scammers. A non-significant portion of the population doesn't have access to banking. Not every country has the blessings of a stable currency, freedom of capital movement, and a sane government. Crypto enables borderless transactions and collateralized loans with low fees without being dependent on a country's institutions. In countries like Argentina that've experienced hyperinflation and bank runs, nobody has trusted banks and their Peso for a long time - preferring to hoard cash and deal in cash transactions, even for house purchases [1]. To Argentinians, crypto is a huge boon. I'd imagine the same in countries like Venezuela and Cuba.

Crypto also enables decentralized anonymous voting, decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs), and decentralized finance (eg. trading, lending + borrowing, insurance). In 20 years I'd bet we'll see elections run on the blockchain with zero knowledge proofs.

Sure there are downsides as well, but it's tiring seeing shallow comments on here dismissing crypto as a "scam" despite the real value it's bringing to peoples' lives. Crypto is much more than just Ponzi schemes and ape NFTs.

[1] https://youtu.be/dwjiucS4NtY?t=2164

[Aulig]

Banks are going into crypto because they can charge transaction fees many times larger than they can with stocks.

[olalonde]

What's IB?

[kevstev]

Investment Bank.