|
|
|
|
|
by ETH_start
1413 days ago
|
|
Of course there are differences between cash and cryptocurrency, but the latter's design aspires to make it similar to the former, especially with respect to making peer-to-peer transfers possible. Privacy-enhancements like mixer smart contracts using cryptographic zero-knowledge proofs further mimic cash, in jettisoning the naive blockchain transaction of its traceability. >>don't complain about losing uninsured imaginary monopoly money when the entire sales pitch for crypto is "you don't need the traditional financial system with all it's corrupt government regulation and interference". Firstly, it's not imaginary monopoly money when people assign a value to it, and it exists as real information in a persistent database. I think if you take some to think about it without your preconceived ideological presuppositions, you would see that. Secondly, the sales pitch of cryptocurrency is not that we need zero government or that we don't require laws against theft to be enforced. Surveillance and limits on contract freedom are not "protections" and people have a right to want to live without these encroachments without being told they're anarchists who deserve to be robbed. |
|
All the drivel about mixers and zero knowledge proofs is the sales pitch of snake oil salesmen (and people who bought snake oil to a point they feel invested in it's value) - yes, the technology is interesting but it's a solution in search of a problem that there's little evidence isn't already better solved by a regulated financial industry.