[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

Sure, and paying with crypto is always going to be more painful unless you use an exchange, which is just a bank with less regulation(ok maybe not in the US, since banks are barely regulated there anyway). Which again means it will never catch on unless it just becomes a conventional currency. Which, btw is a sociological inevitability anyway(I will die on this hill, try me). Decentralisation never lasts, see countless examples of that with decentralised protocols(including crypto! Which is literally why this thread is here).

Is it useful for people in countries with shitty governments? Very much so, it seems to me. Which is great. But that is not an argument for its intrinsic value as opposed to normal currency in a country with a functioning economy and government.

[__MatrixMan__]

> Decentralisation never lasts

Mycorrhizal networks, to pick just one of myriad counterexamples, would like a word. Decentralization is just something that humans are (so far) bad at designing for.

> paying with crypto is always going to be more painful [than fiat] unless you use an exchange

Always is a long time. As governments figure out how to add features to fiat via CBDC's I can definitely image some bloat that would make paying in fiat needlessly complex. It's not like cryptocurrency has the market cornered on bad decisions.

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

We're talking about complex social structures here, not fungi. The fact that you bring up fungi is just absurd. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you have no understanding of what I was getting at.

[__MatrixMan__]

Well then perhaps you should be more specific, because there are obvious counterexamples to the generalizations you're throwing around.

USDC is a bridge across which supply and demand signals flow between centralized and decentralized networks.

Mycorrhizal networks are a similar bridge. Both are complex social structures, but only one is falling apart.

If we're going to get this right, it's not going to be by writing off cases where this kind of problem has been elegantly solved, especially in the absence of alternatives to try.

[alphanullmeric]

The point of crypto is to you from making rules about other people’s money. The state sponsored looting stunt the canadian government pulled off last year would be impossible with crypto. Likewise would PDT laws and similar regulations governing what other people can choose to risk.

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

Random, unsourced, singular examples do not an argument make. Try again.

Btw how invested are you in crypto? Valid question, y'know, enumerating biases.

[alphanullmeric]

https://www.businessinsider.com/trudeau-canada-freeze-bank-a...

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/patterndaytrader.asp

It’s as valid of a question as asking you if you hold USD.

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

If you want to climb down an antivaxx rabbit hole, go waste someone else's time.

As for dollars, I hold zero. Same for bitcoin, ethereum, ScamCoin, and RugPullCoin. Your turn. Defensive are we?

[alphanullmeric]

I don’t care what you think about vaccines. It’s a question of whether or not you believe force is only justified in response to force, which you clearly don’t. So as I was saying, crypto does a great job of keeping your fingers off of other people’s wallets.

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

Do you think crypto is somehow immune to use of force?

And how about those holdings?