[mjr00]

> it seems to be a proven technology now.

Proven to do what exactly? A solution for which problems?

Cryptocurrency had billions invested into it and the most valuable product that came out of it was cartoon apes. There's not a single blockchain that replaced the existing financial system, an area it was supposed to disrupt. There's not a single blockchain in use anywhere in logistics and supply chain, an area the blockchain was allegedly going to revolutionize. There's not a single blockchain being used for identity management by serious enterprises.

Most new technologies are overhyped, but blockchain/cryptocurrency is the only one where you can look back and be astonished at how virtually nothing was created. Its most important lasting contribution to society is providing incontrovertible evidence that just because "thought leaders" and deep-pocketed investors say something is going to change the world, it doesn't make them right.

[dotty-]

Whether or not you agree with the greater philosophical goal of Bitcoin, Bitcoin proved the ability to create a system of value using basically just cryptography and with a built-in reward system to incentivize the decentralization of the network -- and it grew enough that it can now operate as a standalone method of payment. It's an amazing feat.

Snowden is correct here: https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1759304612664779247

[ezrast]

It had done all that by 2010, no? The real hype was about what would come after.

I don't think the thesis of most Bitcoin critics is that the math and social engineering involved aren't interesting.

[dotty-]

I don't disagree with you. But the original post was about 1) cryptocurrency as a whole being busted and 2) that cryptocurrency had never provided any kind of value. Those are what I disagree with.

[CatWChainsaw]

Yeah it just requires massive investment in computer components, ridiculous amounts of carbon burning, servers in the Arctic to lower cooling costs, and a few towns full of people subject to more sound than jet engines at all hours of the day. Innovation!

[skydhash]

> Bitcoin proved the ability to create a system of value using basically just cryptography and with a built-in reward system to incentivize the decentralization of the network

AKA micro transactions in games.

[dotty-]

No, because micro transactions in games is a centralized system involving zero cryptography, usually powered by a centralized database by the game developer. Bitcoin is decentralized.

[seba_dos1]

> Bitcoin is decentralized.

Barely, if at all. Technically it can be decentralized, but Bitcoin's design promotes centralization, and the result is that currently Bitcoin can be controlled by either two entities (AntPool and Foundry USA) or three (one of the former ones plus F2Pool and ViaBTC) - and it's not going to get better.

[serial_dev]

... A solution for which problem...

[adultorata]

Good luck sending 10 BTC worth of USD from a US bank to China or Russia, or ANY bank without raising eyebrows and getting your bank account locked/frozen

[heyoni]

You don’t send bitcoin to a country! Maybe the act of buying the bitcoin gets your account frozen but certainly not the sending.

[xboxnolifes]

This is pretty much trivial.