Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by thisjepisje 4211 days ago
Care to elaborate?
2 comments

The implication is that Bitcoin isn't "real" money.

Never mind that money is a social construct and is useful whenever two parties agree on a common value.

I think the implication is actually that the person sending this transaction was also the recipient.
Good point; your explanation makes more sense. I pretty much only use Bitcoin to buy lunch and laptop stickers, so I forget that people with significant amounts of it have to shuffle it like this.
This was pretty obviously some internal accounting shuffling and not some kind of payment processing. If your bank charges a fee to move funds between accounts your bank sucks.