People have looked at it from all sorts of directions and tried to propose use cases but none have come up with any particular use for this concept that isn’t just as well or better served by a different approach.
Without the crypto-bros, sure, no one would be especially ‘anti-blockchain’ and it wouldn’t have the negative impacts it does today, it just would be a forgotten concept that didn’t go anywhere.
none have come up with any particular use for this concept that isn’t just as well or better served by a different approach
This is literally the fault of the banks and billionaires controlling them. This is exactly what they want you to believe.
They’d go bankrupt if people started keeping their money on a blockchain and they will do anything possible to prevent that and push the propaganda in the oop post.
While it’s partially true, banks and billionaires are much more toxic to this planet and people.
Money and capitalism are toxic to the planet. You cannot have an economic system based on infinite growth when you live on a planet with finite resources and ecological limits. Blockchain enabling* a “better” way to spend money doesn’t change the fact that money is still a disease.
In general, I get it, but the weird thing about arbitrary number as currency is that you can have ‘infinite growth’ because the numbers are made up and if the number decreases in value by about 2%, then stable value would look like abotu 2% growth.
So you can’t have infinite growth in real terms, but we can play this currency game to pretend stable value is growth. Of course, merely keeping pace with inflation is not considered good enough, so they do tend to want to push ‘infinite real growth’ which is impossible, but if they settle for ‘kept pace with inflation but still say growth’, that can work because of this shared hallucination that is money…
We dont need to boil the earth to have crypto either. It’s crypto speculators that are the problem latching onto these old systems for nothing but speculative value.
The thing is that if it could have been a way to ‘fix capitalism’ but instead gets ‘broken by’ capitalism, then it doesn’t provide the proposed value in that respect.
I would have used “incorporated into” or co-opted by, but yeah I agree with you essentially, it’s why we can’t have nice things.
Its not that it couldn’t be useful to some, its just that once you scale to the masses there is clearly nothing to stop it from just being used as another capitalism tool. There are very cool projects that never gained popularity that have anti capitalism baked into it, such as chains with negative interest rates that scale with the amount of coin you have.
The one thing people are doing is piling a whole bunch of money ‘on a blockchain’. That use case is very much alive and all the problems it has on that front are precisely due to the nature of a blockchain in an economic context. Wildly varying valuation day to day, massive resource usage for relatively small volume of transactions, low throughput of transactions, a ledger that lets everyone know your financial activities.
Problem is I don’t see a baby whatsoever…
People have looked at it from all sorts of directions and tried to propose use cases but none have come up with any particular use for this concept that isn’t just as well or better served by a different approach.
Without the crypto-bros, sure, no one would be especially ‘anti-blockchain’ and it wouldn’t have the negative impacts it does today, it just would be a forgotten concept that didn’t go anywhere.
This is literally the fault of the banks and billionaires controlling them. This is exactly what they want you to believe.
They’d go bankrupt if people started keeping their money on a blockchain and they will do anything possible to prevent that and push the propaganda in the oop post.
While it’s partially true, banks and billionaires are much more toxic to this planet and people.
Money and capitalism are toxic to the planet. You cannot have an economic system based on infinite growth when you live on a planet with finite resources and ecological limits. Blockchain enabling* a “better” way to spend money doesn’t change the fact that money is still a disease.
Money is just a metric to compare different things, don’t see how that intrinsically is evil. On capitalism we agree.
In general, I get it, but the weird thing about arbitrary number as currency is that you can have ‘infinite growth’ because the numbers are made up and if the number decreases in value by about 2%, then stable value would look like abotu 2% growth.
So you can’t have infinite growth in real terms, but we can play this currency game to pretend stable value is growth. Of course, merely keeping pace with inflation is not considered good enough, so they do tend to want to push ‘infinite real growth’ which is impossible, but if they settle for ‘kept pace with inflation but still say growth’, that can work because of this shared hallucination that is money…
So what are the good uses for this tech then? That was the main point you disagreed with but didn’t provide ant examples
Read other comments, there are plenty. I’m lazy to parrot what was already said by others.
We don’t need to boil the Earth to fix late stage capitalism.
We dont need to boil the earth to have crypto either. It’s crypto speculators that are the problem latching onto these old systems for nothing but speculative value.
The thing is that if it could have been a way to ‘fix capitalism’ but instead gets ‘broken by’ capitalism, then it doesn’t provide the proposed value in that respect.
I would have used “incorporated into” or co-opted by, but yeah I agree with you essentially, it’s why we can’t have nice things.
Its not that it couldn’t be useful to some, its just that once you scale to the masses there is clearly nothing to stop it from just being used as another capitalism tool. There are very cool projects that never gained popularity that have anti capitalism baked into it, such as chains with negative interest rates that scale with the amount of coin you have.
The one thing people are doing is piling a whole bunch of money ‘on a blockchain’. That use case is very much alive and all the problems it has on that front are precisely due to the nature of a blockchain in an economic context. Wildly varying valuation day to day, massive resource usage for relatively small volume of transactions, low throughput of transactions, a ledger that lets everyone know your financial activities.
Trust this comment. This guy knows what he’s talking about.