this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2025
630 points (78.6% liked)
memes
16534 readers
2599 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
totally agree re bitcoin, and also am very sceptical of crypto as a mass-adopted currency in general
however there are plenty of networks that don’t use proof of work to validate their chains, and they aren’t bad for the environment to nearly the same degree
They are still very unstable and rely on some sort of consensus. It is flat out a bad design. It would be safer to pay with stocks.
consensus is basically what all modern databases rely on… it’s not unstable; it has properties that need to be well known and accounted for
The problem is using that for something world wide with no backing by anything material.
It is unstable by nature
i tend to agree for mass-adopted currency, but mass currency is only 1 use case for blockchain
things like bank to bank transfers (think a replacement to swift: with semi trusted entities like a big group of banks, the proof functions can be both extremely efficient and fast whilst remaining scalable and distributed so nobody has control… of course this would be a private network, but every bank involved can audit and sign off on transactions)
blockchain at its core is an immutable log between untrusted parties… it can be used to prove a particular thing happened at a particular point, in situations where people don’t even trust governments etc to maintain accurate records
it’s too big and cumbersome to be used by everyone in the world for payment, but it’s a good facilitator of some niche things that most people won’t have any idea about
the technology is solid; it’s just very limited, and the most “profitable” and marketable uses are also the most ill-suited
Why use them and not.. normal fiat currency?
No bank or goverment can control it. It is the benefit of being able to send money to anyone around the world while maintaining ownership of your money as if it were cash in hand.
That is exactly the problem. It has no real value as the entire thing is propped up by chaos. It could be worth a trillion dollars one day and then nothing the next.
Banks or governments as opposed to who though? There's a reason we usually want those publicly owned and regulated institutions to handle our transactions. Obviously, it depends what country you live in, and what currency you're talking about. But I don't think Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency actually solves the problem it purports to.
Ideally, no one controls it. It's just exists as a medium for exchange.
There are both good and bad points to currency have value that can be adjusted by gov'ts; crypto currency solves one set of problems, but has it's own, inherent issues.
You're not really selling it for me, which I guess is the point aye? 😂
What I imagine as ideal is an open-source and transparent bank and payment system that issues its own currency backed by ties to its investment portfolio that is properly regulated by its host country. i.e. you would use their currency to trade among others on the platform according to the percentage value of their portfolio that you own as measured by the currency to which you which to convert your holdings for a given purchase. You could select different tiers of risk if you'd like your "savings" to grow in value over time but experience potential dips or even loss of value if there is major market stability.
I am not an expert on such things, but this at least has real links to tangible asset worth, and isn't based on the artificial scarcity of an increasingly unsolvable math problem.
Well, kind of. But the worth of those assets is largely due to perception, rather than real utility value. Like, real estate is stupidly expensive in many places, but it's expensive because people believe that it's expensive. When real estate bubble burst, you see the 'worth' of that real estate drop sharply. The utility value is having a place to sleep, but it's often treated as an investment. So you would still see currency value fluctuations. Currency issue by gov'ts largely has worth because the gov't says that it has worth; it's not tied to anything. (BTW - tying currency to a tangible asset limits your ability to add currency when necessary. It will tend to lead to depreciation--the value of the currency rising--which is usually a bad thing.)
The other problem is that corporations and banks go bust; if they were issuing currency, that would mean all your money would instantly be worthless.
Anti-inflationary to keep cash in BTC as opposed to sitting in an account at a bank
Until some guy in LA hires a bunch of moonlighting police officers to steel your laptop
Yup, just like cash.
To an extent cryptos only value is it can be turned into currency.
And therefore no recourse if you are robbed, scammed, etc. Try going to your local, or even federal authorities and explain to them that you lost the digital equivalent of $10000 and they won’t do a thing.
You can opt in to an arbitrator before sending the money.
And that helps you how in the event of a theft?
It prevents the theft in the first place because they'd need to hack two parties instead of just one.
Wow, are you really that clueless about crypto stealing malware, Fraud by crypto exchanges, Authentication attacks, etc?
None of those sorts of attacks would be prevented by the use any sort of escrow service because you’re not actively performing a transaction.
An Analysis of the first half of this year also shows a significant uptick in attacks on personal crypto wallets, and over $2 billion stolen so far in 2025.
How is malware going to steal funds locked in escrow?
i do think they hold some value for things like bank to bank, where each party is kiiiiind of untrusted and unrelated (not on a public chain - it’s just a private consensus between collaborating parties)
it also undeniably provides payment outside of standard card networks and the finance sector (people have been using crypto to buy drugs for decades now), so can be used to circumvent things like this mastercard/visa morality police garbage… i think in that, it’d be useful to have a strongish cryptocurrency somewhere at least to be able to provide uncensorable competition (the alternative to that being some global EU network that everyone accepted in the same manner)
but i think the value in blockchain in general is minimally about currency: that was just the first implementation… it’s a distributed, trustworthy log between untrusted individual entities. the benefits of that are honestly pretty niche, but i think it does solve some valuable problems… just most people should never even know that blockchain was involved
Fair points, cheers.