• Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    There are only two good use cases for crypto:

    1. Financial speculation
    2. Criminal activity and fraud
          • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            No, it’s not a viable use case.

            Developers of such games what the broadest market possible and consumers want easy accessibility and stable updates/support.

            The groups outlined above are interested in the product and not promotion of some cryptocurrency.

            Both these goals are best served using real currencies, not monero. Such payment systems (using real currency, aimed at content with erotica/porn) are widely available and haven in use for 30+ years.

            If you don’t want to deal with such payment systems directly (e.g. setup an LLC and other such matters), there are multiple easy to implement distribution approaches that one can launch in ~15 minutes.

            This is why I don’t trust crypto promoters.

            • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              13 hours ago

              You would use real currencies for everything except the transfer. The consumer only sees USD. The provider swaps back to Fiat as soon as necessary.

              The use case is enabling payment over the Internet while avoiding traditional, censoring providers.

              • hark@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 hours ago

                Couldn’t those transactions be cut off at those swapping points to fiat? I assume if a bank doesn’t support a business directly transferring funds for a particular purpose then they’d take issue with indirectly transferring funds for the same purpose and would work to close those accounts.

                • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  7 hours ago

                  It can happen. That would involved cutting off access to all crypto for that individual. It’s not common.

                  Even on the token side there are often blacklist addresses (e.g. USDC) that perform a similar function. Usually for hacks rather than terrorism.

              • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                12 hours ago

                This does not make sense.

                What you’re saying is that it’s impossible to buy porn/erotica online without monero. This is clearly wrong.

                You most definitely could do that before blockchains were a thing.

                • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 hours ago

                  What you’re saying is that it’s impossible to buy porn/erotica online without monero

                  I haven’t said anything like that.

                  I’m saying crypto is an additional, uncensored payment channel.

                  • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    11 hours ago

                    And why exactly is it a use case if you can already buy erotica/porn via specialized payment services without monero?

                    What’s the benefit here? Be clear and specific. Don’t randomly bring terms like “privacy”, “uncensored” and “freedums”.

    • 𝚝𝚛𝚔@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’ve always maintained that the dude who spent like 10,000 Bitcoin to buy a pizza was the first and last legitimate use of crypto.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      And:

      • privacy friendly transactions

      For example, think of:

      • activists and political dissidents
      • victims of domestic abuse
      • people who don’t want banks and governments tracking their purchases

      Bitcoin ain’t it, bit privacy coins like Monero exist and tend to not have as much fraud spam since they don’t have as many crazy spikes. I want Monero to be a thing because:

      • low fees, and no foreign transaction fees
      • privacy, so my bank can’t sell my transaction data to advertisers
      • fast transactions

      I wouldn’t use it for everything since it has no purchase protections, but I’d absolutely use it for a lot of small stuff if it was possible.

      • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Have to disagree on this one.

        How would this even work? You transfer monero to a person in an authoritarian state and then what? What do they do with Monero? You think an authoritarian state is going to allow you to pay for utilities with Monero? Buy food?

        Monero doesn’t allow for private transactions as this issue is a social and political problem, not a technology issue.

        I wouldn’t be surprised if your transactions would be less private with monero than a bank payment (because of Monero’s unlicensed nature).

    • katy ✨@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      sad thing is that it could be great as an alternative to mastercard/visa but crypto fash have just ruined any attempt to make it appealing to anyone other than crypto fascists.

      • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        You don’t need crypto as an alternative to MasterCard/Visa. There are multiple national payment systems that de facto work on a public benefit basis or offer no fees or very low fees.

        One major example is India’s UPI:

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Payments_Interface

        Even in a medium sized developing country like Ukraine, I can send anyone money (P2P, business payment, business transaction) with minimal or no fees on a near instantaneous basis off my phone.

        I am not on top of recent payment infrastructure developments, but from memory this is relatively common.

        No need for scam services like PayPal, Venmo.

        And this has been avaible for half a decade minimum (was living in another country before then).

        • DSN9@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Sure sure, is it a sound, decentralized bottom up monetary network built by the people for the people on cryptography rails on an uncensorable network?

      • MushroomsEverywhere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        As I understand it, cryptocurrency funnily enough works awfully as a means of transaction, because the amount of processing power required to make transactions is ridiculously high.

          • hark@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 hours ago

            If a cryptocurrency concentrates into the hands of a few, as assets tend to do in capitalism, then wouldn’t proof of stake mean those few control the cryptocurrency anyway?

            • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 hours ago

              If the protocol is badly designed, yes.

              In theory, the stakers should only be rewarded for correctly confirming transaction and that capital (staked tokens) should carry no votes in any protocol changes.