You asserted "[t]here really and objectively is no reason for cryptocurrencies to exist at all." Evidence was provided demonstrating the assertion is false. Burying your head in the sand won't change that.
You never provided counter arguments. How can I trust you if you’re just an anonymous person online stating something without backing it up? At least the crypto guy had some examples. How about you state why those applications in questions have no utility?
That has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm saying. What I am saying is that cryptocurrencies are so horrible in every way except anonymity that the ONLY reason you would use it is for illegal activities, speculation, or paranoia.
The argument is not so much that cryptocurrencies don't replace anything as that they don't have a use case (this is something that we can observe, unlike "value" which is subjective), and therefore it could be argued they are objectively useless regardless of their actual value in the market.
There is none and will never be. Cryptocurrencies are Rube Goldberg machines; interesting to observe but functionally useless. Anyone who says otherwise is ideologically blind.
I disagree with this because cryptocurrencies have existed for nearly a decade. Nobody's telling people in third-world countries that have smartphones that they can't use cryptocurrencies.
Cryptocurrency has explicitly and repeatedly been touted as un or anti-correlated to the wider financial ecosystem, fiat currencies and the stock market, and has been loudly, noisily and never-endingly sold as a great hedge against these things, absent any evidence.
The evidence is in now, and those theories are a bust.
I read like halve of it. No arguments could be found and very annoying to read.
I dont care about your personal liking and disliking I only care about rational argumentation.
If you are so sure that everything in crypto is worthless then bet on it. If you dont do that you are lying to yourself and you argent actually so sure.
Also utility tokens exist with actual use case not "crypto" as the product. You seem misinformed, its not 2015 anymore, big banks use crypto nowadays its not going away its gong to be regulated and become an essential part of the financial system.
There was never any in crypto either. Anyone who thought so is just as stupid as the HN'ers that think cryptocurrencies are bogus. Thinking a few over leveraged crypto companies getting wiped out will destroy cryptocurrencies is laughable.
> They do not meet any of the standard tests for money (especially the three classic criteria of store of value, medium of exchange, and unit of account)
That's a really difficult claim to swallow. Especially without further explanation than a wall of citations that I'm not going to bother chasing because I know the claim is false. At least provide a quick synopsis/summary for why crypto fails at any given one of those.
Bottom line: Most cryptocurrencies may not be very good at any of those, but that doesn't mean they aren't used in those capacities at all.
You asserted "[t]here really and objectively is no reason for cryptocurrencies to exist at all." Evidence was provided demonstrating the assertion is false. Burying your head in the sand won't change that.
reply