Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Examples of what cryptocurrencies does better:

* Donations to wikileaks. Paypal froze their account and there are tons of examples where they have done this without good cause.

* Legal businesses like marijuana sellers, porn, escort services and gambling platforms have had trouble using and keeping payment services. Some have been forced to only accept cash payments as they couldn't accept credit cards.

* A way to accept irreversible payments digitally. Credit card charge back fraud is a big problem.

* Credit card companies and other payment processors take an often expensive fee. Cryptocurrencies are much cheaper (see Bitcoin Cash as Bitcoin is not a good example).

* Easier to move money. For example sending money to or taking money with you when you cross borders. Western Union is slow, expensive and cannot be used to send everywhere. The same can be said about banks in isolated countries or countries in disarray. With cryptocurrencies all you need is internet (sometimes a VPN as well).

Edit: As usual when I try to point this out I'm down voted. I encourage you to counter my examples.



Places crypto has been used isn't evidence that it was the only thing possible to have been used, which is the question -- what does PoW-consensus blockchain ledger make possible that isn't possible without it?

It's not a matter of what they've been better than status-quo broken finance systems. The question is "if we replace these broken systems with something, why does it have to be a blockchain using PoW for consensus?"

In many of the cases people use crypto because otherwise they'd have had to been a bank or a money transmitter or file with SEC and uphold their legal obligations as such, and in those cases using blockchain didn't make those obligations disappear.

In other cases, the hype around "blockchain" created solutions that could have been served by any form of digital currency or any form of distributed database -- not just this specific form.


> what does PoW-consensus blockchain ledger make possible that isn't possible without it?

Preventing double spends in a decentralized manner without a trusted third party. No other form of digital currency can do that.

There is a possibility that PoW can be replaced with some form of PoS (proof of stake) but it's not certain if it works well enough. Note that I consider both PoW and PoS backed ledgers cryptocurrencies.

> It's not a matter of what they've been better than status-quo broken finance systems.

They're better than everything at the examples I listed.


We'be in a crypto winter since January, basically a huge bear market. This is likely to attract a lot of negativity. I wouldn't worry too much about it, these are solid points.


If you think taking money for products via credit cards is difficult or expensive, you've got some surprises should you try to sell via cryptocurrencies.

Security is a huge deal. Want to get hacked? Tell people you accept bitcoin payments. Put an interface on your website. Remember to bolt your server down to the floor with big long bolts. And the backup server. And the other backup. And all the little thumbdrives. Cash is far easier to secure.

Think credit cards are difficult, try negotiating with a customer wanting a refund in bitcoins. Exactly how much bitcoin do they get today in exchange for a purchase made last week?

Nobody outside onionland handles commercially-significant crypto transactions. There are reasons.


There are drawbacks to be sure. Yet you don't refute my examples.

> Nobody outside onionland handles commercially-significant crypto transactions.

I've bought computers, books, clothes, games, online services and made significant donations using cryptocurrencies. I have also received several refunds (they were priced in euros and so I received a matching amount in cryptocurrencies).

That's just an ignorant and wrong statement.


>> I've bought computers,

Ya. BOUGHT. I guarantee the people selling them to you have different stories. The retailers that do take bitcoins knowingly do so for other reasons. The are trying to be cool and, perhaps, have a jump on the competition if things change. I'd bet they operate the bitcoin division at a loss.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: