I'm not 100% convinced on XRP as an investment long term tho.
The distinction I'd make with this point (even though I agree with what you're saying) is thus:
Most of us want to see great returns from Bitcoin and we therefore see it as an investment. But even if Ripple were to gain you a return and was therefore a "good investment" would it trouble you that you'd used a protocol that has establishment links and is possibly a threat to the decentralised, free spirit of crypto?
I don't necessarily want to come across as a crypto-anarchist, but I'd rather support a genuine alternative to the economic system that's failing us.
For all we know the "decentralize everything" approach of bitcoin might be an utopia that doesn't work long term or that creates more problems than it tries to solve.
For example the fact that it is supposed to be 100% decentralised (even tho it's not actually the case considering mining centralisation for example) raises issues related to consumer protection (that's a big one), money laundering, frauds, scams etc.
An utopia much like anarchy, it either doesn't work in practice or nobody actually adopts it and still prefer governments, the state etc
So basically you try to solve some problems but the 100% decentralised solution might bring new ones or offer us something that in the long run is a lot worse.
I understand you talk about the "spirit of crypto" but that spirit might be a lot more corrupt that the fiat system you are talking about.
"Trusted third parties" are not out there just to screw ya. t's not that simple.
Let me reflect on this, for that there are a massive amount of factually wrong observations.
First, mining is decentralized!
https://blockchain.info/pools just because it is not a commie "equal share to all proletariate" the hashing power is in fact distributed (every pool mine has thousands of individual, group, corporate etc miners!), changing hands over time, can be freely entered or left (!).
Any centralized system will eventually show the symptoms of a single point of failure, arbitrary change of rules, also can NOT be entered by an outsider (citizens can not participate). That is the main difference, not the number of monopoly/oligopolic group(s); the ability to freely move in and out of the system. It is a qualitatively different way of decision making.
There is no such thing as money laundering. It is either my money, or yours, or i took it by force from you. So it is either mine by virtue (law, etc), or i stole it. Money laundering is an euphemism by the state for his "due share", that he wants you to accept the fact that he has the right to take it from you by force (steal it) - by the way,
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/17/hsbc-swiss-arm-fraud-money-laundering-charges-belgium - proves my point perfectly.
Consumer protection never protected anyone retro casually. It can not, they can only act AFTER the consumer was frauded, scammed, and threaten the fraud with jail. As long as time travel is not a option...
Also, "
it either doesn't work in practice or nobody actually adopts it" is factually wrong. We have already adopted it and it does work for millions of people around the globe, it is weird to even say it on a bitcoin forum.
"
"Trusted third parties" are not out there just to screw ya." - Yes, in theory they are not there for that,
they just do it in the practice, every. single. time in the last 5000 years. Power corrupts (the lack of incentives to play fair - which state power gives a human actor in reality - will eventually).
PS.: the whole natural life and its evolution from a single cell organism to a complex ecosystem on Earth works in a decentralized manner, "no trusted third parties", and it survived pretty much anything thrown at it. And we can agree that life on Earth is way more complex than the economy of Belgium...
Poll
