Arguments againts cryptocurrencies!

[DesmondHayes]

This text is one of the arguments against buying a crypto value ..

Namely, FIAT money has its own backbone, much more solid than bitcoin and that is the support of the central banks, regulation of the banks (provided security) and is supported by weapon industry if needed. If tomorrow bitcoin failed because of someone hacking the exchange, none of them would blink.
The beginning of the text is typical of doom porn.

Furthermore, bitcoin is used as a hedge towards the crisis as an auxiliary argument. Right now gold has that function. Calling on someone to come and say that the euro is not worth anything, nor is the dollar ... I do not know what to say.
The last who said it was underground - I mean Gaddafi and Saddam. Putin can not 'strengthen' because the Russian economy is of the size like - Spain.

Can you imagine that Spain is beginning to blackmail the EU and the US? I cannot!

The only one who can say 'no' to the dollar and the euro is China, and China will not do that because they are trading partners. Also, China has a lot of American bonds, so that financial assets would have been defective in its possession, as this would lead to war.
If China comes and says that the USD / EUR is worth nothing, then it will do so to replace it - Juan, and not with the bitcoin that is also banned in China anyway.

[1714011625]

1714011625

[1714011625]

1714011625

[1714011625]

1714011625

[Jet Cash]

Fiat money has no "backbone". In fact it is a wobbly jelly based on a massive mountain of debt. To accept that crypto-currencies have value, you have to start to understand the concept of virtual assets. The US dollar is a virtual asset, and it purports to be guaranteed by the US government, or the Fed - I'm not sure who guarantees it these days. However, a guarantee by a bankrupt doesn't really have a great deal of value. The value of Bitcoin is guaranteed by its community, and although that may contain a few bankrupts, the vast majority of its supporters are far from bankrupt. Similar consideration apply to other virtual assets like domain names. The "value" is determined by the community of users, and not by an over-spending failing regime.

If you are discussing gold, you need to differentiate between paper gold and physical gold, In the same way you need to differentiate between Bitcoin and Bitcoin derivatives.

Gaddafi, Sadam, Assad and Kim Jong-un all wanted/want the mineral assets of their country to be controlled and developed by their own government, and not by the Deep State. They also wanted to break free of the US dollar hegemony.

China has been dumping dollar bonds for years, and they are making a bit to replace the US dollar with the Petro-Yuan. Also they created the AIIB to replace the western banking system. Russia is a significant trading partner of China, and the strengthening of Russia was a result of the unwise sanction attempts by the US, which only served to damage the US, and strengthen bonds between Asian countries.

[Hedda Gabler]

This is the last month I'm investing into crypto, I'm putting in $1000 and I'm just gonna let it ride.

I quit day-trading because it's fucking retarded and words cannot describe how pissed off I am.

I am done trying to pretend to be "cool" and put up nice public persona when I lost hundreds of dollars on this BS. I am so fucking pissed off at the state of crypto space right now.

Crypto is a fucking joke and half of the wallets do not even sync for most users. Do you think it will ever catch on to the public unless people start making some half-decent software that the average public can use? The public's not gonna copy and paste and bunch of nodes, are you fucking kidding me? The public's not gonna tolerate wallets that take years to sync...

Second, we have markets like CoinsMarkets that take all of your money...Unless CoinsMarkets is back online by Feb I'm fucking done with crypto, period.

Like, I litterally just bought some tokens, then I realize I have a fee of 1 token, that's half my fucking tokens because I only bought 2 tokens, so I say fuck it, I send them anyway. And seriously, who the fuck is gonna be comfortable with a fee of 1 coin or 0.01 coins when these coins hit the moon, how the fuck is this better than banking when you get charged $10 to withdraw a coin, banks don't even charge any fees, and this is supposed to be the moral high ground from banking? Where is the moral highground when scam artists and trolls litterally run away with your coins? The whole point of this was it was supposed to usher in some utopian society, free of corruption, and yet somehow this has even more corruption than actual governments and banks...I think this illustrates something philosophical...people always want to look outwardly for enemies, like saying the devil is in banks, or government, but the enemy is not the government, or banks, but the entire human race itself...

So like i buy 2 million B3, thinking I will become a millionare when B3 hits one dollars, but guess the joke's on me, joke's always on me, I say this coin can only go up, no way it can go less than 1 satoshi, that will violate the laws of physics, yet somehow the coin violates the laws of physics and now my B3 is worth 20% of the original value....Like a cartoon acme joke anvil in space it violates the laws of physics, Jokes on me I guess...

So yeah, sorry for not sticking to my cool, business like persona and trying to support crypto space, this was the last straw I'm tired of trying to pretend everything is okay with cryptospace when half of these ICOS are scams, customer service is like prayer, and none of these businesses act slightly professional.

Look, there is still hope for crypto space, but only when people start taking their business seriously, hire actual web devs and artists to run a website, and people with FUCKING ETHICS, NOBILITY, AND MORALS start making coins and exchanges, and make fucking wallets that are suitable for public use. Until then, the public isn't going to take crypto space seriously.

[aleksej996]

It isn't all about economy, sometimes it is all about the rule of a bigger army when things get serious.
These days, with nuclear weapons, every country with them can make demands and the rest just kind of have to let it go if they are serious enough about it.
US is a young country, their military is very modern and well funded, but Russia has been there for a long time, they got a lot of tanks and they can defend themselves very well and China, well, over million soldiers, together with Russia they make quite a threat against US, with the economy as well.
All kind of things can happen in the future, let's not get ahead of ourselves.

I guess the only real problem with crypto is that it kinda requires electronics, but that it is not that big of a deal most of the times.
Everything else is just adoption. If the tech is good for most, it is going to take over, this was always the case.

@Hedda Gabler, I am sorry you had such a bad experience man. I never went into altcoins, I am very happy with Bitcoin. Unfortunately you can't really get rich with no work, at least not most of us. Don't invest in something you don't understand, that was always a good advice.
I don't really think that any altcoin currently has anything significant over Bitcoin and when it comes to currency, adoption is a big deal.
I wouldn't really invest in other tokens, but then again, I don't really like risk personally, so that isn't much of a surprise.

[Hedda Gabler]

It isn't all about economy, sometimes it is all about the rule of a bigger army when things get serious.
These days, with nuclear weapons, every country with them can make demands and the rest just kind of have to let it go if they are serious enough about it.
US is a young country, their military is very modern and well funded, but Russia has been there for a long time, they got a lot of tanks and they can defend themselves very well and China, well, over million soldiers, together with Russia they make quite a threat against US, with the economy as well.

Yeah but tanks are a joke, if Russia invaded the us they the Feds could just hand citizens Javelins and make short work of them.

@Hedda Gabler, I am sorry you had such a bad experience man. I never went into altcoins, I am very happy with Bitcoin. Unfortunately you can't really get rich with no work, at least not most of us. Don't invest in something you don't understand, that was always a good advice.
I don't really think that any altcoin currently has anything significant over Bitcoin and when it comes to currency, adoption is a big deal.
I wouldn't really invest in other tokens, but then again, I don't really like risk personally, so that isn't much of a surprise.

Well I'm too broke to invest in 1 whole bitcoin, altcoins are my only shot. It's really my fault, I could have invested in bitcoin 4 years ago, I actually knew of bitcoin 4 years ago but I was too much of an ignorant chickenhead to understand the rammifications of it. I do appreciate your sympathy though.

[aleksej996]

Yeah but tanks are a joke, if Russia invaded the us they the Feds could just hand citizens Javelins and make short work of them.

I am not saying that Russia could successfully invade US, I just think that they would successfully defend themselves.
I wouldn't call tanks a joke. It is naive to think that it is that simple. Javelins are very expensive. They are good, but that is why they are so expensive.
Each missile is like $80.000. It is not that simple man, it would be quite the battle and if we get China into the mix, wherever they join, there would be no chance for the other side.
All of these things don't matter of course, as we got nuclear weapons, of which Russia has the biggest and ugliest stockpile. Not that there would be any point in using it, as everyone would lose.

Things are complicated. that is my point. There will likely be no wars, but it all can get messy with proxy wars and whatnot.

I am just saying that all of that is politics. And if the technology is good, it will be used globally.

[Hedda Gabler]

Yeah but tanks are a joke, if Russia invaded the us they the Feds could just hand citizens Javelins and make short work of them.

I am not saying that Russia could successfully invade US, I just think that they would successfully defend themselves.
I wouldn't call tanks a joke. It is naive to think that it is that simple. Javelins are very expensive. They are good, but that is why they are so expensive.
Each missile is like $80.000. It is not that simple man, it would be quite the battle and if we get China into the mix, wherever they join, there would be no chance for the other side.
All of these things don't matter of course, as we got nuclear weapons, of which Russia has the biggest and ugliest stockpile. Not that there would be any point in using it, as everyone would lose.

Things are complicated. that is my point. There will likely be no wars, but it all can get messy with proxy wars and whatnot.

I am just saying that all of that is politics. And if the technology is good, it will be used globally.

Yeah but a tank costs 8 million dollars. Why would you buy a tank when you can buy a missile that destroys a tank for 1% of the price.
Tanks are obsolete tech, a sniper is more dangerous than a tank because you can't see it coming. A soldier is more dangerous than a tank because he can hide in a mountain and shoot a javelin at a bunch of tanks and the tanks cannot even know where he is. Tanks are also obsolete at controlling cities, civilians in cities can hide and plant traps for tanks as well.

[aleksej996]

Yeah but a tank costs 8 million dollars. Why would you buy a tank when you can buy a missile that destroys a tank for 1% of the price.
Tanks are obsolete tech, a sniper is more dangerous than a tank because you can't see it coming. A soldier is more dangerous than a tank because he can hide in a mountain and shoot a javelin at a bunch of tanks and the tanks cannot even know where he is. Tanks are also obsolete at controlling cities, civilians in cities can hide and plant traps for tanks as well.

I don't know where you got that figure. First modern tank I found on wikipedia, of which there are only couple of hundreds, are 2 million.
Most of them are older tanks that are in reserve and they count thousands.
They are not obsolete at all, but I just pointed them out as an example. There are all kinds of tanks, infantry tanks, anti-aircraft vehicles, artillery, all kinds of stuff.
If they were useless, they wouldn't make them.

I think this is enough of a discussion about military on this topic. A little bit is relevant, but let's not make it all about this.

[Hedda Gabler]

Yeah but a tank costs 8 million dollars. Why would you buy a tank when you can buy a missile that destroys a tank for 1% of the price.
Tanks are obsolete tech, a sniper is more dangerous than a tank because you can't see it coming. A soldier is more dangerous than a tank because he can hide in a mountain and shoot a javelin at a bunch of tanks and the tanks cannot even know where he is. Tanks are also obsolete at controlling cities, civilians in cities can hide and plant traps for tanks as well.

I don't know where you got that figure. First modern tank I found on wikipedia, of which there are only couple of hundreds, are 2 million.
Most of them are older tanks that are in reserve and they count thousands.
They are not obsolete at all, but I just pointed them out as an example. There are all kinds of tanks, infantry tanks, anti-aircraft vehicles, artillery, all kinds of stuff.
If they were useless, they wouldn't make them.

I think this is enough of a discussion about military on this topic. A little bit is relevant, but let's not make it all about this.

OK, last post about this. The m1 abrams is 8 million dollars. And lets say a tank is 2 million dollars, still a waste of money. Why spend that money when you can get a tank destroying missle at 4% of the price. And not to mention, 1 guy with a missile can kill 3 of your guys. Why would you spend 2 million just so you can also get 2 extra guys killed.

The argument that they aren't useless is a fallacy. War is useless but they still make war. People buy tanks for corporate reasons, because CEO's are lazy and like reselling outdated products.
And yeah tanks are not 100% useless, they are the equivalent of medieval siege weapons. You play that game called Savage battle for Newerth? Basically a tank is the same as a medieval catapult. Totally vunerable on its own, but good for leveling cities. Basically, it needs protection.

[Gecko8]

Just want to bring this discussion back to the starting point. I agree, that the use of most crypto currency is still not clear, which is a big argument currently against crypto currencies. And to have bitcoin positioned as value storage like gold is also not a sustainable argument yet, as there are not enough people for the moment to believe on it. Personally I believe the market will need to get more mature. Getting off those ridiculous speculations. Still having buyers, who even do not know, in what kind of project they are investing through a ICO or simply by buying a token, makes it even worse. There are great projects out, which deserve it to get successfully. But there are so many out, which are simply scam, without any sustainable use case. 

[OriginTrain]

Namely, FIAT money has its own backbone, much more solid than bitcoin and that is the support of the central banks, regulation of the banks (provided security) and is supported by weapon industry if needed.

That's great it's backed by all those things. Now how do you feel about holding this stable currency that loses value due to inflation each year at an unpredictable rate based upon the social policy of the powers that be of the day?

If tomorrow bitcoin failed because of someone hacking the exchange, none of them would blink.

Bitcoin can't be hacked or fail due to someone hacking an exchange. Exchanges are a 3rd party system that have nothing to do with BTC.

Furthermore, bitcoin is used as a hedge towards the crisis as an auxiliary argument. Right now gold has that function. Calling on someone to come and say that the euro is not worth anything, nor is the dollar ... I do not know what to say.

What can you do then with all that "gold hedge" of yours when the government comes and confiscates it because they made bad decisions? Absolutely nothing. Just like last century when there was a real collapse that required a real hedge. The hedge was simply confiscated. Remember before you say "that was in the past" that we haven't yet experienced a collapse of equal scale since then. You can kiss all the idealism and laws goodbye when it comes time for a government to fight for its very existence.

I think you need to research what the point of blockchain is.

[cynical]

  This thread is an eye-opener!
  im a bit embarrased because its my first time visiting this board, and im enjoying it.

some very good arguments against crypto here, and some I can really relate to.

The day-trading thing is definitely over-rated and while I am smallfry i still lost overall so i ditched that fairly rapidly.
Everyone thinks they can do it, sit behind the desk and watch the data, but its hard to know what is behind the market movements.

the FIAT - CRYPTO relationship is another thing that going to be a bane.
everyone has to convert FIAT to crypto some way to get into the game and its complicated to newcomers but easy when you know how.

for all the negatives surrounding crypto there are points to consider:

we are dealing in and Open-source, decentralised and unregulated technology, something the majority of us are happy with (others dont care)
so the system is open to all sorts of abuse and manipulation

crypto is a very young technology with many many branches off the main route which Satoshi started on,
so the old saying 'time will tell' is relevant but that could be in 100 years from now.
most projects are still in their infancy and 'time will tell' applies to them more so.

[JuniAiko]

Cryptos cannot be banned. Only the trading of it can be banned.

Banning of speculative trading on exchanges of coins in China could also mean having a more stable crypto currency that could becomes easier to be adopted for actual use = real value and real long-term growth (albeit much slower).
Only once the crypto market have become more stable and less volatile, would China then be more open towards cryptos again; and they might control which cryptos they would allow most likely. Look out for selected cryptos that are working closely with the Chinese government to conform to their rules and regulations, and are happy to do so (such as NEO, Loopring, VeChain, XinFin, and TRON -- an ambitious project which is currently still under heavy development, and so on..)

Here's an interesting perspective article: Fear not, China is not banning cryptocurrency
https://medium.com/@chewweichun/fear-not-china-is-not-banning-cryptocurrency-79dffdf4036f

And a response to my comment over there here:

Juni LEE
Feb 7
QTUM, VeChain, and XinFin are Singapore crypto projects (a country that is highly supportive of crypto-fine-techs) and strong law/punishment against scammers. So probably won’t be as impacted as other crypto projects based in China, etc. in terms of value growth. However selected chinese cryptos such as NEO are still promising, due to their compliance with the government. The reduced ability of speculative trading of these coins in the Chinese market could hopefully also prevent the creation of unrealistic bubbles and crazy volatility, thus giving these coins a lot more promise to gain wisespread adoption as currencies (rather than a speculative trading commodity in a volatile irrational market based on the emotions of greed and fear).

7
1 response

Wei Chun Chew
Feb 7
Yes. Many of the firms have moved to crypto-friendly countries like Singapore to avoid regulations in China. Volatility in the market is definitely one of the main deterrence to adoption. NEO has working relationships with many other blockchain firms and is viewed as the biggest blockchain project in China. We would definitely see some support from the government with regards to these highly promising projects. In the upcoming months, or even years as the market stabilizes, it is these firms with working products and established relationships that will take the limelight in the industry.

[johnwarren12]

The biggest thing against cryptos is that being anonymous, its being used to fund illegal activities...terrorism, drugs, weapon trades, black market products but still they were anyway happening before crypto became this popular. Crypto has just made is more convenient for people to trade in blackmarket. I remember the times of 2010 when LR was one of the methods used by hackers etc to receive money. Since then, BTC has taken over and is still the undisputed king.

[aleksej996]

The biggest thing against cryptos is that being anonymous, its being used to fund illegal activities...terrorism, drugs, weapon trades, black market products but still they were anyway happening before crypto became this popular. Crypto has just made is more convenient for people to trade in blackmarket. I remember the times of 2010 when LR was one of the methods used by hackers etc to receive money. Since then, BTC has taken over and is still the undisputed king.

Other than my opinion that anonymity of Bitcoin is a good thing, I would still claim that cash is a lot more anonymous than Bitcoin.
I would have trouble imagining a criminal preferring a public ledger over paper cash, if he has a choice.

[stantpro]

Bitcoin and crypto currency is a new technology just like when microsoft hit
the software world.It may interest you to know that bitcoin and other crypto
currency cannot burst or die out due to its decentralized nature which all other
fiat money of the world and commodities do not possess.Hence, this is an innovation
in the information age which must remain like other information technology innovations
of our time.Hence, there is no apprehension of the sooner extinction of bitcoin and
other crypto-currencies. What may happen is to control its abuse and indiscriminate
use for crime and other vices.China banning its mining does not mean they have rejected
it.Its just to apply some control.There are other big economies of the world reaping big
from crypto trading taxes and commissions.

[amishmanish]

This text is one of the arguments against buying a crypto value ..

Namely, FIAT money has its own backbone, much more solid than bitcoin and that is the support of the central banks, regulation of the banks (provided security) and is supported by weapon industry if needed. If tomorrow bitcoin failed because of someone hacking the exchange, none of them would blink.
The beginning of the text is typical of doom porn.

Furthermore, bitcoin is used as a hedge towards the crisis as an auxiliary argument. Right now gold has that function. Calling on someone to come and say that the euro is not worth anything, nor is the dollar ... I do not know what to say.
The last who said it was underground - I mean Gaddafi and Saddam. Putin can not 'strengthen' because the Russian economy is of the size like - Spain.

Can you imagine that Spain is beginning to blackmail the EU and the US? I cannot!

The only one who can say 'no' to the dollar and the euro is China, and China will not do that because they are trading partners. Also, China has a lot of American bonds, so that financial assets would have been defective in its possession, as this would lead to war.
If China comes and says that the USD / EUR is worth nothing, then it will do so to replace it - Juan, and not with the bitcoin that is also banned in China anyway.

I believe the link to the text you are quoting is missing or maybe you just meant to give the TLDR.
Anyways, Isn't this an old argument?? FIAT is real and Bitcoin is "virtual". Fiat has government support and bitcoin only has a community.

The monopoly that governments have with manipulating fiat and its movement is the source of this whole entitled structure of bureaucracies and enormous banks. I need fiat to do anything even if the hard work, innovation and the risk is completely mine. The government decides when and how much to tax it. There is no way for the common people to ask questions about how rationalized the government's cut or the "tax" is.
The problem is many folds in countries with weaker institutions and low awareness among the people. And when the government and banks screw up, the normal people can only watch their savings go down the drain while there's austerity measures and what not. This is why the backing of bitcoin is the awareness of its community. We have to say no to paying the cost for the constant fuck-ups of governments and banks.

Why should Zimbabweans suffer is their government and central bank cannot manage inflation?? They should have the freedom to have some savings in a form which is untouchable by the government and with which they can rebuild a life if they want.

If more and more people wake up to this and decide to use bitcoin as a hedge against their banks and governement's inevitable screw-ups, then the backbone of bitcoin is going to be much stronger than that from an army. Even Kim Jong-Un has an army..LOL!