The myth of crypto revolution

[mr3dds]

Hello, my friends.

I am following the blockchain and cryptocurrency since 2015. And I have thought a lot about it. Is it really better than the fiat monetary system? Is it an asset? or Is it a currency?

Actually, I couldn't give an absolute answer. I must say that blockchain technology is awesome and can make a lot of great changes in our future.

Now, about the coin. Most of the crypto-followers are after the profits and don't care about the project. There are a lot of rubbish coins that are traded a lot because they just have great potential for profiting.

So, that is making these coins just like EUR/USD pair but with high volatility and no value in these coins' projects at all.

Does this mean that the coins will fade away and just the blockchain will persist?

Comparing crypto to fiat, there is no difference. There is no fair distribution for people. When I check the rich list of any crypto coin I found that there is no difference from the fiat rich list. Just a few people have the majority of the wealth. So, I am thinking a lot about a way to really trigger a crypto coin revolution.

I reached the conclusion that POS is better than POW. POW needs a lot of devices and a lot of power and money to buy both. POS needs no power but needs money as the minimum balance to run a master node.

For that issue, I think making this minimum balance affordable to everyone will give the POS blockchain a lot of security because anyone can run a master node. So, the chain is safe.
Then we make the addresses on that chain with caped balance. For example, no address can have more than ten million of the coin. And KYC is a must so no one can open multiple addresses. And when some address receives more coins at the cap these coins will be distributed to the poor list on the chain.
One more thing, the income of the master nodes must put in consideration where its owner is living. I live in Egypt and 1 ETH can sustain me for a month but for a USA citizen it can only pay a bill.
With a lot of master nodes, the chain is secured, a lot of buyers and sellers, less volatility for the coin, fair distribution guaranteed.

There is no intelligence in making a coin and just selling it. No intelligence in asking for thousands for dollars to run a master node.

I think a change must come to crypto-world or it will end as the myth of the millennium.

Had you given this your thoughts?
please, share your thoughts

[1715001487]

1715001487

[1715001487]

1715001487

[1715001487]

1715001487

[1715001487]

1715001487

[Beerwizzard]

Now, about the coin. Most of the crypto-followers are after the profits and don't care about the project. There are a lot of rubbish coins that are traded a lot because they just have great potential for profiting.

People invest their money in order to get some profits and their investments will always be on the first place. Are you surprised?  That is the difference between investment and donation.

Comparing crypto to fiat, there is no difference. There is no fair distribution for people. When I check the rich list of any crypto coin I found that there is no difference from the fiat rich list. Just a few people have the majority of the wealth. So, I am thinking a lot about a way to really trigger a crypto coin revolution.

What do you mean under fair distribution?
People are usually getting money because they earned them and not because someone 'fairly' distributed money.

[alisafidel58]

I am following the blockchain and cryptocurrency since 2015. And I have thought a lot about it. Is it really better than the fiat monetary system? Is it an asset? or Is it a currency?

Yes, it is much better than fiat monetary system. its both asset and currency.

Now, about the coin. Most of the crypto-followers are after the profits and don't care about the project. There are a lot of rubbish coins that are traded a lot because they just have great potential for profiting.

If it is`nt for the traders bitcoins price would not move at all, they are the main reason why bitcoin has a high price. The project are for those who have a vast knowledge about bitcoin lets keep it to them, will handling the price goes to us users of bitcoins and traders.

Does this mean that the coins will fade away and just the blockchain will persist?

There are millions of user of bitcoin it wont vanish just like that.

Comparing crypto to fiat, there is no difference. There is no fair distribution for people. When I check the rich list of any crypto coin I found that there is no difference from the fiat rich list. Just a few people have the majority of the wealth. So, I am thinking a lot about a way to really trigger a crypto coin revolution.

There`s nothing fair in the world we live in. Imagine a world were all living things are fair, Boring. Don`t be jealous.

I reached the conclusion that POS is better than POW. POW needs a lot of devices and a lot of power and money to buy both. POS needs no power but needs money as the minimum balance to run a master node.

You wish that there was a fair distribution but even in the POS the more stake you have the more crytpo you will get, so its not fair. You wish that there was a fair distribution but based on your conclusion they contradict each other.

One more thing, the income of the master nodes must put in consideration where its owner is living. I live in Egypt and 1 ETH can sustain me for a month but for a USA citizen it can only pay a bill.

Register here change.org and get a protest.

[vv181]

I am following the blockchain and cryptocurrency since 2015. And I have thought a lot about it. Is it really better than the fiat monetary system? Is it an asset? or Is it a currency?

Cryptocurrency especially Bitcoin is way better ahead than conventional currency. Bitcoin is meant to be created to seeks the roots of the problem from conventional currency which is trust.

Now, about the coin. Most of the crypto-followers are after the profits and don't care about the project. There are a lot of rubbish coins that are traded a lot because they just have great potential for profiting.
So, that is making these coins just like EUR/USD pair but with high volatility and no value in these coins' projects at all.
Does this mean that the coins will fade away and just the blockchain will persist?

The volatility the markets have given make people are blinded by the price swings, and many of them profiting from it. We need to know that in general cryptocurrency are speculative assets, no one ensures to always make a profit. What we need to do is to urge the community to create a project that has real-life values and usage, not just some forked scam coin.

I reached the conclusion that POS is better than POW.

POW is better in term of security.

[d5000]

@OP: While you're right that the amount of speculative capital in the cryptosphere is too high in comparison to its real "currency" usage, I disagree with almost all of your other statements.

Proof of Stake is surely an interesting technology, but it has its own set of disadvantages and challenges. I don't know if you know about the Nothing at Stake problem. It has not been used for an attack up to date. But in contrast to Proof of Work, where you can calculate an "attack cost" and thus the approximate security of the chain, in Proof of Stake you can't, because there may be cheap, devastating attacks we don't know about yet (e.g. if the attacker shorts coins and attacks the chain with PoS holdings).

PoS also "makes the rich richer", as already mentioned by others - with the exception of "very low reward coins" like Peercoin. In addition, never "anyone" will be able to run a masternode or a PoS validation node (which are two different things people often confuse!) because if more than a certain amount of people do that (I believe this number to be about 10000) then the reward for smaller "stakers" or "masternode hosters" will be almost nothing.

KYC is impossible in decentralized systems. You need a "central authority" for that. And then you don't need a cryptocurrency. Bitcoin is all about decentralization.

[Kemarit]

Hello, my friends.

I am following the blockchain and cryptocurrency since 2015. And I have thought a lot about it. Is it really better than the fiat monetary system? Is it an asset? or Is it a currency?

Both. Majority are using it as an trading assets, by their are people who uses their crypto for whatever purposes it may serve them. Personally, I also used it as a currency to pay some bills.

Actually, I couldn't give an absolute answer. I must say that blockchain technology is awesome and can make a lot of great changes in our future.

Now, about the coin. Most of the crypto-followers are after the profits and don't care about the project. There are a lot of rubbish coins that are traded a lot because they just have great potential for profiting.

So, that is making these coins just like EUR/USD pair but with high volatility and no value in these coins' projects at all.

Does this mean that the coins will fade away and just the blockchain will persist?

Those that are being used for pump-and-dump will obviously fade away, hence the term shitcoins.

Comparing crypto to fiat, there is no difference. There is no fair distribution for people. When I check the rich list of any crypto coin I found that there is no difference from the fiat rich list. Just a few people have the majority of the wealth. So, I am thinking a lot about a way to really trigger a crypto coin revolution.

The difference is that you have total control of your crypto. Did you here the phrase "not your keys, not your coins?". Well crypto gives us the freedom to have control over our funds as compare to let's say let your money sit in the banks. There maybe more rich people in crypto but they wanted to stay hidden and I'm sure they are just like you and me, average Joe's. And one advantage though is that we can also be rich as hell, that is if you know how to play in this game.

I reached the conclusion that POS is better than POW. POW needs a lot of devices and a lot of power and money to buy both. POS needs no power but needs money as the minimum balance to run a master node.

For that issue, I think making this minimum balance affordable to everyone will give the POS blockchain a lot of security because anyone can run a master node. So, the chain is safe.
Then we make the addresses on that chain with caped balance. For example, no address can have more than ten million of the coin. And KYC is a must so no one can open multiple addresses. And when some address receives more coins at the cap these coins will be distributed to the poor list on the chain.
One more thing, the income of the master nodes must put in consideration where its owner is living. I live in Egypt and 1 ETH can sustain me for a month but for a USA citizen it can only pay a bill.
With a lot of master nodes, the chain is secured, a lot of buyers and sellers, less volatility for the coin, fair distribution guaranteed.

There is no intelligence in making a coin and just selling it. No intelligence in asking for thousands for dollars to run a master node.

I think a change must come to crypto-world or it will end as the myth of the millennium.

Had you given this your thoughts?
please, share your thoughts

I suggest you just go around the forum. There's a lot of arguments and debate about the whole POS/POW, and its pros/cons.

[davis196]

There's no such thing as a crypto revolution.There's only crypto evolution,which means that cryptocurrencies will be adopted steady and slow.
If the Proof-of-stake is really better than Proof-of-work,why the most of the crypto users are still using bitcoin,which is POW?I guess that POS isn't that great after all.
Every coin,fiat currency of financial is just a tool.There's no way to implement fair distribution into some financial asset that has value/market liquidity.

[dothebeats]

-snip

Points taken. There really is no greater intelligence involved in creating another coin that will ask for investors' money only to be dumped @ people's faces. Sure there may be a lot of fancy new features included in every coin and a change in 'security' but really, we don't need that many coins with different variations, let alone a thousand of them with the majority being trashed into obscurity after the devs have made their fortunes.

I reached the conclusion that POS is better than POW. POW needs a lot of devices and a lot of power and money to buy both. POS needs no power but needs money as the minimum balance to run a master node.

Then again, only those with a lot of coins on hand will have the greater control and net-production of coins, which could therefore affect the market pretty hard. Not that I'm discrediting your argument of master nodes and PoS, but looking at other things apart from being a masternode, it poses more risks than actual rewards.

For that issue, I think making this minimum balance affordable to everyone will give the POS blockchain a lot of security because anyone can run a master node. So, the chain is safe.
Then we make the addresses on that chain with caped balance. For example, no address can have more than ten million of the coin. And KYC is a must so no one can open multiple addresses. And when some address receives more coins at the cap these coins will be distributed to the poor list on the chain.

This will be impossible, given that not everyone will really obey the system and this is yet another centralized, controlled system we have created with the involvement of KYC. Cryptocurrency's main takeaway is being decentralized and anonymous (to a certain extent), so this purposely defeats what crypto stands for. Also, this is not philanthropy and no one is obligated to give even a cent of their holdings to someone just to 'even out' the scale.

One more thing, the income of the master nodes must put in consideration where its owner is living. I live in Egypt and 1 ETH can sustain me for a month but for a USA citizen it can only pay a bill.
With a lot of master nodes, the chain is secured, a lot of buyers and sellers, less volatility for the coin, fair distribution guaranteed.

How so if the merchants themselves don't feel like getting into the economy and accepting crypto payments? A secure chain with a lot of masternodes doesn't necessarily attract a lot of merchants to sell their goods and services.

[LeGaulois]

There is always this situation in all markets, (stock, metals,...) . The fair distribution can only be fair if it's adjusted to your current wealth

Then we make the addresses on that chain with caped balance. For example, no address can have more than ten million of the coin. And KYC is a must so no one can open multiple addresses.

If you need KYC then you don't need a cryptocurrency. You can do the same with the current fiat system, either in the form of a shared funds pool, pension funds or whatever. I don't know why people get so in love with KYC, AML, and so on.

[leavolnhals]

 I understand the big problem here is the security and reputation of businesses. As people gradually turn to crypto and blockchain, unwanted events will inevitably occur.
then governments will participate in the crypto market because the market has grown and can greatly affect the economy of the world.
There will be regulatory and technological adjustments to blockchain technology to make it more suitable for a decentralized market.
It will definitely have a lot of changes in the future, bro.

[Kimonoe]

I understand the big problem here is the security and reputation of businesses. As people gradually turn to crypto and blockchain, unwanted events will inevitably occur.
then governments will participate in the crypto market because the market has grown and can greatly affect the economy of the world.
There will be regulatory and technological adjustments to blockchain technology to make it more suitable for a decentralized market.
It will definitely have a lot of changes in the future, bro.

right, later there will also be many governments that inevitably take policies for the regulation of cryptocurrency. although at this time they have many reasons for not being able to accept it, but it will be different from later

[palle11]

Now, about the coin. Most of the crypto-followers are after the profits and don't care about the project.

This should not really give us headache because people invest for profit especially where it is not a charitable organization.

Comparing crypto to fiat, there is no difference. There is no fair distribution for people. When I check the rich list of any crypto coin I found that there is no difference from the fiat rich list. Just a few people have the majority of the wealth.

There might not be fair distribution because life is about survival of the fittest. However, cryptocurrency grants more opportunity for wealth creation for people than fiat. This is because, you can be lucky to adopt a good prospect coin or buy and hodl , the bull hits it good to financial success.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

My personal opinion, which I've held for years now, is that bitcoin is an asset and an investment more so than a currency--and I think that's even more true for altcoins.  As it stands, the average person has no use for an alternative form of money.  If you don't believe that, just take a quick poll of everyone you know, asking them if they use bitcoin for their daily transactions.  The fact is that fiat currency generally works just fine (Venezuela or any other country with hyperinflation excluded, of course).  And even in countries with hyperinflation, the citizens aren't adopting crypto en masse, and that should tell you something.

All of that aside, I'm still a big fan of bitcoin.  I don't like banks and think people are squeezed too much in terms of taxes and that government and banks have too much control over people's money.  Bitcoin offers a solution for all of that, even if the solution is imperfect.

Most of the crypto-followers are after the profits and don't care about the project.

That's true of any investment, though.  And I would argue that the market needs such investors anyway, since they keep the market liquid.  It's also human nature to try to make money on something that you don't necessarily believe in, so I don't have any problem whatsoever with traders who aren't hardcore bitcoiners.  Let the best man win.

[mr3dds]

Let me clarify few things about what I wrote.

Rich people can earn a lot more than others just because they are rich not because they are better. So, when we just sell the coin, we are just making the rich richer which is just like the fiat monetary system. A lot of us don't like that very few people have more than half of our wealth. Crypto is making the same.
To mine and get more coins you need a lot of miners. Rich people can but these miners and they will control the chain in the end. That is a problem facing the blockchain. It is becoming less decentralized. That's because it is becoming rich only club.

If I want to mine any coin now I will need money and the more money I have the influence I will have on the chain. But if rewards for everyone are the same and without a big investment, that would be a true decentralization.

Dash master node is worth about 70000$ which is a lot and that minimize the potential of new master nodes being born to the chain. So, the worth of master nodes must be affordable for everyone for the sake of true decentralization.

In my opinion money functions as a mean to facilitate our life. Not to be linked to our work. All humans must eat, drink, have a home, so we all have needs. So, it is not smart to pay more for smarter people. Smart or stupid we have the same needs. Actually smart people can manage their financials but stupid can't. I hope you get the point.

One last thing, the difference between fiat currencies affect the price of crypto. Let me explain what I mean. I joined the Polymath airdrop and got 250 tokens. I sold them for 1$/token and that is a great deal for me. That's because 250$ is a lot in my country. This action of mine will affect the price of the tokens. Because once the coin is listed on an exchange I will sell to the first buyer. That happened with a lot of projects. The distribution of coins must consider where its users are located. Offering a 50% bonus in a sale for some countries is not healthy for the project.
There are a lot of things to say about this issue. But, I am really tired. See you another day my friends.

[shield132]

Bitcoin isn't only currency and also there are more types of people than those who only think about profit, there are a lot who thinks on privacy and use it as a secure payment way + you can have offline wallet in just one small usb stick and store as much bitcoin as you want while you can't store millions in your home because that's unsafe + we don't want to give banks control on our money.

[Upgrade00]

Comparing crypto to fiat, there is no difference. There is no fair distribution for people. When I check the rich list of any crypto coin I found that there is no difference from the fiat rich list. Just a few people have the majority of the wealth.

Money rules the world, and any asset with monetary value would be owned by a small percentage of the population. Bitcoin was designed to be a rivals currency and offer freedom to those who did not like the monopoly and activities of banks.
Every system has it's flaws and would not suit everyone, but with digital assets we all have an alternative. Other physical assets like gold have also been controlled by the financial sector.
Bitcoin would create a revolution, it would take time.

[MakeMoneyBtc]

then governments will participate in the crypto market because the market has grown and can greatly affect the economy of the world.

At a certain point governments will surely take action and participate in the crypto market but the important thing is if they are going to do it in a positive or a negative way since this could go either way. In my opinion governments will try to legalize and create regulations for cryptocurrencies and this is only going to influence the market in a negative way but i am sure crypto can survive this since it has a very strong community behind.

[Kevin77]

You are definitely right about the fact that many people use bitcoin as a means to make money and not for its real purpose of using it like money. They try to buy and sell and profit from the trade and that is all they care and yes many rubbish altcoins were created just for that purpose alone. However, do not assume just because that is a majority of people in the crypto world but its definitely "all" of them.

There are still tons of people using bitcoin for what bitcoin was created for, and to some extend same applies to ethereum as well. They are used to buy stuff, earn money, spend it on something or pay a person as well, just like regular money. So, all in all even though most of the bitcoin users we have right now are focused on the profitable side of bitcoin, there are still tons of people who use it for what it was supposed to be used for.

[bitbunnny]

There's no such thing as a crypto revolution.There's only crypto evolution,which means that cryptocurrencies will be adopted steady and slow.
If the Proof-of-stake is really better than Proof-of-work,why the most of the crypto users are still using bitcoin,which is POW?I guess that POS isn't that great after all.
Every coin,fiat currency of financial is just a tool.There's no way to implement fair distribution into some financial asset that has value/market liquidity.

At the begininig when cryptocurrencies first appeared that was some kind of revolution. Crypto was brand new technology and concept never seen before. Today I would agree that we've come to the stage of evolution where further development, adoption, regulation and new features are more important. Bitcoin is a very powerful tool that is a serious competition to tradional financial system.

[sclmte]

Blockchain's technology has become the center of attention for over a decade now, but even today if technology has been established as a driving factor for the next industrial revolution, there are many misunderstandings associated with it. People with opinions and differences in opinion can be good things to improve technology and make them better in the long run. But after hearing different arguments from both parties, it seems that despite the difference in opinion, there are various misconceptions related to technology. This article will help you understand these legends and the actual truth behind them. So, let's fix some of the legends in Blockchain.