monerod is hogging al my CPU! It's weird that cyptocurrency is supposed to be decentralized and there we are keeping our money in centralized locations like FTX or Binance.
monerod is hogging al my CPU! It's weird that cyptocurrency is supposed to be decentralized and there we are keeping our money in centralized locations like FTX or Binance.
monerod is hogging all my CPU! It's weird that cyptocurrency is supposed to be decentralized and there we are keeping our money in centralized locations like FTX or Binance.
cryptocurrencies are not decentralized, they are a very complex distributor network.
The only part that you could remotely consider decentralized are your private keys (du'h)
cryptocurrencies are not decentralized, they are a very complex distributor network.
The only part that you could remotely consider decentralized are your private keys (du'h)
it's very much a distributed network, but you are essentially centralizing the storage of transactions, the so-called block chain, ledger, onto infrastructure and computers that aren't yours or in your control.
it's very much a distributed network, but you are essentially centralizing the storage of transactions, the so-called block chain, ledger, onto infrastructure and computers that aren't yours or in your control.
> but you are essentially centralizing the storage of transactions, the so-called block chain, ledger, onto infrastructure and computers that aren’t yours or in your control.
Which exactly are those computers? Isn't the blockchain distributed and stored on each individual node?
It is a distributed network. Not decentralized.
It is a distributed network. Not decentralized.
> How is an institition different from a few powerful players that control >50% of the network? 🤔
I can't say I understand completely how cryptocurrency, works, I wasn't interested in the subject until recently but this is what they say: https://www.coindesk.com/learn/what-is-a-51-attack/
> A 51% attack, however, is theoretically limited in the amount of disruption it can cause. While the attacker could trigger the double-spending problem, they cannot reverse others’ transactions on the network or prevent users from broadcasting their transactions to the network. Additionally, a 51% attack is incapable of creating new assets, stealing assets from unrelated parties or altering the functionality of block rewards.
This is not verified by me personally and and the source is a crypto exchange.
> How is an institition different from a few powerful players that control >50% of the network? 🤔
I can't say I understand completely how cryptocurrency, works, I wasn't interested in the subject until recently but this is what they say: https://www.coindesk.com/learn/what-is-a-51-attack/
> A 51% attack, however, is theoretically limited in the amount of disruption it can cause. While the attacker could trigger the double-spending problem, they cannot reverse others’ transactions on the network or prevent users from broadcasting their transactions to the network. Additionally, a 51% attack is incapable of creating new assets, stealing assets from unrelated parties or altering the functionality of block rewards.
This is not verified by me personally and and the source is a crypto exchange.
It could however lead to the devaluation of the coin, that's true.
Love it or hate it, institutionalized fiat currency has value because the issuing country has people with guns who will drag you off to a metal box if you don't use the currency in the intended ways (unless you're super rich I guess). That aside, cryptocurrency stupidly throws away many thousands of years of accumulated human knowledge about how currencies work and don't work. For that reason alone it's stupid and untrustworthy.
> Love it or hate it, institutionalized fiat currency has value because the issuing country has people with guns who will drag you off to a metal box if you don’t use the currency in the intended ways (unless you’re super rich I guess).
Yes, 100% agree on this!
> The cryptocurrency industry collapsed because the idea at its core is a Ponzi scheme. It doesn’t matter how you implement the Ponzi scheme in software. The only way to accrue value is to bring in more people who are willing to pay more money for the currency than what you paid for it. That’s the literal definition of a Ponzi scheme and is inherently unstable (it crashes the moment the of rate of incoming new users slows down).
That's the problem, people saw cryptocurrencies as way to make money quick (classic money making problem), it's not that the idea of cryptocurrency is a Ponzi scheme, is that people are using it to engineer Ponzi schemes or do fraud with it as they do with fiat money.
> That’s the problem, people saw cryptocurrencies as way to make money quick (classic money making problem), it’s not that the idea of cryptocurrency is a Ponzi scheme, is that people are using it to engineer Ponzi schemes or do fraud with it as they do with fiat money.
I _think_ you are confusing the idea of a blockchain, a distributed leger. That idea has its merits, btu, and I stress but in reality it also has its own sets of problems too.
> That’s the problem, people saw cryptocurrencies as way to make money quick (classic money making problem), it’s not that the idea of cryptocurrency is a Ponzi scheme, is that people are using it to engineer Ponzi schemes or do fraud with it as they do with fiat money.
I _think_ you are confusing the idea of a blockchain, a distributed leger. That idea has its merits, btu, and I stress but in reality it also has its own sets of problems too.
> The only way to accrue value is to bring in more people who are willing to pay more money for the currency than what you paid for it.
Crypto increases or decreases in value just as any other good (or currency), based on demand, you can do Ponzi schemes with potatoes, you can't say potates at their core are Ponzi scheme.
> institutionalized fiat currency has value because the issuing country has people with guns who will drag you off to a metal box if you don’t use the currency in the intended ways (unless you’re super rich I guess).
And cypto's value is that it's a currency outside the (at least the digital) reach of a countries institutions. No institution can give an order to block your transactions! Even if you're bank account is blocked, you can still trade with crypto! That's at least one of the reasons it has value!
> Crypto increases or decreases in value just as any other good (or currency), based on demand, you can do Ponzi schemes with potatoes, you can’t say potates at their core are Ponzi scheme.
This is not true, because cryptocurrency is unique: it has no inherent value whatsoever. Potatoes have value as food, and so yes while they can be used as the underpinning of a Ponzi scheme, the presence of potatoes as a kind of currency does not immediately imply that you're looking at a Ponzi scheme. You might be looking at a perfectly viable economy grounded, ultimately, in the value of a potato as a food.
There is no grounding for cryptocurrency. You can't eat it, wear it, or live in it. You can't use it to pay taxes, fees, or fines from a nation-state without first converting it into the fiat currency of that nation-state.
You might argue "well, you can exchange the crypto for those other things!" and the answer to that is: no you can't, unless you have enough people participating in the Ponzi scheme. That's how these schemes work. It's a con game where the token only has a value if enough people *believe* it has a value. That's a Ponzi scheme.
> And cypto’s value is that it’s a currency outside the (at least the digital) reach of a countries institutions.
That is not a value. I have absolutely no need or desire for that, nor do the vast majority of people. People avoiding accountability from their community might view it as such.
> That is not a value. I have absolutely no need or desire for that, nor do the vast majority of people. People avoiding accountability from their community might view it as such.
I have no doubt a lot of crypto transactions have been made with the West sanctions and all. That's value!
> That is not a value. I have absolutely no need or desire for that, nor do the vast majority of people. People avoiding accountability from their community might view it as such.
You can never tell for sure, that's where crypto's values lies in.
I have no doubt a lot of crypto transactions have been made with the West sanctions and all. That's value!
> No institution can give an order to block your transactions! Even if you’re bank account is blocked, you can still trade with crypto! That’s at least one of the reasons it has value!
You're literally trying to say that if your community has decided that you should not have access to certain funds, you should be empowered to thwart that decision. A profoundly anti-social stance to take.
Because that's the notion here. Banks can't legally decide that you no longer have access to your funds. You have a right to those funds that is protected by law. Legal authorities in some cases can restrict your access to your funds, but there is a reason and purpose to that, and in theory that reason and purpose is protection of the community. Yes I know I'm being simplistic, but the alternative is to take the extreme libertarian view that these institutions are all broken and hostile beyond hope, we should resist them at all costs, everyone else be damned. To me that's far more simplistic, naive, and dangerous than believing that these institutions approximate the ideals we have for them and can be improved through time.
And honestly, if that's your worry--that a bank would restrict your access to your money--why in the actual FUCK would you think that cryptocurrency gives you better access? Get a bunch of cash, bonds, and prepaid debit cards and bury it all in your backyard. That's far better.
I've talked to many people who are enthusiastic about cryptocurrency, and almost to a one I find that they have a limited understanding of how actual currencies work. I'd urge you to read up on how banks work, how fiat currencies work, etc., before saying stuff like this.
> You’re literally trying to say that if your community has decided that you should not have access to certain funds, you should be empowered to thwart that decision.
Yes, because it's YOUR money!
> Banks can’t legally decide that you no longer have access to your funds. You have a right to those funds that is protected by law. Legal authorities in some cases can restrict your access to your funds, but there is a reason and purpose to that, and in theory that reason and purpose is protection of the community. Yes I know I’m being simplistic, but the alternative is to take the extreme libertarian view that these institutions are all broken and hostile beyond hope, we should resist them at all costs, everyone else be damned.
You're going to extremes now, I'm saying there MAY BE SOME situations when if would be a could idea to have some money outside of the institution control.
> Get a bunch of cash, bonds, and prepaid debit cards and bury it all in your backyard. That’s far better.
I believe that in those kind of situations is better to have your cash in digital form rather than in any kind of physical form, not sure if prepaid cards can't be blocked.
> well, fuck Russia lol. Crypto should burn if only to deny those genocidal pricks access to money.
What if the balance of power would change? What if you would be affected?
> @adi what are you talking about?
Please quote, I don't understand on what reply you're asking the question.
The biggest darknet markets where taken down due to misconfigurations or mistakes leading them to leak IP and such , not because tor is compromised or that some agency ran a exit node.
A hidden service's traffic never goes through a exit node, only passes through middle nodes and everything stays encrypted.
https://conference.hitb.org/hitbsecconf2015ams/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/D2T2-Filippo-Valsorda-and-George-Tankersly-Non-Hidden-Hidden-Services-Considered-Harmful.pdf
> Hidden service users face a greater risk of targeted deanonymization than normal Tor users
> This sounds like a scary event and I’m sorry that it happened to you.
No reason to be afraid of law enforcement! People are people!