Conversation

Even if you're fine with people getting donations back fraudulently due to later regret (which may not seem so bad), you need to win the dispute or you pay the fee and your account ends up flagged for involvement in fraud. Leads to fund freezes and eventually losing the account.
2
1
I hate exchanges, and don't trust them one bit. I was previously beginning a process of slowly getting ~1000 USD at a time turned into CAD and deposited into my bank account, and the exchange that I was using (Quadriga) finished an exit scam right before I sent them another 1k.
1
Replying to and
my problems with Bi/tcoin are primarily political in nature (it's extremely destructive and also totally controlled in practice by like five guys who want to launder money from China, both bad long term outlook); I have used it extensively and know what it's capable of
1
4
Replying to and
Bitcoin isn't very private at all even when not reusing addresses but I would like it far more if it was. I see support for laundering money as a necessary evil similar to criminals benefiting from end-to-end encrypted messaging. I do agree proof of work is a serious problem.
2
The equivalent to mining pools to get a portion of the income without owning huge amounts of the currency is to keep your money in a bank. Even if it doesn't incentive pooling, you'd generally not be able to use a proper hardware wallet with confirmation and passphrase support.
1
You can have multisig allow you to use this coin to vote for the next vote, but not to transfer it, and then use HW wallet for the other sig. BTC is skewed towards people with cheap electricity and with access to the very centralized (literally one company IIRC) that makes the HW
1
Show replies
Well, it's not that BTC doesn't have centralization problems To my understanding if cost of participation is low, deflation can be kept low, and what you describe is less of a problem It was designed by cryptographers (e.g., Tal Rabin) to be similar to BTC
Quote Tweet
Replying to @davidgerard @giladby and 2 others
To my understanding, you don't (necessarily) have to incentivize participant by inflating the coin for every block. Unlike PoW, the cost of participating is very cheap, holders are incentivized to maintain the coin, just to keep their shares. Even if you do low cost=low inflation
1
A mining pool is different than needing to hand over the keys for your money to the pool though. By centralizing, I mean placing more trust into these pools, by turning them into banks, not just pooling of hashing resources where they are in a position to choose the transactions.
1
Show replies