1. No it does not have that potential. Crypto doesn't scale that way, and the technology is fundamentally too slow and expensive to use for people like you describe.
It's also not a currency, you can't use it for banking, it's just too volatile for that. The number of people actually buying anything in crypto is miniscule and on the decline.
2. No one who has money in crypto has any incentive to make cryptos a viable currency, especially for the poor.
If you're an investor you want volatility, you want the value to go up rapidly, which is antithetical to it being usable as a currency. If you're in crypto management business, you want it to be as expensive as possible to own and handle.
There's no one even seriously working towards creating banking for the unbanked through crypto. It's not a real thing.
Ripple is trying to do this with the XRPL, XRP and CBDCs. Stellar is also aiming to help the unbanked.
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
are their mortgage rates competative?
This question is more subtle than it appears on the surface - banks create money by means of the deposit multiplier when lending funds out. This works because it is just numbers being manipulated, and you can have (for example) a billion dollars lent out with only 10% of that actually on deposit. That money circulates back between lenders and borrowers and provides a natural increase to the money supply based on economic activity - how much "work" that money does - and how much the multiplier is set to by the government.
Crypto, though, cannot be manipulated in this way, I can't lend you 10 bitcoin or ethereum or whatever if I only have 1 myself. It's not just numbers, they are tokens or "coins" which is touted as an advantage, but it really isn't. It is, as I've mentioned before, much like the days when gold and silver functioned as money.
The invention of fiat currency and the rise of modern banking underpins the economic structure of the world, and you can't successfully replace that interlocked system with crypto without the means to grow the money supply other than through so-called mining, which is, again, much akin to needing to mine more physical gold or silver back in the pre-fiat world. Giving governments control and regulation of a fiat money supply is what allowed commerce and business to grow and thrive far past what was ever possible before. Decentralized currency would do the opposite and kill economies as the money supply would stagnate or contract, not grow.
Even if you think fiat is fundamentally flawed, going to a model with flaws that are not debatable, but a matter of historical record and fact, is foolish. It is not a question of what crypto can do, it's extrapolating what the effects will be of losing the ability to do what it is deliberately designed not to do - allow organic inflation of the money supply .
Likely someone will claim again "you just don't understand the technology" but that's not an argument, that's just a dismissal and statement of belief. Crypto boosters think understanding the technology equates to understanding the ramifications of that technology, and they are wrong. Digital currency is the future, not cryptocurrency, as it's an evolution of what already works, not a revolution driven by technical elegance over practicality.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to jammies For This Useful Post:
I'm in the "crypto is the future" camp, but in the way you state and not as currency. I think they will be used in a variety of ways, but only to interact with CBDCs, not replace currency as we know it today.
I also think there are going to be some very severe and ironic consequences of crypto adoption. The irony being that most of the crypto community thinks it will be out of the hands of the government. I think the opposite will end up ringing true where the government will have absolute transparency into everyone's finances through the blockchain. Once everything is digital, it will be impossible to do anything without leaving a footprint.
This is all probably decades away but who could say for sure.
The Following User Says Thank You to indes For This Useful Post:
This question is more subtle than it appears on the surface - banks create money by means of the deposit multiplier when lending funds out. This works because it is just numbers being manipulated, and you can have (for example) a billion dollars lent out with only 10% of that actually on deposit. That money circulates back between lenders and borrowers and provides a natural increase to the money supply based on economic activity - how much "work" that money does - and how much the multiplier is set to by the government.
Crypto, though, cannot be manipulated in this way, I can't lend you 10 bitcoin or ethereum or whatever if I only have 1 myself. It's not just numbers, they are tokens or "coins" which is touted as an advantage, but it really isn't. It is, as I've mentioned before, much like the days when gold and silver functioned as money.
The invention of fiat currency and the rise of modern banking underpins the economic structure of the world, and you can't successfully replace that interlocked system with crypto without the means to grow the money supply other than through so-called mining, which is, again, much akin to needing to mine more physical gold or silver back in the pre-fiat world. Giving governments control and regulation of a fiat money supply is what allowed commerce and business to grow and thrive far past what was ever possible before. Decentralized currency would do the opposite and kill economies as the money supply would stagnate or contract, not grow.
Even if you think fiat is fundamentally flawed, going to a model with flaws that are not debatable, but a matter of historical record and fact, is foolish. It is not a question of what crypto can do, it's extrapolating what the effects will be of losing the ability to do what it is deliberately designed not to do - allow organic inflation of the money supply .
Likely someone will claim again "you just don't understand the technology" but that's not an argument, that's just a dismissal and statement of belief. Crypto boosters think understanding the technology equates to understanding the ramifications of that technology, and they are wrong. Digital currency is the future, not cryptocurrency, as it's an evolution of what already works, not a revolution driven by technical elegance over practicality.
The real irony is crypto boosters are actually just a new iteration of the Gold Standard brigade, but if you want an object lesson of the effects of a limited/fixed money supply then the UK's attempt to return to the Gold Standard in 1925 is an object lesson in 'be careful what you wish for'
'50% of transactions were fraudulent' when Steam accepted Bitcoin for payments, says Gabe Newell
No wonder Steam stopped taking cryptocurrency.
Steam wasn't on the Bitcoin train for long. Bitcoin was introduced as a payment method on Steam in April 2016 and removed in December 2017 due to the volatility of Bitcoin's price and "a significant increase in the fees to process transactions on the Bitcoin network," Valve wrote at the time.
"The problem is that a lot of the actors who are in that space are not people you want interacting with your customers," Newell said. "We had problems when we started accepting cryptocurrencies as a payment option. 50% of those transactions were fraudulent, which is a mind-boggling number. These were customers we didn't want to have."
Newell reiterated that Bitcoin's fluctuations were "a complete nightmare"—people weren't happy when a game could cost $10 one day and $100 the next.
"There's a difference between what it should be and what it really is currently in the real world. And that's sort of where we were at with the blockchain-based NFT stuff: so much of it was ripping customers off. And we were like, 'Yeah, that's not what we want to do, we don't want to enable screwing large numbers of our customers over,' so that's what drove that decision.
"Biden’s order directs financial regulators to review any threats cryptocurrency poses to the stability of the financial system and the broader economy and develop recommendations to address them. It calls on the Commerce Department to work across the government to ensure that emerging policies protect U.S. leadership in the sector. And it orders the Treasury Department to report on the “future of money and payment systems,” with an eye toward promoting wider access to the financial system."
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to The Fonz For This Useful Post:
I submitted an idea to the Nation Building Dapps section of Cardano's ideascale fund 8. It's currently sitting in the top 10 of maybe 60 proposals in the subsection, so there is some traction. If anyone here happens to have an ideascale account (free to sign up ), kindly consider giving the idea some kudos, a comment or a vote. There's some serious funding available for innovative projects that grow the Cardano ecosystem.
I submitted an idea to the Nation Building Dapps section of Cardano's ideascale fund 8. It's currently sitting in the top 10 of maybe 60 proposals in the subsection, so there is some traction. If anyone here happens to have an ideascale account (free to sign up ), kindly consider giving the idea some kudos, a comment or a vote. There's some serious funding available for innovative projects that grow the Cardano ecosystem.
The cryptocurrency entrepreneur who bought a non-fungible token (NFT) of Twitter founder Jack Dorsey’s first tweet was hoping to sell it for $48 million, more than 16 times the $2.9 million he paid for it.
But after an auction that lasted a week, the highest bid offered was a mere $280.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to chemgear For This Useful Post:
The cryptocurrency entrepreneur who bought a non-fungible token (NFT) of Twitter founder Jack Dorsey’s first tweet was hoping to sell it for $48 million, more than 16 times the $2.9 million he paid for it.
But after an auction that lasted a week, the highest bid offered was a mere $280.
Hope we see more of this.
Stupid flippers deserve to see some major losses.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Winsor_Pilates For This Useful Post:
What in the heck is this? It’s like it was written by Dogbert.
Quote:
Elephant Money
ELEPHANT.MONEY implements a voluntary, sustainable, and permissionless global economic engine on top of a collection of blue chip assets, a core rewards token (ELEPHANT), and a stable coin (TRUNK). The ELEPHANT.MONEY protocol is a 100% complete and finished product and provides yield and price appreciation in any market cycle.
Benefits
ELEPHANT.MONEY is a permissionless system for economic inclusion and helps its community accumulate wealth through active and passive cash flows.
So, someone called a coin "Trunk" and a token "Elephant", claimed to have a feature-complete product, then called it "Elephant Money" ... So, people "invested" in it, and now everyone is SHOCKED that it is a scam???
LOL
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Krovikan For This Useful Post:
the proper name for this is 'pump and dump', the old Vancouver stock market was renowned for these, so much so it had to be closed down, but back in the day you could lose all your money on companies that promised to grow massive pearl bearing oysters or french fry vending machines in Japanese train stations along with the more mundane gold and diamond mines that never existed
), kindly consider giving the idea some kudos, a comment or a vote. There's some serious funding available for innovative projects that grow the Cardano ecosystem. 
