top 98 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 45 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (16 children)

I found crypto earlier than some. (not everyone -- if I had more I wouldnt have to work anymore, haha!)

IMHO, the main value proposition of crypto is permissionless peer-to-peer payments. If we both have crypto wallets, and you send me an address to make a payment to, I can send that without needing anyone's approval first. I don't need any bank to agree to have me as a customer first, or any government to approve why the transaction is taking place. All I need is a functioning payment network, and the original Bitcoin white paper solved how to provide that and preserve anonymity. (Really Pseudo-anonymity, but only the nerds and Monero shills care about the difference)

As an academic experiment regarding permissionless payments, it is a resounding success. But, it turns out, Governments have laws regarding who can pay who, and about scamming people, regardless of the medium. So, just because Bitcoin enables permissionless payments doesn't mean you can pay whomever you want, or makes scams somehow permissible.

Furthermore, the rapid increase in crypto prices really doomed any chance at all for useful adoption. Because people don't want to spend crypto anymore. They view it as a Store of Value, and who can blame them, given how it has risen from nothing to a > $2T market cap, even after the recent downturn? You used to be able to use crypto in regular transactions, but not anymore.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 7 months ago (9 children)

    So it is digital cash without the backing of a government and no stability.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    You're not wrong, but why is not having the backing of a government a bad thing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    A currency backed by a government has a very high chance of being able to be used at any time with a mostly stable value. Sure, if the government collapses it can become worthless, but on a worldwide scale that is far, far less likely and you will most likely know if it is headed that way ahead of time.

    Governments add a bit of stability for currency used as currency and not as speculation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

    Tether is an interesting experiment here. They are traded as smart contract tokens on top of various blockchains. They don't really have any intrinsic value, other than Tether LTD saying "every Tether is 100% backed by currency reserves", and releasing unsatisfactory "audits" now and then. It's main utility is that it provides foreign exchanges with a way to trade in something that is like Dollars without opening them up to the regulation that comes with trading actual dollars. It's market cap is currently in excess of $180 B.

    But, USDT has been around, in one form or another, since 2015. And while other "innovative" crypto products have crashed and burned, Tether has been able to keep its peg and has never failed to meet redemptions. Furthermore, it doesn't need to be a scam. It's whole point is to always be worth one currency unit, so all they have to do is invest that currency in safe conventional investments and they can literally make billions of dollars with very little overhead. The most obvious answer is that they are not a scam.

    I still don't really trust them, but I have used them on exchanges, always making sure to trade through Tether to something I can redeem on a US exchange for actual dollars. But, I have to acknowledge they have lasted longer than most crypto entities. I wish they would get a complete audit together, but at some point their reputation for having lasted so long needs to be worth something?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Madoff's scheme lasted for 30 years or more, surely that means it's worth something?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    He managed to keep it up until all of a sudden he couldn't. Madoff was undone when he had to produce 440 million that he didn't have.

    Meanwhile, Tether was able to meet billions on withdrawals, several times. After Terra collapsed, I seem to recall they saw $15B in redemptions, but I can't find any reputable links on that. If Tether was a scam, shouldn't it have failed a long time ago?

    People outside of crypto don't realize how massive Tether is, and how much money it has under management. As much as the crypto bros dislike Central Banks, Tether has turned into one. If Tether were to ever implode, it would take most Crypto businesses with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    There's a bunch of different cryptocurrencies and a bunch of different government-backed fiat currencies, all with different ranges of stability. Even stuff like gold isn't actually "stable", the price varies. Pick whichever range of stability suits your needs. You could use a stabletoken that's pegged to something else - US dollars are popular.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] [S] 3 points 7 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    To be fair there's a lot of crypto currency that was/still is a scam. Also I'd argue that BTC, and crypto in general, still is being treated as a security that's backed by thin air. Ie: it's a speculative asset that doesn't actually have any value.

    There's nothing really stopping BTC from crashing hard. It's so wild to me how people treat it.

    I could have bought bitcoin too when it was worth pennies but there was no way to know which crypto the whales were going to bet on for the pump and dump. It's a missed opportunity but rest assured there's plenty of universes where Bitcoin amounted to nothing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] -2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child)

    And BTC went from approximately zero to approximately $100K over that time. What else are you advising against at this time? To be honest, I had read an article on cryptocurrency somewhere around '09, and thought, "wow, this is where currency is headed!" I asked a friend who was a nerdy computer programmer type, and he said it was like tulip mania in The Netherlands, so I didn't invest. Sigh.

    From Investopedia: (https://www.investopedia.com/what-can-you-buy-with-bitcoin-5179592) - since I don't know everything, and nobody else has said this...

    *Bitcoin launched in 2009, enabling transactions via crypto debit cards linked to Mastercard and Visa

    *Bitcoin can purchase products like electronics, luxury watches, and cars.

    *The SEC approved the first U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs in January 2024.

    *PayPal lets users buy, sell, and hold cryptocurrency in their accounts.

    *Cryptocurrency debit cards offer an easy way to use Bitcoin for purchases.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    the main value proposition of crypto is permissionless peer-to-peer payments.

    I think a lot of people, including myself, expected a more user-friendly experience. And what many of us realized is that a peer-to-peer payment system is a lot of work and risk for the user. Everything looks unpolished and sketchy. You don't know if you've installed the right software. There's no FDIC insuring the money, and the FBI is going to laugh if you say that you accidentally sent your life savings to the wrong crypto address.

    I guess what I'm saying is that I started to realize all the labor involved in secure fiat monetary systems. For me, as someone without a lot of money or any real reason to transfer my money electronically beyond paying bills, the effort just didn't seem worth it.

    So, yeah, that's the reason I just parked my cash in Coinbase and let it grow. The risk and the hassle of actually utilizing a peer-to-peer system didn't seem to have much of a reward.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 57 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    It was (briefly) useful for buying and selling illicit substances.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 7 months ago

    Just one point to add: there is no currency that is universally accepted. You probably cant buy a pizza with Kuwaiti dinar right now either. But that’s definitely a currency. So your part about “everyone agrees” is not really true of any currency. They work only for a subset of humanity who mutually agree it has value. And you can absolutely find people who will buy crypto from you using other currencies, or give you goods and services for it. Those people are rather randomly distributed around the world though instead of being grouped inside one geographic border. That’s the only difference.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago

    Buying hormones for diy hrt

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago

    Anecdotally, I've heard that trans people use it to buy hormones because HRT is usually not covered by national healthcare or insurance, so the people selling them aren't doing so fully entirely technically legally.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago

    Hide money from government

    You can't carry suitcases of money when you're fleeing a country, so cryptos it is...

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago*

    It's an excellent waste of electricity and computational resources

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

    My understanding is this. Let's say Valve accepted crypto payments. If they did, they wouldn't need to go through middlemen payment processors like Visa and Mastercard that can use their influence to dictate what games can and can't be published on Steam.

    But yeah the way it works in practice seems to make crypto a commodity, not a currency.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    There is a fee for crypto transaction processing. The fee is the same irrespective of dollar value, so for small transactions, like buying a game, it is more than a cc middleman fee.

    Eventually, I think k this is where crypto can work. Something like the digital euro where the transactions are processed by a trusted entity, the European central bank, rather than your local bank through the visa or MasterCard system. If those fees can be low or eliminated, visa and MasterCard are dead.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 7 months ago (10 children)

    Bitcoin alone uses more electricity than Norway.

    And that electricity is mostly from burning coal, so crypto is great for creating global warming

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago

    Bitcoin burns so much energy because it's developers are stubborn. It's really that simple. Ethereum transitioned to a different algorithm that uses a fraction of that energy and only a few dorks care.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 7 months ago (8 children)

    Wait until you hear about the energy cost of traditional finances.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    This is a silly thing to say. Normal payment processing uses more energy, but that's only because there are many, many more payments going through it. It's orders of magnitude more energy-efficient than crypto.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Bitcoin wastes so much energy, I think all normal payment systems combined use less energy than it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Bitcoin wastes so much energy because it's proof of work based which to my understanding is basically a bunch of computers churning out answers competing to be "first and correct" in order to print coins.

    I like the idea of decentralized currency but the current execution of cryptocurrency leaves much to be desired.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

    The current execution of *bitcoin*, there's plenty of non pow cryptocurrencies 

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    Bitcoin in specific doesn't scale, but other things like Bitcoin Cash scale without increasing the energy usage, because the energy cost of PoW Blockchains comes from their security, not from the scale, so doing 1 or thousands of transactions costs the same.

    Plus, things like Ethereum have migrated to PoS which uses very small amount of energy comparable and also scales without increasing energy costs.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago

    It's great for being paid while working abroad.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago

    Sometimes it's expensive or difficult to send money between two countries, depending on which countries they are. But if you know how to send crypto, it's the same process and price no matter where it's going.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    The way I look at it is that cryptocurrency is basically a security with no real use, but it can store 'value' in the same way those NFT things stored value for a while. There are more bullshitters for crypto, so they'll keep that hype train going longer, and you can semi work it to get some profit by buying the security low, and selling it high.

    There was a post a while ago about how around something like 2020 or whatever, with billions invested in it, and with huge amounts of power/electricity going towards it, bitcoin had something like less than 10 transactions per minute globally. Like it's absolute dogshit when ti comes to transactions, in part because it's not a currency despite its name.

    Currencies need to depreciate in value via inflation -- crypto tends to just store value and go up / down solely on its isolated demand as a nebulous concept. In fact, one of the bragging points from cryptobros is often this misguided notion that crypto is a hedge against inflation -- as that 'benefit' basically disqualifies it as a proper currency. If you get $1000, and that $1000 is able to buy you some quantity of goods, you need that money to be able to buy less of those goods in the future in order to encourage people to actually use the fucking thing. If you had $1000, but were almost assured that it would be able to buy twice as many goods in the future if you just held on to it for a bit under your mattress, you wouldn't spend the money... ever. Sorta like those crazy early crypto experiments where uni students were given like 25 bitcoin to see how they'd spend it -- and a bunch did exactly what you said in your opening bit, bought pizzas (you could at the time). Bet they would've preferred to buy a bunch of houses and sports cars later on, if they'd realised how popular the fad would get. Bitcoin only tends to go 'down' in value when people completely exit the currency, so it's not a valid currency.

    I think you're generally right in your note about it needing to be exchanged. The whole point of currencies is that you don't want them to sit idle under someone's bed. Banks/Credit Unions provide savings accounts that pay interest, though typically slightly less than inflation. This is basically a function where because of inflation, you don't want to have your money just sit under your bed, you want to invest it in at least a savings account/term deposit -- but what's actually happening there, is that you're committing your money to the financial institution for a fixed period, and they're subsequently loaning that out to someone so that person can buy a house (typically) -- and then their payments on that house, is what generates your interest earnings (and the banks profits). The house itself is a security, with a general stable/safe valuation, so if that person can't make their payments on the house, the bank can foreclose, sell it, and still pay you your interest. So your savings are generally very safe -- especially, frankly, with simple/smaller financial institutions that aren't trying to do fancy bullshit / aren't doing any higher risk wealth management type back end tricks. Main point being though, that because of inflation, even people who have 'too much' capital, put it into the market, and it generates economic activity as a result.

    Crypto, being a security, doesn't behave too well in this situation either -- in that you can't realistically hold a security and pay interest on it based on being able to use that security to fund other economic activity. Sorta like if someone hands you 10 shares of a stock (which has a variable price), and you've gotta figure out a way to pay that person back 12 shares of stock in a year, buy giving those 10 shares to someone else. What if they don't want shares of that stock? What if the stock price goes down, or up, significantly? There's just an absurd amount of risk, that would be considered wildly untenable for something like a person's core savings vehicle. There are some "interest paying" crypto type accounts these days, but that's a whole shitload of financial shenanigans and cryptobro bullshit. Cryptocurrencies are basically an economic blackhole.

    And speaking of governments, anyone saying that crypto is useful because you can send money globally, is a moron. Banks/Financial institutions have the ability to do global money transfers with ease. The reason they can't/don't, is because of LEGAL reasons and regulatory restrictions from governments - it's not some technical restriction that crypto magically solves. Laws like "You can't let people fund terrorist groups". Crypto being able to do those sorts of things quickly is just a matter of them not obeying any of the laws or regulations from governments. That's not a 'good' thing in general. Many of the recent pushes from crypto sorts to get places like the States to recognize them, are basically resulting in banks getting less restrictions -- which really isn't a win. Crypto shows up and is like "We like sending money to north korea, so you gotta remove or neuter that whole know your customer thing for fintechs. Here Mr USA administration, we can pay you by buying millions of dollars of your personal 'crypto currency' to help with signing the bill. See, isn't it so much better to have no regulations/oversight on transactions?! It's win win!"

    And the last negative I'll note, from my pov at least, is that the core mechanics of most crypto currencies is obfuscated and controlled by cryptobros. Financial industry people make money, but they don't make the sort of explosive, concentrated wealth that you see occur in crypto for the people who maintain those systems. That's partly because the financial industry is larger, and involves government components -- while crypto currencies are often just some techbro goin "let's fork bitcoin and stick a dog face on it and sell it to morons for big $$$$ then we can FTX it up fuckin in the bahamas with uggos!". It's the sort of obvious conflict of interest that they all try and bullshit their way out of -- one that typically doesn't exist in fiat setups, due to the multiple layers, and the role most govs fill in regulating things.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago
    [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    Very low fee cross-border (remittance) transfers using stablecoins (cryptoassets that are pegged to a fiat currency like the dollar) allow people to avoid getting ripped off by companies like Western Union.

    On crypto platforms like Ethereum that support smart contracts (basically computer programs that run on the blockchain and allow you to automate transfers etc), you can provide liquidity to money markets and asset exchange platforms and earn many times the interest yield (APY) of what you might get at a bank for a similar thing (like 12-60% vs 2-5%). If you’re a real finance nerd you can also access various exotic financial instruments on other platforms that otherwise wouldn’t be available to you unless you were at a huge investment bank or hedge fund and even some that aren’t possible there. These are often called DeFi platforms (Decentralized Finance)

    Another huge use of crypto networks are money laundering and scams though so beware. It’s still a largely unregulated black market. Never put more money into a crypto network than you can afford to lose.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    It si great for taking sucker’s money.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago*

    you can buy web hosting or make donations without revealing your identity

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    There are a few services you van but online that accept crypto. Like hosting provider Vultr. Other things do accept bitcoin like non official student money transfer services.

    But all of this is not as wide spread. I did use it a couple of time for actually transferring money, and also buying a software plus support.

    Of of our clients (fashion) did setup Etherum payments for some physical products and their NFTs and actually got sales.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago

    Crime, mostly.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    It’s good for losing a bunch of money.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago (11 children)

    Money laundering, it's really good for that

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago (10 children)

    Apart from privacy coins like Monero, it's all traceable

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 7 months ago (9 children)

    Good luck tracing coins that I bought for cash from John Shadyman who can't give half a shit about KYC.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (8 children)

    Spend some time looking into how the FBI traces wallets. It's pretty easy, and it's that at some point, John Shadyman's wallet gets tied to people tied to you. The entire Privacy community considers cash better than every crypto other than Monero.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    Also btw.

    John Shadyman's wallet gets tied to people

    If I visit Shadyman twice and see that I'm getting coins from the same wallet, I'm gonna find another guy. That's a pretty obvious thing to do.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (6 children)

    Any pointers other than “go read some internet”? That's a rather broad reference.

    John Shadyman's wallet gets tied to people tied to you

    What “people tied to you”? I use the coins to pay some 1337Cr1m3L0rd, with neither of us ever catching a remote semblance of knowing who the other one is. Or, move them to Pierre LeCrook, who's again giving out cash without asking questions. Shadyman and LeCrook are actually the closest links to me, but again good luck proving that I went to their house and received coins for cash or vice versa.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (5 children)

    The pointers are that a lot of people track crypto wallets, it's not hard to do, and that any wallet ever tied to an ID is directly identified. So any other wallet that touches those wallets gets pulled into a network cluster. Network analysis tools are decades old. Patterns get established. So your wallet isn't any safer than Johnny Shadyshit and his wallet once they connect. You think Johnny won't ever get rolled? You trust them to be invincible?

    Just use Monero or cash.

    https://thecoinomist.com/learn/crypto-osint-how-crypto-and-iowners-are-tracked/

    https://www.acfcs.org/acfcs-contributor-report-bitcoin-tracking-for-law-enforcement

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (4 children)

    So your wallet isn’t any safer than Johnny Shadyshit and his wallet once they connect. You think Johnny won’t ever get rolled?

    What you wrote right there is "Once a drug dealer is busted, it's immediately known who ever bought drugs from them with cash". Do you seriously not realize that it's a loony thing to say?

    Using monero or tumblers after buying the coins is of course a good advice in case the seller is a plant. But it doesn't mean that his coins are somehow magically retroactively connected to me when he's not a plant.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

    Not quite.

    Look, ask any serious privacy community, they'll give you the same answer. It's kind of a known standard.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child)

    Well, you presumably believe that you know what you're talking about, so why don't you tell me how this tracing is supposed to work?

    • I create a fresh wallet A. I go to John and buy bitcoin with cash, deposited to that wallet. John knows zilch about me other than that some person occasionally shows up with cash, among dozens other people.

    • John gets busted, his wallets are known.

    How does the FBI tie wallet A to me?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    Not sure if you saw my edit in the previous comment as it looks like you were responding at the same time. Back in the day, my guy made everyone that bought from him move to PayPal because, at the time, cops didn't want to do the extra work to subpoena PayPal. Plus, it meant less cash at his house, so less robbery risk. Things change, and I'm not trying to mess with you or freak you out - I'm genuinely trying to let you know you're holding onto an idea that stopped being low-risk 5 years ago and now using BTC is not a great idea. I'm trying to help you because I do, in fact, know what the fuck I'm talking about. FFS, you're being rescued, please do not resist.

    Don't feel like reading? Here's videos: Reviews of crypto forensics platforms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzxmvQO2INE Your wallet is a data point that companies monetize by selling the data to law enforcement https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGvNfGu_dio

    Because it's not just you and D and John in the world - fraud cases are also adding pressure to law enforcement to track wallets. So you're up against millions in software companies and AI tools and old people losing money pushing these tools to go anywhere and see everything. https://youtu.be/AjxA_xBjcxE?t=389

    Let's get personal. Here's two scenarios that do play out all the time, and which federal, state, and local cops contract out to get network intel on this:

    1. So there's You, John, your guy D, Tom and Janet. You don't know Tom and Janet at all. Tom wants to buy mollies and party favors from D and because Tom's a dick, he gets $500 out of the ATM over 2 days and asks Janet to buy BTC from Coinbase, with KYC. $500 of BTC gets bought and goes to Tom's wallet. Tom buys $300 in party favors and leaves $200 in the wallet. Seven months later Tom gets busted for DUI and in the process gets a possession charge because of a roach in his car's ash tray that wasn't even his. None of this touches, you, right?

    It's a public ledger, so all BTC transactions are visible, both wallet names and values. And at this point, BTC wallets are part of the typical asset investigation list because it's so easy to track. KYC shows Janet bought BTC and immediately sent it. Tom is a bitch and for probation gives up D's name. D is now associated with that wallet. Local PD sit on D for a month looking at who comes and goes. and seeing which wallets touch D's wallet. That OSINT link I sent you is all about this. So the PD gets one pic of you walking up to D's house - so they have your face, which goes into ClearviewAI and gets them your name, address, phone number, etc. They notice that one wallet connected to D also serves as a hub and making BTC purcahses and immediate payments to lots of wallets, Because John doesn't take cash just from you, John takes cash from lots of people to buy BTC. That's John and D both easily on the list for subpoenas for phone records. After sitting on John for 2 weeks and D for 4 weeks, PD picks them both up. John's phone has Whatsapp messages, and the PD subpoenas Meta for those messages and Celebrite the rest. You accidentally called not on Whatsapp once, and you're connected to John - but you're also connected to D. You're just one of a dozen or two nodes in the network map that get picked up over the next week because you've left a trail.

    You use a mixer? Cute - guess who has flagged the use of mixers as probable cause? https://www.secretservice.gov/sites/default/files/reports/2025-06/Public-Alert-Cryptocurrency-Mixing.pdf

    1. D has a connect/supplier, right? D isn't growing keys in the garden. Let's call that supplier Mack. Mack supplies 5 people: D, R, T, B, and P. P gets busted 2 states away and has a trail leading to Mack. Mack has a trail that leads to D. D has to move what he gets paid around so he can buy groceries, right? So that's a trail leading to someone else with KYC or red flags from mixers. And then we're back in the same scenario as above - anything that touches D can come back to you and people who you've never met can bring it all down. A pattern can easily get established where you get out $300 cash and within a week, $300 or less goes to John into a new wallet. Those new payments happen within 24 hours of you going to visit D, in the same exact amounts.

    Chainalysis LOVES that you think BTC is even slightly anonymous. "Senator, cash is, indeed, far less traceable than cryptocurrency." - https://youtu.be/DSyGE3BDpVg?t=65

    Here's detectives talking up how easy it is to track you, across different coins, across mixers, there are methods Mostly that there's no delay between a payment happening and going to another wallet.. https://youtu.be/AjxA_xBjcxE?t=389

    And they are willing to wait. And that data stays in play for YEARS. You been buying from D for 4 years? that's 4 years of patterns. THAT is the data trail you and D and John have left, not what you do today. It's what you've been doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    I really don't think you understand how deep KYC goes, and how patterns get established based on wallets. This is not "loony" stuff- OSINT people do this in their spare time. Your wallet is tracked and known and connected to your dealer already by people. But hey, you do you. Just remember that you have been warned three times.

    First off, read the Privacy Guides recommendations for crypto: Monero only as it provides privacy by default. https://www.privacyguides.org/en/cryptocurrency/

    Second, have you done KYC anywhere else? That CAN get connected indirectly to your wallet. How do you GET cash to pay Johnny Shadyshit? Did you pull out enough to also match that cash in the amounts paid by Shadyshit to a wallet within the same general time frame? Feds have this records, and if they roll Johnny, that's classic data they use to build a case. Did someone stupid that your dealer sells to have their girlfriend deposit money from Coinbase and send the exact same amount to their boyfriend who send the same amount to the dealer? They're connected to you, too. People you've never MET are making nodes on the network mapping. https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/my-journey-without-kyc/36366

    Edit: And hey, I get it. Back in the day, my guy told no one to bring cash by their place ever again because he knew local PD were likely sitting across the street. So he made everyone pay him with PayPal. Park a couple blocks away, pay with what was, at the time, " less traceable" because it wasn't a break-in robbery risk for him, and cash on hand is also something cops will get you for.

    My guy, you might as well keep going with what you're doing. Fighting with anyone about it is straight up foolish in the face of everything I've showing you. But remember, you're taking a risk to maybe/maybe not be yet another example of someone ignoring all the warnings.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/bitcoin-worth-35-million-tied-213110010.html https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-historic-336-billion-cryptocurrency-seizure-and-conviction https://www.crimeworld.com/ireland/how-30m-bitcoin-seizure-from-dublin-drug-dealer-could-lead-to-360m-jackpot-for-state/a/144477652.html https://komonews.com/news/local/king-county-dealer-amassed-287k-in-crypto-selling-drugs-on-the-dark-web-meth-fentanyl-dealing-guns-weapons-handgun-rifle-ak-explosion-shot-crime-investigation-homeland-security-seattle-washington-money-thousands

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago

    It's useful for sending money internationally in situations that would be otherwise difficult

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    You can use Monero to buy things anonymously. Whilst not perfect, it makes it significantly harder to identity or trace you. Other than that, not really, that's the only real use case for crypto in my opinion, for privacy

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Money laundering and gambling mostly

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    To be fair all it takes is for enough entities to exchange it between other assets. If you are in Europe, most stores won't sell you anything for your USD unless you exchange it into euros (except some edge cases), so it does feel kinda similar in that sense except cryptos don't really have a "home" country where they're universally accepted (bar some nations whose own currency has so throughly failed they adopted it).

    There are some services which allow you to spend crypto by simply doing the exchange for you at the point of purchase into whatever currency the store uses (similar to visa/MasterCard/your bank doing this if you pay by card abroad).

    I'll say ultimately though it doesn't change a lot, the idea of crypto is great and there are some where the implementation actually yields something that could be a better money (truly yours, not controlled by a government or a company necessarily, low fees, near instant transactions), but in the end there are just too many of them and they rock the boat too much for the well established financial institutions that they're just doomed IMO.

    However, the technology itself I expect will end up being used against us by the ruling class in the coming years (i.e crypto currencies controlled by the government where they can set whatever rules they want on it).

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago
    [–] 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child)

    Why are you asking a question when you clearly made up you mind already? :)

    You are wrong of course, you can buy anything with crypto as long as the other person accepts crypto (there are dozens of marketplaces, not only darknet ones, e.g. xmrbazaar).
    My instance hosting is paid for in Monero. I plan to change it soon to another hosting, which also accepts Monero. The domain is also paid for in Monero. Same for my VPN (Mullvad actually offers 10% off when you pay in crypto!) and mail. I regularly donate to projects such as GrapheneOS, Qubes, Whonix, TOR using Monero. I donate Monero to support people hosting things I use, e.g. invidious instances. Your employer absolutely can pay you in crypto if they choose to, and there are examples of people who do receive their salary in crypto. You could easily find examples/articles about that if you wanted to.
    No, money is not defined by "everyone agreeing that it is valuable and willing to exchange it for goods and services". Do you think Zimbabwean dollar (or any other foreign currency other than a few most popular ones) is valuable? Would you agree to sell me your goods and services for it? Why not? Right, because it is not the currency YOU use. Other people use it, so it is money for them. Same with crypto. People use it as trustless p2p money whether you like it or not.

    If you need to hate crypto so much please get back to arguments such as "oh no it uses a lot of energy and allows people to freely exchange it for goods and services buy drugs on the internet", at least those are correct. Please also subscribe to r/buttcoin if you use reddit.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    Crypto is mostly useful for extralegal activities.

    You can technically donate for some services with it, but to acquire crypto you need to either KYC to some exchange which isn't not only a massive pain, but there are very serious privacy implications with it. Or you can acquire it via other means which means you will be buying it at high prices.

    Also note that most cryptocurrencies aren't anonymous, every transaction is public in the block chain and can be traced back to you.

    So if you really know what you're doing you can use privacy coins as a tool to transfer money anonymously, but that's pretty much it's only real world application.

    Also, from what I understand (I'm no cryptographer) cryptocurrencies use public key cryptography so quantum computers may in the future break all cryptocurrencies and well deanonymise all previously anonymous privacy coins transactions stored in the blockchains.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    I don't think this community is meant for rhetorical questions.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 3 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Heating.

    But resistive electrical heating is slightly more efficient. Heat pumps are considerably more efficient.

    So - buying drugs.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago*

    Sure! you can buy lots o things with it, if going through gift cards is ok for you. websites like coinsbee or bitrefill allows you to buy:

    • videogames (steam, keyshops etc)
    • fuel
    • traveling (trains, airplanes)
    • food (various supermarkets)
    • clothes

    and more. I personally tried only videogames and amazon but it worked for me. i have a gift card for IKEA but still need to test it.

    Also you don't need to give data aside from a mail so it's pretty private

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Is a question still rhetorical if you're wrong? Because you absolutely can buy a pizza and pay bills with it, you've been able to for years. You can also get paid in it, you've been able to for years.

    Just because you choose not to, doesn't mean you can't.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Cryptocurrency is a decentralized digital currency, it can be used for the same thing as any other digital currency, the difference being that you can use it without relying on a centralized authority like a bank or similar financial institutions.

    Yes you can buy pizzas with it, although that's less common nowadays because there are more practical ways to pay for that and you probably don't mind the bank and government to know you buy pizzas.

    I thought what made money money was everyone agreed it was valuable and was willing to exchange it for goods and services directly. I don't see that with crypto.

    You don't? If I were to offer you 1BTC for your mouse, would you accept it? If you say no you're stupid, if you say yes you confirmed you see it as valuable and are willing to exchange it for goods directly.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Buying drugs

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    The most famous transaction was for pizza. Your question is disingenuous baiting.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    You can donate to private trackers with it, they already figure out how to convert it to fiat and take care of hosting

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    It's good for buying things online when your bank has an overly strict fraud detection system that blocks legitimate purchases because the seller is in a different country or whatever.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

    It’s a technology that allows you to verifiably possess a definite quantity of “a thing.” That thing is just virtual.

    Think of it this way: shares in companies are also virtual things. You can’t build a bridge out of em.

    But a stock exchange is there to sell them to you and they will keep track that yes, you do actually own X shares of company Y.

    Instead of issuing shares on a stock exchange to raise money, a new company could just sell shares of itself by creating a new crypto. There would be a finite number of “coins” representing ownership shares. The company could control whether more can be created. And it would be verifiable who owns what.

    So that verifying and quantity-control are both features of the software itself. You could say it’s good for those things. As I illustrated above, this could be used to virtualize ownership of something, including the buying and selling of shares of it.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    These are the types of examples used, but I don’t not think it is actually good for these uses. If your account is hacked and someone takes the crypto, there is no way to reverse the transaction, now what the hackers own your company? If you can invalidate the shares and reissue new ones, then owning the crypto is not actually ownership of the company.

    Even without theft what do you do when people simply lose access to their wallets. Maybe because they forget their password or they die and they never gave their heirs the information.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago*

    That’s all true. There are also risks with other forms of currency though. Cash is entirely vulnerable to theft (and destruction, and you can even lose it eg: forgetting where you hid it, just like forgetting a password). And other accounts can be hacked and stolen from as well, not always in any traceable way, else there would be no bank fraud or credit card theft. Nothing’s perfect.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago
    [–] -2 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Please read https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/attack-of-the-50-foot-blockchain-bitcoin-blockchain-ethereum-smart-contracts

    Steam STOPPED taking cryptocurrencies, because of the normal level of criminality in the people drenched in them.. "you do NOT want to be doing business with these people".

    I'd use an Algorand-type blockchain for both accounting-records ( breaking "cooking the books" ) & for currency,

    but then you've got monero which is engineered specifically to enforce that money-laundering is unbreakable, so that organized-crime can move money without any accountability ( I'm including criminal-government-entities, including insider-trading, in organized-crime ).

    Nobody's making the right infrastructure-decisions, .. so whatever.

    _ /\ _

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    That's not true, Steam stopped accepting Bitcoin because of the large transaction fee and value volatility. Here's the news from when they did that https://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail/1464096684955433613 in case you don't believe someone who was buying games with BTC on Steam back then.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    The owner of Valve, I don't remember his name, old round guy with a grey beard, stated exactly what I said, on video.

    _ /\ _

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Do you have a link to that video? Until you do I'll believe the official communication from the company that I linked which has examples on the issues they were facing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago

    I asked gemini to find it..

    Apparently it was in 2 simultaneous interview-publications, by different sites..

    don't know why I've got memory of it being video, instead of text, but here's the answer I got:


    While Gabe Newell definitely made those blunt remarks, you are actually remembering a text-based print interview rather than a video clip.

    In late February 2022, during the media press tour for the launch of the Steam Deck, Gabe Newell did a series of one-on-one interviews where he addressed Valve’s ban on NFTs and why they stopped accepting Bitcoin back in 2017.

    The specific quote you are thinking of comes from two parallel interviews published on the same day:

    1. The Interview with PC Gamer

    When discussing the nightmare of accepting Bitcoin on Steam, Newell focused heavily on the sheer volume of bad actors:

    "The problem is that a lot of the actors who are in that space are not people you want interacting with your customers. We had problems when we started accepting cryptocurrencies as a payment option. 50 per cent of those transactions were fraudulent, which is a mind-boggling number. These were customers we didn't want to have."

    2. The Interview with Rock Paper Shotgun

    In a companion interview published simultaneously, he used almost the exact phrasing from your memory when talking about the NFT and blockchain crowd:

    "The people in the space, though, tend to be involved in a lot of criminal activity and a lot of sketchy behaviours... With the actors that are currently in this NFT space, they’re just not people you really are wanting to be doing business with."


    Why is there no video?

    Because these outlets sat down with Gabe in private press rooms to gather quotes for written feature articles, no official video or audio of these specific exchanges was broadcast.

    If you remember seeing or hearing it, you likely watched a video from a gaming news channel (like YongYea, Inside Gaming, or IGN) or a TikTok/YouTube Short where a narrator read Gabe's text quotes out loud over gameplay footage or B-roll of Newell.

    He didn't hold back, but he did it via the power of the written word!


    So, now you've got both explicit-quotes, AND 2 independent sources-for-that-interview.

    I hope that's good-enough.

    I'm not digging into it any more.

    _ /\ _

  • source
  • parent