Crypto mogul Do Kwon, known as ‘the cryptocurrency king,’ pleads guilty to fraud charges
Technology
50
Beiträge
20
Kommentatoren
4
Aufrufe
-
This does not make sense.
What you're saying is that it's impossible to buy porn/erotica online without monero. This is clearly wrong.
You most definitely could do that before blockchains were a thing.
What you're saying is that it's impossible to buy porn/erotica online without monero
I haven't said anything like that.
I'm saying crypto is an additional, uncensored payment channel.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Montenegro has LARPing brownshirt cops too, eh?
-
You would use real currencies for everything except the transfer. The consumer only sees USD. The provider swaps back to Fiat as soon as necessary.
The use case is enabling payment over the Internet while avoiding traditional, censoring providers.
Couldn't those transactions be cut off at those swapping points to fiat? I assume if a bank doesn't support a business directly transferring funds for a particular purpose then they'd take issue with indirectly transferring funds for the same purpose and would work to close those accounts.
-
What you're saying is that it's impossible to buy porn/erotica online without monero
I haven't said anything like that.
I'm saying crypto is an additional, uncensored payment channel.
And why exactly is it a use case if you can already buy erotica/porn via specialized payment services without monero?
What's the benefit here? Be clear and specific. Don't randomly bring terms like "privacy", "uncensored" and "freedums".
-
Only for PoW crypto.
If a cryptocurrency concentrates into the hands of a few, as assets tend to do in capitalism, then wouldn't proof of stake mean those few control the cryptocurrency anyway?
-
the venn diagram of crypto nerd assholes and tiny dicks is a circle.
I’m up 192% for the year, so I’ll take the tiny dick jokes. Admittedly the signal to noise ratio is pretty awful, but the assets themselves can be smart investments.
-
If a cryptocurrency concentrates into the hands of a few, as assets tend to do in capitalism, then wouldn't proof of stake mean those few control the cryptocurrency anyway?
If the protocol is badly designed, yes.
In theory, the stakers should only be rewarded for correctly confirming transaction and that capital (staked tokens) should carry no votes in any protocol changes.
-
And why exactly is it a use case if you can already buy erotica/porn via specialized payment services without monero?
What's the benefit here? Be clear and specific. Don't randomly bring terms like "privacy", "uncensored" and "freedums".
It's called a use case because you can use it.
What's the benefit here?
An additional vector to avoid censorship.
-
Couldn't those transactions be cut off at those swapping points to fiat? I assume if a bank doesn't support a business directly transferring funds for a particular purpose then they'd take issue with indirectly transferring funds for the same purpose and would work to close those accounts.
It can happen. That would involved cutting off access to all crypto for that individual. It's not common.
Even on the token side there are often blacklist addresses (e.g. USDC) that perform a similar function. Usually for hacks rather than terrorism.
-
What about paying for censored games?
If it's censored by the government, it'd fall under use-case #2.
-
If it's censored by the government, it'd fall under use-case #2.
True. But the recent itch.io controversy was NGO lead.
