You must log in or register to comment.

BlackFlagged OP wrote

Ancaps aint anarchists.


ziq wrote (edited )

And why would super-capitalists (refuse to call them ****cho-capitalists) want to destroy the economy anyway? They depend on it to stay wealthy.


go1dfish wrote

Not all CryptoCurrencies are developed by AnCaps, especially more recently.

Pinkcoin for example.


zorblax wrote

"The tech-spec world" lol.

Anyway, ICOs in particular are massive scams, and cryptocurrencies as they exist are unsustainable. Eventually someone will be able to implement a 50% attack on bitcoin and the rest will fall along with it.

That being said, blockchains are an amazing technology that I think shows great promise.


aiwendil wrote

I am not sure that all the coins will fall with Bitcoin. I think Bitcoin is showing that it has weaknesses and eventually they will be exploited and that will happen with every cryptocurrency, but I don't think it will happen simultaneously. In fact many new alt-coins are constantly being created to address problems. So what I see happening is that as people recognize that another coin is better, they will migrate and Bitcoin will become irrelevant. I feel like that started to happen with Monero a little bit.

However, I do agree that the way in which they are designed to be hyper-inflationary is totally unsustainable and scammy behavior, designed to enrich early adopters. I fail to see how this serves any anarchistic ends as all it has the potential to do is re-organize class, not demolish class altogether.

Ancaps have very little in common with any true anarchist and their goal of completely unregulated, market driven, hyper-capitalism is being lived out with the cryptocurrency fantasy.

I agree that the blockchain is a good idea for a lot of things, but for anything requiring anonymity it actually creates a public ledger of events that can be traced. Even if you make it harder with coin mixing as is built in to monero, a dedicated adversary can still deduce things over time and determine with enough certainty to begin carrying out more in depth espionage, who is potentially involved in what transactions. Bitcoin was supposed to operate as digital cash, but because of the blockchain it can never really be that. Blockchains strike me as a technology better implemented for file sharing and chat protocols(as if we don't have enough of those). Anything requiring true anonymity cannot be implemented this way.

Finally I have a lot of criticism with the whole "proof-of-work," concept for mining. Proof-of-work essentially makes it so that we buy asics designed specifically for mining at the current difficulty and then maybe make back that investment if you are lucky, but a lot of people just never will. Only big mining firms will as the difficulty increases, which invariably leads to a 50% attack. It also ties bitcoin to the value of that technology in other currencies, which I believe is the reason it will never become truly fungible like a normal currency. Bitcoin is an investment/gambling toy and I am starting to think it always has been.

All of that said, I think it opened the door for the possibility of designing a more egalitarian, digital currency. Monero does a better job at controlling inflation to create a more fungible currency by not limiting the total number of possible Monero and by having a standard release schedule for coins that won't change over time. I still think we can do better as Monero is already pretty inflationary, even given these controls. I do think we are getting better and better at this though. If currency is a construct people are pretty set on maintaining in society, we can at least design better ones.


surreal wrote

proof of work will be replaced with proof of stake at some point as it is much more efficient.


aiwendil wrote

Which is even worse as it almost invariably gives incumbents an advantage over new comers and if all coins are generated up front, continues the issue of fungibility that I described above. I don't really like that system any more than the current one. I am not sure what a good solution is to be honest as proof of work is responsible for confirming transactions and you need to sweeten the pot so that people will dedicate hashing power to that process. I just wonder if there is a better more egalitarian way to do such things.


theblackcat wrote

I just wonder if there is a better more egalitarian way to do such things.

Taking food you grew / tools you made / art you created to a communal market and exchanging it for goods made by others.


zorblax wrote

Monero is also nice because ASICs just don't work for it. It's a memory-hard hashing algorithm.


theblackcat wrote

Speculating with bitcoins makes you no better than people that move fiat money around for profit. It's all about enriching the few so they can dominate the many.