Can I buy a pizza with it or pay my bills with it? Can my employer pay me in it? Or is it just an “emperor’s new clothes” thing? I just don’t see the tangible value in it. Rhetorical questions, BTW, I know you can’t buy a pizza with it, at least outside of some edge cases that I’m not aware of.

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.

  • irelephant [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It lets people buy illegal stuff (like drugs or HRT), which can be good and bad.
    It’s possible to buy gift cards for different services with it.

    The first real-world transaction with bitcoin was a pizza funnily enough.

  • kieron115@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    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.

      • Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yupp and then recently had to deal with Visa and MasterCard swinging their dick around and forcing them into submission with what they could and could not have that was legal in their own store.

    • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month 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.

  • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month 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.

  • scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    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.

    • Buffalobuffalo@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      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.

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month 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.

  • percent@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month 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.

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    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 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.

    • early_riser@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I was on a forum in 2009-2010 when another member posted asking whether they should get into bitcoin. I found a video pitching it, can’t remember if the poster linked it or I googled bitcoin after reading their post. I said it sounded sketchy and advised against it.

      • Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        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.

      • LePoisson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        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.

    • saimen@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      In short it enables strangers to make transactions without trust or the otherwise needed trusted middleman.

    • MerryJaneDoe@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month 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.

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month 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.

      • harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        You mean the same governments that manipulate their currency’s value?

        Or in the case of the USA, a government that is spending so much that they’re basically insolvent?

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

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

        • [deleted]@piefed.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          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.

          • dhork@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            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 the 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?

        • Jako302@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Because a currency without a stable backing is completely volatile. Sure the value of normal currencies fluctuate, but apart from a few hyperinflation edge cases that’s at most a few percent each month.

          Small cryptocurrencies fluctuate sometimes hundreds of percent each month and even the big coins can swing ±20% every few weeks. The only somewhat stable coins are the ones directly tied to real world currencies.

          Having a currency that fluctuates this heavily in value creates the exact same problems as the ever changing US tarrifs did. There simply is no wax to reliably price goods and services for more than a few days. You essentially have to barter each trade.

  • toebert@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month 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).

        • hansolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          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.

          • [object Object]@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            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.

            • hansolo@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              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

              • [object Object]@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                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.

                • hansolo@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Not quite.

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

  • wampus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month 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.

  • fodor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    In the distant past I used to pay for my phone bill with Bitcoin that I earned through various side jobs. That ended up being convenient because my VOIP company was based in a different country as were the side jobs. But later the transaction costs for Bitcoin rose and it didn’t make sense.

    You wrote that money is money because everyone agrees it’s valuable. But if I go to a pizza place in New York City and try to pay in Thai baht, they probably won’t take it. Therefore, it’s not money… But of course it’s money. It’s just not the right kind of money for that place.