Readit NewsDead Comment
> POAPs are NFTs that function of digital badges to prove you attended an event
Save your ticket stub. Buy a t-shirt from the event. It's not even valid proof if the event organizer can hand them out to anyone.
> Using POAPs benefits event organizers by creating a direct line of communication with attendees, allowing more interactive, more responsive events and a more reliable way of building relationships with guests and followers
How does an NFT work better than emails/organizing website?
> POAPs benefit individuals by creating a completely personalized story of a person’s life, linking them with moments in time without sharing any data with big centralized platforms
Oh good, so instead of posting things on facebook, now facebook can just read the public chain to get that automatically. Brilliant.
I love the nft haters who think they're sounding smart but sound like absolute morons to anyone who's done at least a few hours of oBjEcTiVe research into the space. And normally I'd take the time to educate but with attitude like this and a made up mind, nah hfsp.
This came off as pretty bitter. I apologize, but I am bitter, and I'm having a shit couple weeks.
Crypto is "cult by design" in much the way all greater-fool scams are. Namely, since coins are incredibly deflationary, wealth accumulates to a small number of early-stakers whilst the long-tail people buying-in provide their liquidity (/cash) so they can exit at an extreme multiple of buy-in. Everyone is relying on "more fools" to create a longer-tail from their stating position so they can exit higher. Meaning, whatever position you enter at, you have to evangelise like crazy.
I dont think anyone has ever yet explained how this is meant to function as a currency. Indeed, crypto people are dead-set on explaining everything except how this works as a currency. Long-and-short of it: extremely deflationary assets are terrible currencies.
One reason they're terrible is they transfer power over the economic system to early-stakers, as they have all the wealth. This is just feudalism where land=coin. So crypto people, sitting on a lot of coins, who urge adoption arent trying to "free" the economy, they're trying to own it.
It is just a bigger-fool scam, so it wont work -- at some point the tail won't be long enough, and it'll collapse (but this could take decades, as some scams do keep finding enough people to sustain them). So I dont think there's much danger in it -- but, lets be clear: any corporation which accepts bitcoins is thereby recognising an essentially feudal type of economic power.
Most holders of coin-wealth didn't earn it, they are taking it from the fools currently buying-in. Accepting crypto as currency, means giving early-stakes a way of exiting the scam at incredible multiples.
It's a store of value. Worked fucking great for people who were fleeing shitty places on earth but most people on this board wouldn't know a god damn thing about that.
>Most holders of coin-wealth didn't earn it..
You're an idiot. You don't know how investments work and how it has nothing to do with "earning it".
So what ? I am still struggling to understand what immediate and painful need users have with trusting Apple, Facebook, Google etc with their identity.
If people had some issue with this then users would simply not use OAuth and default to creating an account for each service they use.
Are you actually serious right now?
HN has many people who understand how technology work and a smaller but still large number of people who understand economics. Cryptocurrency has a few people like that but also a ton of get-rich-quick types who think their best work is making random claims until someone buys whatever they’re selling. We’re a decade and a half into that, with billions of dollars of real money pumped in and almost no benefit outside of some early investors being able to cash out before the inevitable dip.
At this point, the onus is on anyone promoting cryptocurrencies to show up front why they’re different than their waves of predecessors. One big challenge here is the inherent conflict of interest: unlike other things which have come in and out of popularity, someone who tries cryptocurrency but realizes it’s not really useful to them doesn’t have an option for getting out without a financial loss which doesn’t involve finding a buyer for something they know isn’t really worth the price. If you backed MongoDB a decade ago, you can just switch to Postgres without either eating a loss or finding someone to buy your old Mongo server.
This also leads me to your next sentence: for years, the claim was that cryptocurrency was going to transform the financial world and beyond. Sales guys went on at length about how you’d use blockchains to buy coffee and a ride to work, make sure the farmer who grew your coffee beans was organic, store your software licenses, record the deed to your house, etc. They couldn’t explain how any of that would work and dismissed criticism, and were especially upset if people said the only real use cases seemed to be illegal transactions. Now, in 2023 we’re back to the primary use being breaking laws, hoping that the government in question chooses not to monitor cryptocurrencies?
> Crypto is not mostly useless, it is just that people don't like the uses. crypto is absolutely massive for avoiding capital controls in countries with inflation, etc.
There are literally hundreds of millions of people who're into cryptocurrencies...and you clearly don't have a clue what kind of people are into it and to what degree. I'd suggest not to make up statements like this if you want your opinion to be taken seriously. FYI bypassing capital controls with cryptos does not necessarily mean "breaking the law". Learn a thing or two if you're going to spout nonsense.