Topic: The myth of crypto revolution (Read 262 times)

I think the "future" we talk about is a bit bleak to us to begin with. I mean yeah bitcoin looks like the future of money and where it will be headed and the monetary system will have to put blockchain into it one day in the end even if bitcoin is not a global powerhouse the blockchain system will be which is whats important and all that stuff.

Moreover, we still don't know the speed of technology that is pumped everyday, there are technologies today that I couldn't imagine would exist 10 years ago, think about that, 10 years ago I was 18, I wasn't a little kid, now I am 28 and I am already baffled by the speed we improve our technology, I honestly couldn't ever imagine we would have space rockets that go up in the air and drop back down in one piece ready for another run, let alone them actually aiming to send people to mars very soon.

So, how are we so sure bitcoin will not be overdone one day, maybe there will be something much better than bitcoin as well ? Humanity used fiat for decades even centuries before we got to bitcoin so we still have time probably but the next "money" will not take that long, maybe in 10-20 years we will have something that is so much more better than bitcoin who knows?

Blockchain technology is a work in progress, like you rightly said that it has been center for attention for decades which cryptocurrency made the block chain technology a reality, same way so many activities will still come in despite any oppositely opinions, that will make it a full reality and something we can hold on to in future as a great legend.

Many of us didn’t know about blockchain technology until the story was told in which someone pick a part where he can better the system and make it a reality, if we all can do this and see how we can all add something positive to it rather than fighting it and seeing loop holes always.

The advantages will do more changes as long as all nation adopt cryptocurrency as their main spending currency. Bitcoin will always be a good diversion towards digital money, and cashless type is the best alternative to prevent physical money robbery which could prevent crimes. Although it's prone to cyber security breaches, I don't think it's easy to be penetrated when you're equipped with strong firewall security. Talking about the myth, it's now turning to reality so far.

As the entire world is moving on the digital market, it is our responsibility to keep things organized and the same could be achieved through cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin is the one that has got the multiple accessibility. It gets best to be a payment gateway and with its growth as a store of value got importance as an asset. This further got used as a currency. In such a way it is used all around and this doesn't mean it is a myth. It is a realistic revolution.

I dont think there is a problem for using it as both.

Dont you see people keeping USD like a commodity in other countries? Why? Their own currency value is getting lower and that is why they prefer to still keep USD rather than their own.

It is also a currency. The new age had began for so long and we really need something new that would change the payment system specially the online world.
Credit cards and banking system should stay in land. Let bitcoin be the online currency and nothing else.

Depends on your definition of rubbish coins. The top coins aren't so rubbish else people wouldn't be trading them. They have something that attract some or many people to them. Whether they will be sustainable, remain creative and profitable long-term i do not know. But they are currently worth something to their users.
Similar thing happens in real world with big and small businesses. The only little difference is that small cryptocurrency have access to exchange unlike small businesses in real world. This has increase their chances of surviving with increase in finance for funding future projects. Imagine if the small businesses in real world have the same opportunity to be on exchanges, funding wouldn't be a big problem.

However there are many projects that do not deserve funding...and investors should be able to know how to identify this projects correctly.
Hopefully in the future, we will have a way to grade projects in blockchain friendly manner to  help investors make good investment decisions, reduce scam and low quality projects.

POW may be better in terms of security but IMHO, the security we're talking about isn't just worth the expenses and the damage POW consensus inflicts to the environment.There is already a lot of projects using POS like Nano and Dash ans so far we haven't seen any issues with their security at all.Therefore,to me POS is better especially in the eyes of media criticizing the negative impacts of POW coins.

When people first heard of bitcoin, they thought it was a myth but it has become a reality although there are few challenges. In any venture, there are challenges that are bound to happen but we should not give up and just hope for the best. Blockchain technology has come to stay.

I think that this is the important distinction to make here.

You've got some centralised projects that are posing to solve some problem that doesn't even exist in order to raise money through selling their tokens/equities, which is really no different than that in a traditional sense - except they've added a buzzword in blockchain or "cryptocurrency". These are the ones that won't survive in the future.

BTC is certainly not one of them. I've always thought that bitcoin's first mover advantage has been significant, and the fact that there was no initial "public offering" as well as it being the most practically used coin as a long term store of value and medium of exchange.

Also, I disagree with your statement that all cryptos is no different to fiat. Bitcoin is certainly different in the sense that there is no central authority, or third parties that need to be trusted to control the supply of coins, nor the transfer of coins.

I am not that really sure about what cryptocurrency is but all I do know is it's not better than Fiat monetary system. Why? Because of it's very high volatility and people can't really be at peace when they put their money into it. Yes it's a currency, so it could be an asset which attain high risk to deal with.

Te revolution that people dream about happening is very difficult to occur.
An economy can't stand the decentralized system that we want to build by its own. We will always need a centralized way for our operations because regulation is sometimes helpful. The cooperation of the two can bring revolution in our way of living IMHO.

90% of people do not look to the future. People do not want to wait for the development stage, they need everything at once. And so they begin their normal technology to make a bubble. Driven by their greed.

Blockchain's technology has become the center of attention for over a decade now, but even today if technology has been established as a driving factor for the next industrial revolution, there are many misunderstandings associated with it. People with opinions and differences in opinion can be good things to improve technology and make them better in the long run. But after hearing different arguments from both parties, it seems that despite the difference in opinion, there are various misconceptions related to technology. This article will help you understand these legends and the actual truth behind them. So, let's fix some of the legends in Blockchain.

At the begininig when cryptocurrencies first appeared that was some kind of revolution. Crypto was brand new technology and concept never seen before. Today I would agree that we've come to the stage of evolution where further development, adoption, regulation and new features are more important. Bitcoin is a very powerful tool that is a serious competition to tradional financial system.

You are definitely right about the fact that many people use bitcoin as a means to make money and not for its real purpose of using it like money. They try to buy and sell and profit from the trade and that is all they care and yes many rubbish altcoins were created just for that purpose alone. However, do not assume just because that is a majority of people in the crypto world but its definitely "all" of them.

There are still tons of people using bitcoin for what bitcoin was created for, and to some extend same applies to ethereum as well. They are used to buy stuff, earn money, spend it on something or pay a person as well, just like regular money. So, all in all even though most of the bitcoin users we have right now are focused on the profitable side of bitcoin, there are still tons of people who use it for what it was supposed to be used for.

At a certain point governments will surely take action and participate in the crypto market but the important thing is if they are going to do it in a positive or a negative way since this could go either way. In my opinion governments will try to legalize and create regulations for cryptocurrencies and this is only going to influence the market in a negative way but i am sure crypto can survive this since it has a very strong community behind.

Money rules the world, and any asset with monetary value would be owned by a small percentage of the population. Bitcoin was designed to be a rivals currency and offer freedom to those who did not like the monopoly and activities of banks.
Every system has it's flaws and would not suit everyone, but with digital assets we all have an alternative. Other physical assets like gold have also been controlled by the financial sector.
Bitcoin would create a revolution, it would take time.

Bitcoin isn't only currency and also there are more types of people than those who only think about profit, there are a lot who thinks on privacy and use it as a secure payment way + you can have offline wallet in just one small usb stick and store as much bitcoin as you want while you can't store millions in your home because that's unsafe + we don't want to give banks control on our money.

Let me clarify few things about what I wrote.

Rich people can earn a lot more than others just because they are rich not because they are better. So, when we just sell the coin, we are just making the rich richer which is just like the fiat monetary system. A lot of us don't like that very few people have more than half of our wealth. Crypto is making the same.
To mine and get more coins you need a lot of miners. Rich people can but these miners and they will control the chain in the end. That is a problem facing the blockchain. It is becoming less decentralized. That's because it is becoming rich only club.

If I want to mine any coin now I will need money and the more money I have the influence I will have on the chain. But if rewards for everyone are the same and without a big investment, that would be a true decentralization.

Dash master node is worth about 70000$ which is a lot and that minimize the potential of new master nodes being born to the chain. So, the worth of master nodes must be affordable for everyone for the sake of true decentralization.

In my opinion money functions as a mean to facilitate our life. Not to be linked to our work. All humans must eat, drink, have a home, so we all have needs. So, it is not smart to pay more for smarter people. Smart or stupid we have the same needs. Actually smart people can manage their financials but stupid can't. I hope you get the point.

One last thing, the difference between fiat currencies affect the price of crypto. Let me explain what I mean. I joined the Polymath airdrop and got 250 tokens. I sold them for 1$/token and that is a great deal for me. That's because 250$ is a lot in my country. This action of mine will affect the price of the tokens. Because once the coin is listed on an exchange I will sell to the first buyer. That happened with a lot of projects. The distribution of coins must consider where its users are located. Offering a 50% bonus in a sale for some countries is not healthy for the project.
There are a lot of things to say about this issue. But, I am really tired. See you another day my friends.

My personal opinion, which I've held for years now, is that bitcoin is an asset and an investment more so than a currency--and I think that's even more true for altcoins.  As it stands, the average person has no use for an alternative form of money.  If you don't believe that, just take a quick poll of everyone you know, asking them if they use bitcoin for their daily transactions.  The fact is that fiat currency generally works just fine (Venezuela or any other country with hyperinflation excluded, of course).  And even in countries with hyperinflation, the citizens aren't adopting crypto en masse, and that should tell you something.

All of that aside, I'm still a big fan of bitcoin.  I don't like banks and think people are squeezed too much in terms of taxes and that government and banks have too much control over people's money.  Bitcoin offers a solution for all of that, even if the solution is imperfect.


That's true of any investment, though.  And I would argue that the market needs such investors anyway, since they keep the market liquid.  It's also human nature to try to make money on something that you don't necessarily believe in, so I don't have any problem whatsoever with traders who aren't hardcore bitcoiners.  Let the best man win.

This should not really give us headache because people invest for profit especially where it is not a charitable organization.


There might not be fair distribution because life is about survival of the fittest. However, cryptocurrency grants more opportunity for wealth creation for people than fiat. This is because, you can be lucky to adopt a good prospect coin or buy and hodl , the bull hits it good to financial success.

right, later there will also be many governments that inevitably take policies for the regulation of cryptocurrency. although at this time they have many reasons for not being able to accept it, but it will be different from later

 I understand the big problem here is the security and reputation of businesses. As people gradually turn to crypto and blockchain, unwanted events will inevitably occur.
then governments will participate in the crypto market because the market has grown and can greatly affect the economy of the world.
There will be regulatory and technological adjustments to blockchain technology to make it more suitable for a decentralized market.
It will definitely have a lot of changes in the future, bro.

There is always this situation in all markets, (stock, metals,...) . The fair distribution can only be fair if it's adjusted to your current wealth


If you need KYC then you don't need a cryptocurrency. You can do the same with the current fiat system, either in the form of a shared funds pool, pension funds or whatever. I don't know why people get so in love with KYC, AML, and so on.

Points taken. There really is no greater intelligence involved in creating another coin that will ask for investors' money only to be dumped @ people's faces. Sure there may be a lot of fancy new features included in every coin and a change in 'security' but really, we don't need that many coins with different variations, let alone a thousand of them with the majority being trashed into obscurity after the devs have made their fortunes.



Then again, only those with a lot of coins on hand will have the greater control and net-production of coins, which could therefore affect the market pretty hard. Not that I'm discrediting your argument of master nodes and PoS, but looking at other things apart from being a masternode, it poses more risks than actual rewards.



This will be impossible, given that not everyone will really obey the system and this is yet another centralized, controlled system we have created with the involvement of KYC. Cryptocurrency's main takeaway is being decentralized and anonymous (to a certain extent), so this purposely defeats what crypto stands for. Also, this is not philanthropy and no one is obligated to give even a cent of their holdings to someone just to 'even out' the scale.


How so if the merchants themselves don't feel like getting into the economy and accepting crypto payments? A secure chain with a lot of masternodes doesn't necessarily attract a lot of merchants to sell their goods and services.

There's no such thing as a crypto revolution.There's only crypto evolution,which means that cryptocurrencies will be adopted steady and slow.
If the Proof-of-stake is really better than Proof-of-work,why the most of the crypto users are still using bitcoin,which is POW?I guess that POS isn't that great after all.
Every coin,fiat currency of financial is just a tool.There's no way to implement fair distribution into some financial asset that has value/market liquidity.

Both. Majority are using it as an trading assets, by their are people who uses their crypto for whatever purposes it may serve them. Personally, I also used it as a currency to pay some bills.


Those that are being used for pump-and-dump will obviously fade away, hence the term shitcoins.


The difference is that you have total control of your crypto. Did you here the phrase "not your keys, not your coins?". Well crypto gives us the freedom to have control over our funds as compare to let's say let your money sit in the banks. There maybe more rich people in crypto but they wanted to stay hidden and I'm sure they are just like you and me, average Joe's. And one advantage though is that we can also be rich as hell, that is if you know how to play in this game.


I suggest you just go around the forum. There's a lot of arguments and debate about the whole POS/POW, and its pros/cons.

@OP: While you're right that the amount of speculative capital in the cryptosphere is too high in comparison to its real "currency" usage, I disagree with almost all of your other statements.

Proof of Stake is surely an interesting technology, but it has its own set of disadvantages and challenges. I don't know if you know about the Nothing at Stake problem. It has not been used for an attack up to date. But in contrast to Proof of Work, where you can calculate an "attack cost" and thus the approximate security of the chain, in Proof of Stake you can't, because there may be cheap, devastating attacks we don't know about yet (e.g. if the attacker shorts coins and attacks the chain with PoS holdings).

PoS also "makes the rich richer", as already mentioned by others - with the exception of "very low reward coins" like Peercoin. In addition, never "anyone" will be able to run a masternode or a PoS validation node (which are two different things people often confuse!) because if more than a certain amount of people do that (I believe this number to be about 10000) then the reward for smaller "stakers" or "masternode hosters" will be almost nothing.

KYC is impossible in decentralized systems. You need a "central authority" for that. And then you don't need a cryptocurrency. Bitcoin is all about decentralization.

Cryptocurrency especially Bitcoin is way better ahead than conventional currency. Bitcoin is meant to be created to seeks the roots of the problem from conventional currency which is trust.


The volatility the markets have given make people are blinded by the price swings, and many of them profiting from it. We need to know that in general cryptocurrency are speculative assets, no one ensures to always make a profit. What we need to do is to urge the community to create a project that has real-life values and usage, not just some forked scam coin.


POW is better in term of security.

Yes, it is much better than fiat monetary system. its both asset and currency.


If it is`nt for the traders bitcoins price would not move at all, they are the main reason why bitcoin has a high price. The project are for those who have a vast knowledge about bitcoin lets keep it to them, will handling the price goes to us users of bitcoins and traders.


There are millions of user of bitcoin it wont vanish just like that.


There`s nothing fair in the world we live in. Imagine a world were all living things are fair, Boring. Don`t be jealous.


You wish that there was a fair distribution but even in the POS the more stake you have the more crytpo you will get, so its not fair. You wish that there was a fair distribution but based on your conclusion they contradict each other.


Register here change.org and get a protest.

People invest their money in order to get some profits and their investments will always be on the first place. Are you surprised?  That is the difference between investment and donation.

What do you mean under fair distribution?
People are usually getting money because they earned them and not because someone 'fairly' distributed money.

Hello, my friends.

I am following the blockchain and cryptocurrency since 2015. And I have thought a lot about it. Is it really better than the fiat monetary system? Is it an asset? or Is it a currency?

Actually, I couldn't give an absolute answer. I must say that blockchain technology is awesome and can make a lot of great changes in our future.

Now, about the coin. Most of the crypto-followers are after the profits and don't care about the project. There are a lot of rubbish coins that are traded a lot because they just have great potential for profiting.

So, that is making these coins just like EUR/USD pair but with high volatility and no value in these coins' projects at all.

Does this mean that the coins will fade away and just the blockchain will persist?

Comparing crypto to fiat, there is no difference. There is no fair distribution for people. When I check the rich list of any crypto coin I found that there is no difference from the fiat rich list. Just a few people have the majority of the wealth. So, I am thinking a lot about a way to really trigger a crypto coin revolution.

I reached the conclusion that POS is better than POW. POW needs a lot of devices and a lot of power and money to buy both. POS needs no power but needs money as the minimum balance to run a master node.

For that issue, I think making this minimum balance affordable to everyone will give the POS blockchain a lot of security because anyone can run a master node. So, the chain is safe.
Then we make the addresses on that chain with caped balance. For example, no address can have more than ten million of the coin. And KYC is a must so no one can open multiple addresses. And when some address receives more coins at the cap these coins will be distributed to the poor list on the chain.
One more thing, the income of the master nodes must put in consideration where its owner is living. I live in Egypt and 1 ETH can sustain me for a month but for a USA citizen it can only pay a bill.
With a lot of master nodes, the chain is secured, a lot of buyers and sellers, less volatility for the coin, fair distribution guaranteed.

There is no intelligence in making a coin and just selling it. No intelligence in asking for thousands for dollars to run a master node.

I think a change must come to crypto-world or it will end as the myth of the millennium.

Had you given this your thoughts?
please, share your thoughts