this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2025
2109 points (99.3% liked)

memes

15290 readers
4889 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 days ago (10 children)

The amount of ignorance regarding crypto is too damn high. I agree that NFT's are stupid, always felt that way, but when people just say a "all crypto is a scam" really don't understand what they are saying. There's a plenty of legit crypto products out there, but yes, the vast majority are just garbage. Invest in the blue chips, the REAL industry of crypto, not memes or things no ones ever heard of before. (Bitcoin, Solana, Ethereum, etc..)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (6 children)

It's a solution in search of a problem. Currencies are government backed because the vast majority of people have faith in their governments' enforcement of legislation regarding use of that currency. It's good to be able to make class action lawsuits against scammers and most in the population will choose anything government backed if they have the option.

So if the goal is to get away from government backing, who do you give control to? In the case of a blockchain, it's the parties with the majority of the "proof of XYZ" creation hardware. Which are not normal people. Then there's the possibility of developers of a blockchain choosing to rewrite the ledger, causing splits. So you didn't invent some unmodifiable currency either, the control lies with people who you probably should trust even less than the parties managing EUR/USD.

Then, it's incredibly energy inefficient. Especially proof of work is a ridiculous waste of computational resources, at least tie the problem to something NP-hard with actual value instead of whatever reverse hashing search is usually done. But wasting resources is the design of the system anyways.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 days ago

it’s the parties with the majority of the “proof of XYZ” creation hardware. Which are not normal people.

Originally the idea was that it WOULD be normal people using their own CPU cycle time to secure the chain and mint new blocks. Even then, as long as no one party holds the majority of hash power, the incentive is to support the security of the coin rather than subvert it. The moment that changes is the moment that Bitcoin dies, because no one will be able to trust it any more - which also means there is an incentive to make sure there are enough competing BTC farms.

there’s the possibility of developers of a blockchain choosing to rewrite the ledger, causing splits.

The blockchain is upheld by the combination of the developers and the miners. If the developers aren't acting in good faith and the miners don't like it, they don't move to the new chain. Sure, you get a split, but odds are one of them is going to die.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)