undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrvz4y ago0 comments

I'm sure it would have ended quicker than the beanie babies did if cryptocurrencies had totally 'no use case'. As with those toys, it is safe to say that they had absolutely no use case and was all pure speculation.

So why has cryptocurrencies lasted longer than that?, or even better is that why companies like Stripe re-entered again after dropping Bitcoin and using another cryptocurrency? Which that is the whole point of why I quoted this:

> Newer revisions of the tech, such as Algorand, may have promise and deal with some of the issues I mentioned.

0 comments

3 comments · 2 top-level

the_gastropod4y ago· 1 in thread

> why companies like Stripe re-entered again after dropping Bitcoin and using another cryptocurrency?

Same reason all the above companies got into Beanie Babies: To make money.

Stripe is happily selling pickaxes to gold miners, as they say. They are more than happy to collect their "useless" fiat USD, and play along. I think it's ethically dubious, but... that's another story. It's certainly profitable.

rvzOP4y ago

> Same reason all the above companies got into Beanie Babies: To make money.

Right. I'm still asking where is the 'use case' in beanie babies vs cryptocurrencies, or stable-coins like what Stripe is using it for?

> Stripe is happily selling pickaxes to gold miners, as they say. They are more than happy to collect their "useless" fiat USD, and play along. I think it's ethically dubious, but... that's another story. It's certainly profitable.

And that somehow is a problem? Is that why it will be 'totally destroyed' and banned then?

Surely both you and the author are going to be disappointed and have to complain a bit more if you're looking into 'destroying' it all.

ryanbrunner4y ago

Stripe didn't really re-enter in the sense of actually participating in the market, they basically just said "we're now happy to take crypto companies' money to sell our fiat currency services".

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse