Item — HN Reader

In most of the cases Scott cites the underlying thing being facilitated can be done via a normal financial system, some countries just don't have one that functions very well. So I don't see the benefits of crypto as much as I see the benefits of having a well functioning financial system. Crypto just outsources that from local regulators, banks, etc., to crypto developers. Might be a good tradeoff for those countries.

The personal example Scott gives of sending money to Russians is probably illegal and circumvents currency controls that the Russian government has deliberately put in place, so not really a demonstration for crypto as much as it is an example that people find these types of transactions useful for various reasons.

2 comments

Having a normal, working financial system isn't really a global or historical norm. Very arguably we're on an isolated island of relative economic calm in both time and space, and that we should not assume these conditions will just continue forever.

Bitcoin is actually a lot more complex than banks- which were first implemented in Europe by the knights Templar.

We know banks work in the dark ages. Even after a nuclear war within years someone will found a bank.

It would be interesting if the US set up some kind of Freedom Bank specifically for people in China, Russia, Venezuela, Argentina, Nigeria, etc. to access US dollars and dollar-based investments. Those countries wouldn't appreciate it though so I'd expect a lot of diplomatic blowback. Until then, there's crypto for better or worse.

[Insert conspiracy theory here about Tether being a CIA op to dollarize the developing world.]

I like the way you think https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32841022