When a digital currency is mined before it’s released to the public, that may be a symptom of a scam – but it doesn’t prove without a doubt that it’s a scam. It may be an indicator that the creators just intend to boost up the value of the currency a little, sell their holdings, and leave. However, if we find that the creators continue to work on the coin long after any get-rich-quick scheme should have expired, is it still reasonable to say that the coin is a scam?
The Story: Fun, interesting and exciting comments about Dash
If you bring up the cryptocurrency Dash among people who know anything about it, you’ll probably get a diverse range of opinions. Some people hate it and believe it’s nothing but a fraud. Other people love it and believe it’s the currency of the future. And others still believe its rise has more to do with sex appeal than any usefulness.
In this episode, Kurt digs into the cesspool known as “the YouTube comment section” and responds to the most interesting and bizarre among them. He discusses SegWit and how it causes mental blocks among Bitcoiners, user experience, Bitcoin as a blue chip company or international clearing house, the security of Bitcoin compared to Dash, the sex appeal of Dash, the fantastic dream of cryptocurrency, what Dash’s marketing says about it, Dash as a business, centralisation, whether someone could control 50% of masternodes, the instamine or fast mine of Dash, what is a Ponzi scheme and whether Dash is one, and finally whether Dash is just a big scam in general.
Join us on a crypto adventure in the next exciting episode of … The Paradise Paradox!
An interesting argument people make for the long-term viability of Bitcoin is this: It’s fine to use Dash for fast transactions and private transactions, buying cups of coffee or whatever… but for big transactions people don’t need fast confirmations, and so they will probably continue to use Bitcoin for certain large, cryptocurrency clearing-house transactions. My question is always, okay, they don’t need fast confirmations, but they don’t really gain anything by having slow confirmations. So why are people going to continue to use Bitcoin?
The forthcoming answer is security. It’s true, Bitcoin has been around longer, has had more tests, and so the network is more secure. However, having a secure network resistant to hacking is actually only one part of security. Another part is, how many people have lost thousands or millions of dollars over the years due to negligence or malicious actors? A lot.
If you have to be a tech nerd to secure your Bitcoins, that means it’s actually not secure, and it’s definitely not ready for mass adoption.
The other thing is, if you’re trying to defend Bitcoin compared to Dash, you’re fighting a retreating battle. Sure it does privacy, speed, user experience and adaptation to a changing market better than Bitcoin, but other than that, what does it do? If Dash has the incentives in place to improve in all these areas, then surely it has the potential to improve in security as well. After all, security is one of the most important parts of user experience. If your coins are constantly getting stolen or the network is going down, that gives the worst possible user experience.
A lot of people left comments on my videos saying “If SegWit comes in…” “Just you wait and see if Segregated Witness comes in…” What they don’t get is, that’s a huge “if”. The problem isn’t just that there are unconfirmed transactions now… the problem is, we have no idea how or when the solutions will be implemented. That is the real problem, and Bitcoin maximalists have a huge blind spot for that. It seems to be because they’re only thinking about Bitcoin in terms of the technology, not in terms of the human factors – the governance, the politics. It’s as if they say “Well the technology exists so it’s all going to be fine.” And when you ask “How is that tech going to be implemented?” they say “the technology exists so it’s all going to be fine.”
You also see this flavour of thinking when it comes to user experience. They say “I don’t care about having to copy and paste a Bitcoin address” Or they bring up QR codes. It’s true, QR codes give an improved user experience compared to long confusing strings of characters that make up Bitcoin addresses. However, QR codes pose their own problems. I’ve often been on the web looking at a QR code thinking, what am I supposed to do – point my phone at my monitor? That just seems weird. If people had to scan a QR code to get to Google or Facebook, the web probably wouldn’t be as popular as it is today.
If you want a service to get popular, you have to extend your empathy, imagine yourself in the shoes of a complete noob and try to feel what they would in that situation. If you get caught up thinking “I’m comfortable with this (so I’m sure everyone else will be too),” you’re confining your tech to be used by an elite few.