[chihuahua]

I thought the #1 use case for crypto was ransomware, followed by shitcoin rug-pulls, and the ability to commit theft without recourse.

Sending money to Iran is just a minor edge case.

[rwmj]

That's a rather narrow view of crypto's uses. What about subverting democracy by bribing the President?

[carshodev]

Has the lack of crypto ever stopped this from happening? Look up cases of gold bars being found in senators houses, those are actually MUCH less tracable.

Shitcoins and Shitstocks(some SPACs) do allow of a legal way to "give" others money through the transfer of value in a way that is technically legal. This again is not crypto specific though.

[whynotmaybe]

For me it was buying a computer from newegg but I confess I'm not playing in the same league.

[htx80nerd]

There are a dozen better ways than Crypto to bribe politicians.

[overgard]

Well, you could also use it to buy a pizza and find out it that your pizza cost a billion dollars a few years later.

[irjustin]

Literally - this is my friend =(

For him, it was something like a ~$30m pizza at peak. We're asked not to bring it up.

[MrToadMan]

Conversely, buying pizza with MELANIA has left me with zero regrets.

[fragmede]

Sixteen years! If that pizza were still around, it would be dreaming of going to prom, maybe college, figuring out life.

[boplicity]

Money laundering has always been a core feature of cryptocurrency, not an edge case.

[giarc]

When I think about it, I know people that have been involved in all of those areas (always on the wrong non-criminal end). However, I'm not sure I know a single person that has made a regular transaction in some cryptocoin.

[throwaway85825]

The currency part of cryptocurrency was always a lie.

[cguess]

I did once. Even after setting up a wallet and buying BTC (this was back in the mid-2010s), it still took 15 minutes to pay for two glasses of wine at a cafe. I could have just tossed down €5 and been done with it in 20 seconds.

[amelius]

You forgot gambling on crypto exchanges.

[joe_the_user]

Not that snark isn't warranted in this situation but you have to consider that the ability to turn energy into globally accepted (but notably not-actually-untraceable) cash-equivalent is a key piece of the corrupt bitcoin puzzle. It offer opportunities to everyone from third world oligarchs and pariahs to those who happen to be able to tap an electrical grid. Technically, this is indeed "theft without recourse" but you're reply seems to imply this kind is marginal.

Moreover, the chances are the reason Binance nixed the investigation of bitcoin going to Iran is because so much of the bitcoin economy is driven by entities like Iran (google AI say they have 4.5% of global mining plus random search link [1]).

Edit: Iran also wants bitcoin sent to it because bitcoin isn't actually untraceable so getting clean money for dirty matters.

[1] https://www.chainalysis.com/blog/iranian-crypto-activity-geo...

[throwaway85825]

Crypto is just temporary regulatory arbitrage. Same as BNPL which is totally not just payday loans.

[numbers_guy]

Back in 2011 I remember a lot of people talking about how the Chinese oligarchs were using it to evade currency controls and funnel their wealth out of China.

[carshodev]

Yes but we should be reminded that this also allows people to be protected from government overreach.

If you say something the Chinese government does not agree with they can choose to take all your money and control of your company instantly. Not just oligarchs although those are the bigger targets due to the high value.

Even a small business owner could THEORETICALLY have their assets and equity seized for saying something which goes against the current ruling party, and this is not specific to China it could happen in any modern country.

Crypto allow someone to distribute their wealth in a way where they can be free to speak their mind and still protected even if the country which their business is based out of decides to take action against them.

[lazyasciiart]

Isn't it just a subset of #3?

[protocolture]

I just want to exploit over worked border security by buying semi legal drugs they dont have the capacity to follow up prescriptions for.

[hinkley]

I like to amuse myself that if Robert Preston had lived another 20 years that Stephen Colbert or John Oliver would have paid him a heap of money to explain cryptocurrency to us all and it never would have happened.

[jalapenos]

I think you missed buying illegal goods over the internet and making absolutely inane videos and comment about crypto-shit that you spew all over the internet.

[hilliardfarmer]

What a deeply troubling and cynical comment.

As far as I know, nowhere in the Bitcoin white paper or the original code base. Does it say anything about what you seem to think it's use cases are.

Bitcoin has one main use, digital cash, that can be sent instantly and for free or a very low fee.

Edit: I would agree though, that anything other than that is probably a scam.

[wpietri]

It seems entirely accurate to me, at least in a POSIWID sense.

The original theory of Bitcoin was, as described in the paper, decentralized digital cash. But in practice it was never optimized for what normal people use cash for. As system like that would be something like M-PESA.

Even at the time, cash was declining in usage. In the 18 years since, it has declined a lot more. And for good reason, because what most people want for most things isn't digital cash, but digital money. E.g., debit cards and Venmo.

So pretty naturally Bitcoin has value only for a few niche use cases that are not well served by more effective systems. Various sorts of crime, mostly. Digital cash, sure, but the kind that's transferred in unmarked envelopes slid quietly across the table. The kind that is delivered in a briefcase.

As a side note, it also failed in its goal of being decentralized. The mining power is very concentrated. Much more so than the banking industry, for example. And most users keep their Bitcoin on deposit in centralized services. So it's again basically banking but worse.

[natpalmer1776]

Men of principles often mistake the experience and observations of others for cynicism when it does not align with said principles.

This applies to a great deal, not just bitcoin.

[datatrashfire]

the problem is as a means of cash it’s inferior to existing systems in pretty much every dimension. more expensive, slower, more risk, higher volatility. the cash story for crypto is not good.

[lambda]

What? "Instantly and for a very low fee"?

Fees have historically gone up above $100 per transaction. They've since added hacks on top of the original Bitcoin protocol to get the price back down again, but the original design was not good for low fees.

And transactions can take 30 minutes or more to settle, that's hardly instant. If you accept a transaction instantly, it's relatively easy for someone to scam you by double spending.

So, no, Bitcoin doesn't make a great digital cash. Maybe a better wire transfer. But the biggest benefit of it is to be unblockable and unrefundable, which makes it great for scames and illegal activity, plus the speculative nature of the pricing, which is great for gambling on.