The De-Facto List of Cryptocurrency/Blockchain Applications That Are Superior To Existing Tech

Examples of blockchain applications that are superior to existing tech:

*crickets*

Debunked claims that suggest Blockchain is a superior solution:

Seriously... still waiting for something to put on the list. Let me know if I've left out any arguments.

• Bitcoin is up to $$$$ Wow. Now are you willing to admit you're wrong? - Nope. Someone just paid $120k for a banana taped to a wall. That doesn't mean it's the best designed banana ever, or that it will be worth anything a year from now, despite how many people are talking about it.

• Helps Bank the Un-banked - Nope. A pre-paid gift/debit card is better/accepted at more places and easier to use.

• Allows money to be sent around the world instantly - Nope. Wire transfers, Moneygram, Paypal and other systems are easier to use.

• Can't Be Seized - Nope. Authorities all around the world have seized crypto.

• Bypasses government/taxation - Nope. You can't use crypto for anything useful without converting it into fiat and passing through regulatory boundaries.

• Inflation proof - Nope. There is no guarantee crypto will perpetually increase in value. And its exchange rate will still be dependent upon the current inflation rate.

• It's more secure than other payment methods - Nope. There's not much "security" when a simple mistake can mean you lose your money forever with no recourse.

• It's censorship resistant - Nope. Crypto still relies on an internet/communications infrastructure which is tightly controlled and regulated by special interests with competing agendas. There's no evidence that various municipalities cannot severely restrict its use if desired.

• Blockchain is new technology - Nope. Append-only linked lists have been around for decades. There's a reason this technology is not widely in use, because it's not very efficient.

• Blockchain is immutable - Nope. It can and has been changed. (See forks, 51% attacks, etc)

• Major industry players are adopting crypto - Nope. Financial firms who claim to be "exploring" crypto or "handling crypto" aren't really doing that. They are instead partnering with exchanges who convert that crypto into fiat within their existing systems.

• You can't print Bitcoin like the fed prints cash - Wrong. Yes you can. First, bitcoin has forked several times; second you don't necessarily need to print more bitcoin. You can create artificial inflation through wash trading with tokens like Tether. Stablecoins are printed out of thin air and traded for bitcoin and vice-versa. Same difference.

• Nobody can control crypto - Nope. There are already mining consortiums that have the ability to manipulate the blockchain if they so desire.

• Crypto is "trustless money" - Nope. Whether you decide to trust government, or various computer programmers, unless you audit all the code yourself, you're still "trusting" in some other party.

• People want "trustless transactions" - Nope. People prefer to do business with entities they trust. Trust is a key component in fair trade. A system that panders to the untrustworthy is unlikely to attract anybody other than parties that aren't worthy of trust, which explains crypto's primary use as an exchange of value involving criminal activities.

• Bitcoin has value because of Proof-of-Work - Nope. If I spend my life savings sailing a boat to a foreign place where somebody gives me a password, that password is not worth the money I spent getting there. To anybody else it's still just a bunch of letters and numbers. However many resources were consumed to create it, does not matter. And ideally, if it was that difficult to create, it's a stupid idea that just wastes resources unnecessarily.

• You can make a lot of money in crypto - Nope. Not for most people. The only way someone makes money in crypto is if someone else loses money. Don't be fooled by survivorship bias.

• Company X is making a fortune in crypto - Nope. They're making a fortune exploiting people who hope to make money in crypto. There is a difference, like the difference between someone heading to California for the gold rush, and someone setting up a hardware store to sell shovels and buckets to greedy suckers. Exchanges don't make money from crypto. They make money from people. Crypto doesn't generate any value.

• Helps bypass corrupt/hyper-inflated countries' monetary systems - Nope. In countries with dysfunctional economies, basic trade and bartering of goods and services works better and is more used than crypto. In a crippled economy, using a volatile, unsecured token like crypto is simply replacing one unstable monetary system with another.

• Crypto is a good investment - Nope. You're not "investing" in anything. Stocks represent actual intrinsic value in companies that own assets and can generate income. Ownership of crypto does not create any value or represent any assets. The only way crypto increases in value is through recruitment of downline buyers - which is the textbook definition of a MLM/Pyramid scheme. Just because some people make money does not mean the model is in any way, lucrative for even a noticeable percentage of players. Most people will lose.

• Bitcoin is a store of value, better than gold, etc. - Nope. See the above "Crypto is a good investment" myth. Comparing crypto to another system and saying it's better is also foolish. Gold is also a relatively lousy "store of value" when compared with stocks and other securities. A "store of value" is just that: a store of value. Bitcoin neither represents anything "stored", nor anything of "value." Bitcoin has value because of marketing hype, not anything tangible. It's popularity is a "fad." And yes, some fads can last decades. That doesn't mean they'll be forever appealing.

• If money can't be created from thin air, governments will spend more frugally. - Nope. History shows that when monetary systems were asset-backed, it didn't have much of an impact on government spending; what it did have an impact on was government engaging in more draconian legislation to have more control over assets like silver and gold. Plus, as outlined before, crypto can be created out of thin air; it can be forked; it can be further sub-divided, and it can be augmented with so-called "stable-coins" which are fractionally reserved. You want more responsible government spending? You don't need a new monetary system. Just pass a balanced budget amendment.

• Crypto is great because ____ [fiat, government, The Fed, taxes, etc.] sucks - Nope. If you have to talk shit about a very useful and necessary part of society and the economy, in order to make your fantasy digital dollars seem reasonable, your argument is weak. "I have a car with square wheels. It's the best because soon, everybody will learn the secret of how corrupt round wheels are!"

• Crypto solves the "Byzantine General Problem!11one!1" - Nope. See earlier arguments about trust and security. Crypto enthusiasts like to toss about this notion that blockchain solves some kind of epic hypothetical scenario they call the "Byzantine General Problem" which suggests if you have different armies that you need to get instructions to, there should be a way to get perfect instructions to each one if any part of your com network fails. -- The idea being that with blockchain, there is no way to subvert the transaction between parties so any breakdown on the Internet doesn't corrupt the transaction. Problem solved? No. It's not solved. Because Just like in the actual Byzantine General scenario, you're still dependent on the "generals" to decide to act on the message or come up with their own plan. Bitcoin doesn't solve this situation. Bitcoin has forked multiple times, code can be hacked, miners can form consortiums and choose to do something different. Aside from this fact, there's another issue with the "Byzantine General Problem" that also applies even more obviously in crypto: If for some reason you lose communication with your armies, perhaps they should already have a plan for that scenario and not wait around for a message that may or may not be legit? Perhaps it's better to wait and re-assess the situation until you regain contact? Likewise if your payment network is damaged and not operating normally, maybe it's not a good idea to toss your money into that void and hope for the best?

• Crypto (i.e. Monero) is anonymous - Nope. None of these crypto currencies, even the ones that have better obfuscation of transactions, are truly "anonymous". In most cases, converting fiat to/from XMR undermines the anonymity. The legitimacy of this claim relies on a hypothetical scenario where the transaction doesn't cross through any other systems that aren't as secure, which is unrealistic. Also fiat is a more anonymous currency than XMR, and can be more easily sent from one party to another. It may be slightly slower than digital transmission, but this again isn't really a problem among people who aren't criminals and don't have a need for instant, non-reversible, secret international monetary transactions.

If there is any moral to the crypto argument it seems to be that "crypto is awesome" if ______ (insert obscure, atypical, crazy scenario here).

Are you a Venezuelan or someone living in a completely screwed up economy that while it doesn't have a functioning monetary system, has rock solid Internet, cellular, smart phones and computer tech available for everybody even people who lack the resource to use traditional banking systems? Congrats! Crypto may be a slight improvement to what you have!

Are you a drug addict or dealer that is interested in acquiring illegal (and potentially fake or lethal) substances from anonymous random people on the other side of the planet? Congrats! Crypto may be a slight improvement to your existing way of conducting that business!

Aside from the bizarre scenarios proponents cite where "crypto is useful", we still cannot find an example of where it offers any unique value to the rest of humanity.... still waiting.. and there are no good arguments. It wasn't this difficult to demonstrate the value of other disruptive technology like: e-mail, Internet, fax machines, telephones, automobiles, etc.

That which can be attributed value with no net worth, can also be attributed as having zero value.

Potentially "Honorable Mentions":

• Crypto is a disruptive technology (in the black hat community) - u/Chipfox brought up this very interesting point. This may be the first example of crypto disrupting an industry. Prior to the implementation of bitcoin, it was more profitable to hack into other systems, individual companies, etc. Now those seeking vulnerabilities to profit from are much more focused on attacking crypto currency-based operations. Crypto has disrupted the black hat community and made it much more focused.

• Crypto is great for money laundering, extortion, drug deals and black market transactions - Ok, this may be the one actual example of where crypto actually does something close to as good as existing methods out there, but there are still better ways. If you can get somebody to wire you fiat for your criminal enterprise, it will be easier to use. And it's easier to get victims to send a moneygram than bitcoin. And dealing with cash leaves no "digital trail" that would be forever etched into the blockchain, making the money paid almost always identifiable wherever it lands. Yes, there are some cryptos that are more anonymous than others, but they still suffer from being largely unusable in non-criminal transactions, which makes the likelihood of them ever being widely used for everyday useful purchases unlikely. And again, crypto tokens don't represent anything intrinsic.