  appears to be regulatory differences in how the blockchain is regulated versus traditional ledgers.

One is governed by humans/banks, the other by unalterable mathematical precision. If you truly don't see the value I don't know what else could be said.

▲ jchw 5 days ago | parent [-]

That turns into a downside very quickly for a lot of applications.

▲

staplers 5 days ago | parent [-]

Indeed, we are witnessing many of them currently.

Hyper-inflation, censorship, corporate takeover of all interpersonal transactions, data harvesting, slow processing, fraud, offshore accounts, scams, laundering. The list feels almost endless.

Luckily we're talking about bitcoin right?

▲

jchw 5 days ago | parent [-]

Well, for one thing, you keep mentioning Bitcoin when we're not even talking about Bitcoin, which is extremely weird. Bitcoin is not one of the two things. I hate to be this way but do you even realize what thread you are replying in? This isn't fiat currency versus Bitcoin. It's fiat currency (by proxy) using Blockchain-based ledger versus fiat currency using a traditional ledger...

	▲	staplers 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		Sure, I get your point. I don't really consider stablecoins or even most cryptocurrencies true crypto due to human control (which invalidates the value of crypto). I've watched for over a decade how this forum utterly decimates any actual discussion of crypto (bitcoin) due to willful ignorance or blind naivety. So excuse my excitement when I get a chance to actually discuss its merits or disadvantages. In this sense, I will agree that stablecoins are just a technological way of obscuring certain mechanisms in how fiat currency is distributed and is basically a derivative instrument that exists outside established regulatory framework (similar to how uber/airbnb operated for a decade until the govt caught up)