It’s perfectly ok if you don’t need it, but why do you want to deny others something if they find it useful?

That's begging the question.

It's been nearly 20 years, what are cryptocoins useful for? And not personally, I mean what have the cryptocoins done to improve the USA?

If it's useless to the country, then they should be banned. That way, our investors can spend money on actually useful investments that help our citizens.

	▲	HighGoldstein 11 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> It's been nearly 20 years, what are cryptocoins useful for? And not personally, I mean what have the cryptocoins done to improve the USA? I guess for the USA as a whole it can be difficult to identify purely good effects, although the same can be said of things like social media. For individual holders, cryptocurrencies (not shitcoins mind you) have been a pretty decent way to hedge against a rapidly devaluing US dollar. Gold would be the same I guess, but gold is either risky to hold physically (and difficult to transport) or you are at the mercy of a custodian beholden to one or more governments.
	▲	ragmondo 15 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		When bitcoin first arrived, in the UK it took 3+ days to send funds from one domestic account to another. Now I’m not saying that crypto catalyzed the arrival of faster payments, but it’s always good to have a fallback of “well if this tech can do it, why can’t the regular banking system?”