Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
Although incidentally I gather there are good-faith, altruistic reasons to form certain entities to pursue certain ventures.
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
wont web3.0 also protect private wealth?
Yeah, in some ways even more so. It would just be more difficult to hide it, like how its more difficult to hide things when everyone has their own personal surveillance equipment on them at all times.
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
Yeah, in some ways even more so. It would just be more difficult to hide it, like how its more difficult to hide things when everyone has their own personal surveillance equipment on them at all times.
Like there are just mountains of money in plain sight on blockchains like bitcoin and ethereum. There are ways to make it less immediately evident, like splitting them up into a number of other wallets, but these ways are still easy to identify for anyone who can navigate blockchains.
 

vimothy

yurp
Yeah, in some ways even more so. It would just be more difficult to hide it, like how its more difficult to hide things when everyone has their own personal surveillance equipment on them at all times.
it does seem like a failure of crypto on its own terms if it makes wealth more difficult to hold for individuals
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
And we're also in the process of advanced blockchain analytics tools being priced above everyone but elite firms and entities, which may make it harder to account for the financial arrangements of the elites.
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
it does seem like a failure of crypto on its own terms if it makes wealth more difficult to hold for individuals
Hold or hide? Easier to hold, and control, especially if you use non-custodial wallets.

As for hiding, in some ways its still quite easy, so long as your legal name isn't associable with your wallet address(es). But once those data points have been connected, you're whole financial presence is public.
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
The only way for you to lose (IE fail to hold) your funds are if you fall for a scam (which is easy), if you send your money to a legitimate smart contract with a vulnerability in its code, or if the majority of operators of the network conspire to mutate the ledger history and effectively erase your money. The first two are much more common, but require the user to deliberately take a risk, while the latter is exceedingly rare, but would effect even the most cautious of users.

Also if you use a non-custodial wallet and you lose the seed phrase / private key. But most people use custodial (IE centralized) wallet platforms, which goes to your point about centralization being better in many cases, which I agree with, at least until better decentralized options are invented.
 

vimothy

yurp
at base isnt it the same thing? how easy is it to be a privately wealthy individual? or at least two sides to the same coin ...
 

vimothy

yurp
I don't think it's that important for the existence of centralised web platforms tho. they exist due to the fact that they're much more appealing than the alternatives, probably for a variety of reasons
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
I don't think it's that important for the existence of centralised web platforms tho. they exist due to the fact that they're much more appealing than the alternatives, probably for a variety of reasons
What's not that important?

I agree that they're more appealing for a variety of reasons, convenience chiefly among them.
 

vimothy

yurp
What do you mean? Like how easy is it to hide your wealth in the traditional financial system?
I mean that if you consider he question of how easy it is to be.a privately wealthy individual, the questions of holding and hiding your wealth are a part of that
 
Top