- cross-posted to:
- aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
- StopTech@lemmy.today
- cross-posted to:
- aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
- StopTech@lemmy.today
What if you woke up tomorrow and completely lost access to your bank account, credit cards, PayPal, and Venmo, all because of something you posted online?
Wero is no currency and there is nothing “national” about it either. At least have a basic idea of what you are criticising.
Wero has also nothing to do with your ability to use Crypto or whatever. It is basically just a wrapper banks are offering to make the existing European instant bank transfer system more accessible and easier to use and a competitive alternative to credit cards.
Extending the fight to basically anything isn’t keeping it simple. Are you also fighting against classic bank transfers and credit cards or are you only fighting against Wero? If so why?
I simply don’t want the government to be able to sanction individuals, block certain transactions they don’t like. So I’m against any payment system controlled by a central authority (banks, government, etc)
There is a difference between the fight for free systems and fighting against everything else. Your opposition against Wero is the latter. That is not keeping it simple, that is the opposite of it, and making it much harder to support the free systems as one is then looking like a radical without consideration of reality (where any complete remodeling of payment systems needs rather a decade, unless one aims for high economic damage) trying to impose one kind of system on everyone else.
I don’t think my proposition was a big ask. Free computing and legal encryption are already the norm, I’m simply saying we should not let them be taken away.
But I imagine that you’re not talking about that. I imagine you’re talking about the adoption of crypto. You are right, that it’s a greater leap than Wero. But I would also hesitate to call Wero an improvement over the existing system. Visa and Mastercard are problematic due to their scale. That is why their actions become oppressive. If Wero reaches the same scale, then what prevents Wero from censoring the same content? Visa and Mastercard already compete with each other, why did they cooperate to censor porn previously, and why wouldn’t Wero do the same?
The problem is centralization. Small central authorities having control over the world’s payment systems. Wero doesn’t solve that. Now I don’t mind incremental improvements, but as long as we recognize that the problem is centralization, then we should also be pushing for decentralization, and the only system we have that supports it (crypto).
That fails the point. Wero is good because it breaks open a duopoly and mitigates the risk that the US can bring the European economy to a halt via Visa/Mastercard.
More comoetition is good, monopolies aren’t. Nor would a Wero monopoly be.
From a strategic view Wero is extremely important for Europe. You are looking from a cery different view on the topic but that does not invalidate that other view per se.
My own views are that we need a balance of control and chaos. Both extremes have substantual downsides.
I’m not convinced that a triopoly (not sure what it’s called) is significantly different from a duopoly.
My main view is that a centralized system can be built on top of a decentralized one, but not the other way around. And by the way, if crypto and traditional banking co-existed, with broad support for both, that would be a decentralized system, and I’m fine with that. As long as people can easily convert their fiat to crypto and interact with the same sellers in order to bypass censorship.
More competition is better than less. It is that simple. Your argument is just either nihilistic or an excuse to support a duopoly.