This never fails to crack me up in laughter!

“..only 7.5% of respondents use crypto for transactions”

“Only” 7.5% of a 6.3 million population is impressive!

Maybe but long-term nobody wants government money whether it’s yuan, dollar or euro

I think at the early stage they would be doing it purely from altruistic reasons.

Maybe better incentives need to be thought of.. or maybe because of the social features the Fedimint protocol enables, people would be doing it voluntarily, just like people admin WhatsApp or Facebook groups for social reasons without expecting financial profits.

If people keep on building on Fedimint, the mints could be like WhatsApp or Facebook groups. Everybody would be in one.

I wonder if wallets will build some kind of features to let fedimint users stress-test the assets and liabilities of the federations.

It’s an open-source protocol so anyone can build a wallet software to use the protocol.

It’s still early and currently it’s mostly just the software company “Fedi” building products as far as I know.

This post wasn’t specifically about Fedi, the consumer-facing app (will do a deep dive later), but about Fedimint, the underlying protocol.

But you’re right: ideally there should be information in the wallet software about the federation you’re joining.

Great that it helped!

If the guardians make money operating the fedimints, regulators could argue that they’re some kind of money transmitters and need to KYC the federation’s users.

Yes, it’s not self-custody.

The major differences between fedimints and centralized exchanges are that fedimints don’t have a view on your balance/transactions.

Also, the assumption is that Fedimint guardians are less likely to rug pull because they have more social capital at stake.

With fedimints, more bitcoin would be held by these federations instead of CEXs, ETFs etc.

Great to hear that it helped you!

How are “progressive, left-leaning and reformist political views” compatible with property rights and free market ideals and incentives?

I’m just curious because nobody has ever given me a good answer.

This and 1984. Orwell must be one of the most prophetic authors ever.

Whether we like “fiatcoins” in crypto or not (USDT and USDC), they are still being used a lot (outside drug deals too!)

Multi-vendor multisig?

More and more Bitcoiners who understand its importance will be elected to decide on these things, and laws will be changed accordingly.

This might take longer than we expect though. It’s a generational thing. Young politicians will grow up with Bitcoin memes and will be less directed by fiat forces.

I have a friend who‘s into real estate investment trusts and Nvidia stock etc.

I just incrementally feed him some insightful Stacker News posts about Bitcoin as an investment case, and let him make his own conclusions.

I’ve noticed it’s best to reference some authorities: gen X tradfi guys can be stubborn about taking advice from a Millennial punk like me!

Rather call “stablecoins” as “fiatcoins”

They’re broke and somebody needs to fund the upkeep of the North African immigrants

If you form clusters of multiple transactions with your address, it will be quite plausible to assume the addresses have the same owner.

You would only need one instance when you link your address to your identity (whether it’s a KYC database leak or your own blunder).

Great attitude!