Oh, I’m sorry if I was confusing in my writing, I’ll be clear:
Monero is the optimal choice for wire transfers because it maximizes privacy, prevents third parties from committing human rights violations, stops rent seeking, and gives financial autonomy to the downtrodden. It is the refuge of last resort in conflicts, humanitarian crisis, and the debanked.
I was curious what claims about Monero you thought specifically were defensible. Thanks for the clarification.
maximizes privacy
prevents third parties from committing human rights violations
stops rent seeking
financial autonomy to the downtrodden
refuge of last resort
How does Monero (1) maximize privacy between people who can’t spend crypto directly and need to convert it to and from their national currency? How do you think this scheme would work in a privacy preserving way? We’re talking about a non-tech savvy undocumented worker in the US playing the role of Alice, and Bob is his subsistence farmer wife in rural Mexico.
You have demonstrated yourself to not be a good faith conversationalist, and I don’t have the energy to engage with you at scale. However, I have faith the good people of lemmy will pitch in, especially the XMR community.
The only reason we are here is you have asserted Monero is a scam, we have since agreed that Monero does not have a known leak, so I’m no longer concerned about the “scam” aspect as far as leaks go and have no further interest in this discussion with you.
According to your definition, casinos and online gambling isn’t a scam, because what they do is well-defined. If I use ‘scam’ to mean a reliable way for the downtrodden to become even more downtrodden, or ‘bitcoin’ as a shorthand for cryptocurrency, telling me I’m wrong because you have a different definition of those words is not an impressive rhetorical feat. And you claim I’m the bad faith actor in this conversation.
And as soon as you were challenged about statements you made on-topic, you disappear. I welcome your retreat. I would choose not to have more conversations with people like you.
The only reason we are here is you have asserted Monero is a scam, we have since agreed that Monero does not have a known leak, so I’m no longer concerned about the “scam” aspect as far as leaks go and have no further interest in this discussion with you.
Oh, I’m sorry if I was confusing in my writing, I’ll be clear:
Monero is the optimal choice for wire transfers because it maximizes privacy, prevents third parties from committing human rights violations, stops rent seeking, and gives financial autonomy to the downtrodden. It is the refuge of last resort in conflicts, humanitarian crisis, and the debanked.
Access to the money you earned is a human right.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/implicit
Just to clear that up for you.
I was curious what claims about Monero you thought specifically were defensible. Thanks for the clarification.
How does Monero (1) maximize privacy between people who can’t spend crypto directly and need to convert it to and from their national currency? How do you think this scheme would work in a privacy preserving way? We’re talking about a non-tech savvy undocumented worker in the US playing the role of Alice, and Bob is his subsistence farmer wife in rural Mexico.
Please make a ask post in !monero@monero.town for the details
You have demonstrated yourself to not be a good faith conversationalist, and I don’t have the energy to engage with you at scale. However, I have faith the good people of lemmy will pitch in, especially the XMR community.
The only reason we are here is you have asserted Monero is a scam, we have since agreed that Monero does not have a known leak, so I’m no longer concerned about the “scam” aspect as far as leaks go and have no further interest in this discussion with you.
According to your definition, casinos and online gambling isn’t a scam, because what they do is well-defined. If I use ‘scam’ to mean a reliable way for the downtrodden to become even more downtrodden, or ‘bitcoin’ as a shorthand for cryptocurrency, telling me I’m wrong because you have a different definition of those words is not an impressive rhetorical feat. And you claim I’m the bad faith actor in this conversation.
And as soon as you were challenged about statements you made on-topic, you disappear. I welcome your retreat. I would choose not to have more conversations with people like you.
OP’s IQ in the negative
Holy shit, your replies made me lose brain cells.
Man, OP is some kinda non-sequitur savant. You were more than fair in your attempts to engage with his disjointed and ephemeral “arguments”