Bukele has been a wonderful leader for El Salvador. He's shown us that we don't have to live in a society run by violent criminals. We can actually solve the problem.
He has largely fixed the gang problem, but at the expense of suspending various constitutional and even human rights for some. His popularity is understandable, but what comes after him? Does he become a Chavez?
There are so many better coins out there than bitcoin, some even provide better privacy and faster speeds but bitcoin was the first so it keeps limping on under its first mover advantage. Using over it other coins is like everyone choosing to use the Ford model A over a car made today. Its just silly.
Kind of like everything else. First mover advantage is everything. I think also, the powers that be have a vested interest in promoting inefficient cryptocurrencies in order to prevent efficient ones from gaining a foothold. Bitcoin does a great job at centralizing attention towards itself. Bitcoin maximalism isn't so much about helping Bitcoin as it is about depriving others of opportunities and staining the reputation of cryptocurrencies.
Unfortunately, that doesn’t tell the full story. Features and optimizations often come with costs such as security and complexity. Not to mention many cryptocurrency projects have an embedded self-enrichment scheme for the founders and centralized decision making, making them a theoretical target for governments. Sometimes a simple, well tested solution is better than a complex one with better performance and features. After all, money should be simple and carry low technical risk.
That said, I personally think features found in some other projects are worth the costs. But I can definitely see why someone would still choose btc. Especially for a government initiative or treasury.
Bitcoin is not that simple. The scripting language alone is a big source of complexity, and the emission could be made both simpler and fairer, leaving no advantage for the founders or early miners.
Finally, some privacy improvements can be had with no cost (even a notable improvement) in scalability.
> [...] the government opened a digital wallet called Chivo, and gave every citizen the equivalent of $30 in bitcoin. But hundreds of the Chivo accounts were hacked, and the money was stolen along with the account owner’s identity.
> [...] only 1.3% of remittances have been transferred using digital wallets that use cryptocurrencies, according to the most recent data from the central bank
> The move to bitcoin has been an undeniable success for El Salvador, says Andrés Engler, a journalist specialized in cryptocurrencies and former editor for Latin America of the crypto website Coindesk. [...] "[...] If you ask anyone in the industry about El Salvador, they will recognize it and will probably name Bukele straight away. From that point of view, it seems to have been effective."
It seems that bitcoin's rollout as a practical matter, as a tool for everyday people, is a goal that has lagged behind the political win for Bukele in terms of name recognition. At best, with an open mind, it makes sense that a certain amount of time and education are necessary for anything as new as a digital wallet. This is especially true considering how volatile bitcoin has been. At worst, I don't know, it feels kind of cynical.
I'd like to understand better how his government is actually conducting the rollout and education effort. What metrics are they studying? What does their vision of success look like?
Also, it's a little suspicious that the government's bitcoin holdings aren't made public. Maybe someone from there who understands better can explain.
Agree. The article read more like political success not practical success in moving money. Volitale value also does not help the average Joe with purchasing decisions either
Does anyone know why foreign media outlets (especially in the West) are so keen to criticize Bukele? Searching his name on WaPo or CNN comes up almost exclusively with hit pieces or scare-bait about the 'mega prisons', yet I read the other day he's polling at a record 93% approval in El Salvador. That seems the result of a politician doing their job well, no?
15 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 46.7 ms ] threadhttps://www.hrw.org/report/2022/12/07/we-can-arrest-anyone-w...
His party is set to win 90%+ of legislative seats.
What about the human rights of non-gang citizens?
Valid, and I understand why he is popular. But, so was Chavez.
That said, I personally think features found in some other projects are worth the costs. But I can definitely see why someone would still choose btc. Especially for a government initiative or treasury.
Bitcoin is not that simple. The scripting language alone is a big source of complexity, and the emission could be made both simpler and fairer, leaving no advantage for the founders or early miners. Finally, some privacy improvements can be had with no cost (even a notable improvement) in scalability.
> [...] only 1.3% of remittances have been transferred using digital wallets that use cryptocurrencies, according to the most recent data from the central bank
> The move to bitcoin has been an undeniable success for El Salvador, says Andrés Engler, a journalist specialized in cryptocurrencies and former editor for Latin America of the crypto website Coindesk. [...] "[...] If you ask anyone in the industry about El Salvador, they will recognize it and will probably name Bukele straight away. From that point of view, it seems to have been effective."
It seems that bitcoin's rollout as a practical matter, as a tool for everyday people, is a goal that has lagged behind the political win for Bukele in terms of name recognition. At best, with an open mind, it makes sense that a certain amount of time and education are necessary for anything as new as a digital wallet. This is especially true considering how volatile bitcoin has been. At worst, I don't know, it feels kind of cynical.
I'd like to understand better how his government is actually conducting the rollout and education effort. What metrics are they studying? What does their vision of success look like?
Also, it's a little suspicious that the government's bitcoin holdings aren't made public. Maybe someone from there who understands better can explain.
Where is this discrepancy coming from?
I think what we have here is a case leaning towards benevolent dictatorship. Those are always controversial.