The Wall Street Journal ran a debate on whether there is a need for cryptocurrency.
The “pro” side of the argument claimed that people in unstable countries with unstable fiat currency could use Bitcoin as their stable money. That argument falls flat just based on the volatile history of the crypto market.
She then argues that Bitcoin “enables secure, arm’s-length transactions between two unknown parties.” But we know that cyrptocurrency thefts are now in the billions of dollars.
Her arguments regarding security, transaction capacity, merchant acceptance and governmental recognition still admit that none are there (yet).
So, a less than convincing “pro” argument.
Is there a future for crypto? Probably, but it’s just not apparent yet.