It amazes me that the anti-crypto crowd would rather be at the mercy of the payment processors that they hate than to accept any crypto transactions.

Crypto isn't perfect, don't get me wrong, but these "all crypto bad" types prefer you not to use it, even for donations because otherwise you are catering to those evil ancaps and contributing to climate change.

Unfortunately, there really is no other option for those who want to donate or purchase things online (semi)-anonymously and/or without a man in the middle. Maybe something like GNU Taler will fix that, but I don't know who uses that or how that works.

@xianc78 at least when the dollar collapses I can use it as shit paper, can’t even do that with used electricity on a spreadsheet

@sapphire I don't get this argument. I never hear anyone made the argument that it should replace cash/barter or be used for all transactions. I think it should be used for things like renting VPSes or donating to open-source projects. Both of which wouldn't be options anyway without electricity.

And as I said in another post, it's use as an investment is just a psyop made to undermine it's intended use.

@xianc78 why would I pay to pay someone else, what massive security benefit do you think I get by not telling the owner of the udindu foundation the name on my privacy.com card?

@sapphire No man in the middle. With bank transfers transaction fees go to the banks and payment processors (single corporate entities). With crypto, transactiion fees go to the nodes and miners (literally anyone who sets up a rig).

@xianc78 just because your man in the middle is decentralized doesn’t mean there isn’t a man in the middle.

@sapphire It's better than having a centralized man in the middle. I'd rather have random people take a cut of my transactions than some single, rich monopolist taking a cut.