Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | 3434g34g34's comments login

You are right to be a skeptic of cryptocurrencies. All of them are garbage. Focus just on bitcoin, because it aims to solve the exact problem you have identified in the most secure, decentralized way possible. Any cryptocurrency that tries to bolt more onto its base layer will always sacrifice some level of decentralization which is where a lot of problems get introduced.

cryptocurrency and bitcoin are not categorically the same.


All of them is a slight exaggeration. 999 out of every 1000, definitely.


Wait till you learn about solana.


The problem is not both ends always have bank accounts. This is the specific area where remittance payments and bitcoin can fill the void.


That's something most of us forget. I was wondering why you wouldn't just do a bank transfer, it's cheap and everyone have a bank account, but that's because I happen to live in a country where the EU ensures that I'm not paying insane fees and where you legally must have a bank account.

Personally I'm still not sure that Bitcoins and Western Union should be part of the solution. It seems "simple" for a country to just cap feed and ensure that everyone have access to banks.


This happens everywhere. When I was 20 I went to a UK university as an exchange student and tried to open a bank account (needed for some reason I can’t remember). I expected that to cost zero and not come with any strings attached but the bank person started talking about minimum deposits and yearly fees just to open a standard account.


That may be in the UK.

In El Salvador simplified bank accounts require no minimum deposit, can send and receive instant bank transfers to other banks, and some allow the account holder to receive a remittance from the US just by typing remittance ID and amount.

No need to go to the bank either. They can be opened from a website or app with a selfie and a picture of both sides of the ID card.


There are "simplified bank" accounts that are very easy to open in El Salvador. They are basically open to anyone and charge few fees. They can even be opened using and app, a photo of the ID card and a selfie.

It is also possible to receive a remittance from family using the app by filling a form with two textboxes: 1. MTCN/Remittance code and 2. Remittance amount.

Those who are under 18 cannot access this service though.

The salvadorans living in the U.S., even if they didn't enter the U.S. legally, usually have bank accounts too.


Because WU has a monopoly on remittance payments in multiple countries.


Interesting. Is there any reading material available for how this monopoly is maintained? Are the country’s leaders being paid a cut for allowing WU to be the only money transmitter or something like that?


Most banks here support between 5 and 15 remittance companies. I wouldn't call it a monopoly.



That makes sense. I would not have thought even a poor country’s bank would agree to that. But it does not seem to be a problem in El Salvador today.

The situation is also getting better based on this report linked in Wikipedia:

http://www.remesas.org/files/exclusivityWP9.pdf


Most banks are not WU exclusive in El Salvador.


People gloss over what goes into money transfer. There is substantial risk, verification of identity of recipient, etc. With Bitcoin the services are simply not offered, so it's not really comparable. You get irreversible money transfer to an bitcoin address nothing more and nothing less. Western Union's services go well beyond that.


I figured, I just thought I might ask for a source to lend credence to any conspiracy theory.


Not true anymore. Moneygram and Ria Envia have been growing very fast to Latin America and there are numerous smaller firms stealing market share in the digital send space.


> Because WU has a monopoly on remittance payments in multiple countries.

Not in El Salvador. A quick Google search shows that:

A mid sized bank supports about 9 remittance companies. And a credit union supporting about 15.


There are a lot of things the police can't do, but do do and get away unscathed because of union or department backing. I wouldn't be surprised if they beat a person to death for refusing to give this info up.

Personally im not taking a fucking chance. If they ask, I'll provide any info I have. I am trying to live, not demonstrate to a cop that I know my rights he is violating. If you think that's a wrong mentality to have then maybe we should step back and figure out how to make actual progress to de-escalate a police state.


Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: