Surprisingly this is not true with Blockchain topics. Upvoted Blockchain stories feel ok but not that relevant or often random. Comments, discussions are sometimes constuctive (like this one) but often anti-blockchain or of low quality.
When it's in the topic of your domain expertise, you perceive HN to be incorrect, but in all other domains, to be right?
This is precisely because of: "The upvoted stories, the comments, the discussion are of such a high quality. It's just the best resource to stay informed and educated in tech."
If the best, the brightest, the most educated are anti-blockchain, there are definitely reasons for them to be.
---
BTW. Is this true what the article is saying: it takes 10 minutes for a transaction to clear in bitcoin?
(Comparing to securities settlement is interesting, because cryptocurrency exchanges use off-blockchain "settlement" within themselves. Trades execute near-instantly because they're just updating a database. However, settling your money out of an exchange can take a lot longer)
Usually only if there's something wrong, like a technical or KYC issue. In many cases it is possible to execute a trade and withdraw as fast as the blockchain (or your bank) will allow.
The price of a transaction is as important as the speed, IMO.
Private transfers: instant transactions between individuals, no transaction fees. (Though I suspect internally they do the usual reconciliation between banks at the end of the day).
Business: instant transactions to your account from your customers. Yearly fee: 500 SEK ($61), price per transaction: 2 SEK ($0.24), price per reimbursed transaction: 2 SEK ($0.24)
There are also limits on how much money you can send in one go, but it's usually more than enough for individual transactions and for small businesses.
[1] https://www.getswish.se, https://medium.com/@etiennebr/swish-the-secret-swedish-finte...
This is due to most blockchain projects being overhyped garbage.
The tech itself is also of questionable practical value.