Hacker News Reader

Comment by chaostheory | Hacker News Reader

I'm going to agree

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=599852

The only surprise is that HN is still a terrible place to discuss crypto. Not many posters or commenters seem to have much knowledge, which is strange for HN

View on HN

Maybe somehow they simultaneously have plenty of knowledge and don't agree with you.

So in the spirit of education - what amazing things are there about ethereum or Bitcoin that will change my mind about their intrinsic value that I don't already know? (My current opinion is that the intrinsic value of PoW systems is negative due to low actual utility and very high cost.)

What's the intrinsic value of USD? It's a garbage pre-mined token that's continually debased at the behest of a cabal of rich bankers so they can purchase real assets and consolidate the world's wealth. The petrodollar isn't exactly efficient either, considering the costs of the military industrial complex.

Every year the USD is worth less. Every year BTC is worth more.

Hope that helps.

Nope. That's the sort of argument that makes your position weaker. You see, USD has a government that asserts it is legal tender for all debts within its borders and military power to back up those assertions.

These are the sort of real-world constraints that you can't just ignore. Attempting to do so makes me less charitable towards other assertions you might make. You come across as an idealist talking about their perfect dream world, not someone describing reality. Now don't get me wrong - it's important to have a perfect dream world. If you aren't working towards something, what are you doing?

But at the same time, you have to accept that "this system is perfect, if you also change these thousand other things" is not compelling to someone who doesn't share your idea of utopia. To convince someone like me, you have to explain how the system improves the world as it exists now.

> These are the sort of real-world constraints that you can't just ignore.

These constraints were drafted by a handful of rich white bankers in a secret meeting. I have no problem ignoring their constraints. It seems you do.

Can you imagine all the hot-takes HN would generate if email were invented today?

"You can't just encroach on the sovereignty of USPS like that" "Electronic Mail doesn't do anything the pony-express can't do" "If we allow Electron Mail then how do we attach a postage stamp"

Email adoption, like Crypto doesn't require convincing the entire population. The laggards will join eventually.

While it's tempting to conflate the beneficiaries of our problems with those who created them, reality is not that simple. Blaming things on an all-powerful cabal of bankers is nearing QAnon levels of seeking a small number of people to blame for systemic issues. That sort of reductionism isn't useful. Action taken based on it is going to never touch any real problem. At most it'll change who benefits from them.

I think we can do better.

(As for your email counterfactual... Why? Do you find it an effective rhetorical tactic to imagine what people might do instead of looking at what people have done?)

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies," Jefferson wrote. "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around(these banks) will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

This Jeff guy, what a radical. Probably will never amount to anything.

That is not even a real Thomas Jefferson quote.

I remember when email became a thing.

No one said those things. Why would they?

That is just boring...

I like seeing things that have deep criticism of crypto and not just cheerleader blog posts. There are few on HN, the only notable ones aside from this post is the Tether fiasco. Most commenters did not seem very familiar with either subject vs others on HN. Maybe it's my imagination?

It's true there hasn't been a lot interesting going on. Though I'd argue the Dark Forest articles on Ethereum recovery were quite fascinating for illuminating a possibility I hadn't predicted and doing so quite lucidly. Of course, the message I took from the series as a whole was that this is a world full of people out to exploit your mistakes and the way to get around them is to have private connections external to the blockchain, so... It didn't shine a positive light, either.

But really, it kind of feels like the Tether investigation is the only thing shaking up the ecosystem in an interesting way, and it's doing so at a glacial pace. There really isn't much else new to say.

I tend to agree with your point of view that the utility (non-bitcoin) cryptocurrencies are something people who don't fully understand are really excited about, but that some experts dismiss.

For me in my daily work, this manifests itself as companies that want to use more obscure currencies as a transaction method in games. I say: "That currency is not on a lot of servers, how will you protect against 51% attacks?" They say: "All transactions are also verified by trusted servers.." So does the person understand what they are talking about, or are they used to talking to people (investors / business partners) who don't have a great understanding. Doubts raised.

However: There are times when experts dismiss new things and are wrong. So I try to keep an open mind.

Not strange at all!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com