Hacker News Reader

Comment by ssss11 | Hacker News Reader

The snark in this comment, and the general aggresiveness on HN to a new technology is becoming tiring.

If you don’t know about it and want to join the discussion then research it or askquestions rather than armchair dismissing it.

There is a lot of new jargon in crypto but what scientific field doesnt have jargon? I’m no expert but have read a bit about crypto and while I may not back every project out there I think the basis of using digital signatures and blockchains for registration of immutable data and verification of it has a lot of potential.

Sorry it wasn’t about your dragon game :) I may go and read about that today

View on HN

The problem is it not a "new technology" -- the original Ethereum DAO was made 5 years ago. The arguments for and motivations for the 0x DAO read exactly the same as 5 years ago, and the same as many other decentralized government schemes that came after.

Is this going to be better than the previous N attempts? I seriously doubt it.

Given the massive negative externalities and lack of widespread adoption beyond speculation and crime after more than ten years, I think that snark is a reasonable default response to any cryptocurrency-related news.

By that logic, we should have given up on the idea of cell phones in the late 20th century[1]. FWIW Motorola released the first commercial mobile phone in 1983.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/exports/mobile-and-fixed-landline...

The market for mobile communication was well established. In the mid 80s, car phones were already popular for rich executives and other people who needed to be accessible on the go, and it was the late 90s when flip phones started becoming accessible for middle class. In 2004, polyphonic ringtones raked in $4 billion in sales.

Bitcoin was released in 2009. By that metric, we should be far past the car phone stage by no, but we're still trying to figure out who needs this thing.

If we're talking about car phones, which I admittedly know very little about, those were released in 1946[1]. So that would mean it was ~40 years until they became popular for rich executives.

I think it's fair to say that crypto's "release" was in 2009. But the point being, technologies rarely hit "widespread adoption" within 10 years of release. I'd be curious to hear counterexamples.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_phone

Car phone service in Chicago was launched in 1946 and reached capacity within the year.

>On October 2, 1946, Motorola communications equipment carried the first calls on Illinois Bell Telephone Company's new car radiotelephone service in Chicago.[2][3] Due to the small number of radio frequencies available, the service quickly reached capacity.

Widespread adoption of mobile phones was limited by availability (or distribution) of radio frequencies. Laptops were adopted between 1987 and 1991 as soon as the input device was figured out. The 3G smart phone was figured out between 2003 and 2006 (the time most markets took to adopt 3G data). The modern touchscreen smartphone was figured out between 2007 and 2010 (the rise of the iPod touch and Android).

Wait a second, you are calling my comment out for snark but I'm not allowed to call the OP news post "indistinguishable bullshit". Oh wait, I did not call the post bullshit...

You can join the discussion about DAI, it'll take about 5 minutes on your end if you google DAI spreadsheet and you will be able to farm on the top end of every other DAI player. It'll also not cost you any money.

If you can not explain your crypto bullshit maybe it is my prerogative to call out your bullshit. Maybe I think smart contracts are dumb, digital signatures is something that has been solved in 1996 and your blockchain is just dumb.

Sorry my post wasn't pretending your bullshit is magic. Maybe go read about something else.

*EDIT: I mean look at my metrics...

https://imgur.com/ajLZL7w

Nevermind that there is no appreciable scale, that's not important.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com