Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

stephendiehl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 183 posts

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#121

Post by skohan »

dkshdkjshdk wrote: post #98
Marazan wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the question "What problem does Bitcoin solve" the answer "Without Bitcoin I would not be able to transact in Bitcoin" is not valid.

Was that even the question to begin with? Here is the comment I replied to, originally [0]. Try to find the word "Bitcoin" there. And, again, thanks for continuing to support my point, by failing to address the fact that the first example I gave had nothing to do with BTC. Have a nice day. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27769442

Yes that was essentially the original question to begin with. You can make a pedantic distinction between "Bitcoin" and "blockchain", but your comments make it clear you are arguing in bad faith here.

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#122

Post by mattdesl »

creshal wrote: post #117
mattdesl wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would point to Hicetnunc as one example[1], which provides real value for many artists on the platform. I’m sure it’s possible to build a similar platform with a central database handling transactions and Stripe payouts, but I’m not sure it would be met with the same enthusiasm (and, despite the possibility of this with past tech, no pre-blockchain digital art marketplace has come close to meeting it in sales). Due…

> I’m sure it’s possible to build a similar platform with a central database handling transactions and Stripe payouts, but I’m not sure it would be met with the same enthusiasm (and, despite the possibility of this with past tech, no pre-blockchain digital art marketplace has come close to meeting it in sales). So blockchain itself is completely useless here, and all the value lies in the hype. And once the hype goes…

Similar but not equal.

Part of the enthusiasm around these platforms is in the idea of decentralization of art assets (which cannot be achieved with a central database). See the latter part of the post you replied to.

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#123

Post by intev »

skohan wrote: post #116
intev wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Seems like a random point to me. I agree with some stablecoins there are fishy things going on, and others not so much. But again I'm failing to see the relevance of this point. Also I'd like to point out, the SEC loves to go after crypto. It's quite clear where they stand. Somehow they are ignoring this "very credible evidence". At what point does this becomes a conspiracy theory? Or is the SEC in cahoots with th…

1) As far as I know there are legal proceedings ongoing agains Tether - I don't think this is a conspiracy theory. > My initial question still stands. At what point will you think you are wrong with regards to the value? Will you constantly move goal posts, as I did for years, or have a line in the sand after which you will adopt it. I know this is a common argumentative tactic to attempt to get people to change thei…

> I know this is a common argumentative tactic to attempt to get people to change their mind. I don't know what would change my mind, but we're certainly not there yet as long as the risks which I cited still exist.

This is a common tactic to best understand if I am wasting my time. Seems like I am. Hope you have a good rest of the day.

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#124

Post by dkshdkjshdk »

skohan wrote: post #121
dkshdkjshdk wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was that even the question to begin with? Here is the comment I replied to, originally [0]. Try to find the word "Bitcoin" there. And, again, thanks for continuing to support my point, by failing to address the fact that the first example I gave had nothing to do with BTC. Have a nice day. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27769442

Yes that was essentially the original question to begin with. You can make a pedantic distinction between "Bitcoin" and "blockchain", but your comments make it clear you are arguing in bad faith here.

I'm arguing in bad faith, according to you, even though I individually and respectfully tried to address every point you asked/made.

Yet, you are the one doing unbased accusations of fraud ("stablecoins are essentially fraud"), and still haven't replied to the question I made 4 or 5 times already: What if I choose to get my returns in some asset that is pegged to USD (e.g. DAI, USDC), am I still speculating on the value of BTC?

I guess my question is inconvenient.

I'm done here, but I do hope you have a nice day. And, don't worry, I won't bite your bait ever again.

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#125

Post by lottin »

redpiller wrote: post #119
lottin wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing of what you say suggests that you have "come up with a way to allow investors to independently verify how much profit a business makes with absolute certainty without having to trust company directors or accountants".

Imagine if there was a tamper-proof ledger of who owns what shares of what companies in such a way that no new shares could be issued and existing shareholders could not be diluted in any way. Tamper-proof in this case means that even the company directors themselves could not modify it, even if all of them wanted to. Now imagine if all share buybacks (which were purchased by the company on the open market in exchang…

This only keeps track of the shares that that the company has issued, it doesn't tell us anything about the profit that the company is making.

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#126

Post by skohan »

dkshdkjshdk wrote: post #120
skohan wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) As far as I know there are legal proceedings ongoing agains Tether - I don't think this is a conspiracy theory. > My initial question still stands. At what point will you think you are wrong with regards to the value? Will you constantly move goal posts, as I did for years, or have a line in the sand after which you will adopt it. I know this is a common argumentative tactic to attempt to get people to change thei…

> As far as I know there are legal proceedings ongoing agains Tether - I don't think this is a conspiracy theory. Even so, how do you go from "there are legal proceedings against Tether" to "there seems to be very credible evidence that Tether and other stablecoins are essentially fraud"? Being hyperbolic does not help your argument here... it just makes it seem like you don't know what you are talking about (i.e. yo…

I am quite confident my arguments are sound. However you are posting from a brand new account, continuously splitting hairs rather than confronting the argument head-on, and generally engaging in bad-faith argumentation tactics.

This might be effective on other forums, but I'm quite confident the HN audience will not be impressed.

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#127

Post by creshal »

mattdesl wrote: post #122
creshal wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m sure it’s possible to build a similar platform with a central database handling transactions and Stripe payouts, but I’m not sure it would be met with the same enthusiasm (and, despite the possibility of this with past tech, no pre-blockchain digital art marketplace has come close to meeting it in sales). So blockchain itself is completely useless here, and all the value lies in the hype. And once the hype goes…

Similar but not equal. Part of the enthusiasm around these platforms is in the idea of decentralization of art assets (which cannot be achieved with a central database). See the latter part of the post you replied to.

How decentralized is it truly when it's all depending on the Hicetnunc brand? If you had Hicetnunc-branded certificates of authenticity, you'd have the same "decentralized" trade opportunities, and in both cases the only value these trades have derive from the branding attached to them.

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#128

Post by skohan »

intev wrote: post #123
skohan wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) As far as I know there are legal proceedings ongoing agains Tether - I don't think this is a conspiracy theory. > My initial question still stands. At what point will you think you are wrong with regards to the value? Will you constantly move goal posts, as I did for years, or have a line in the sand after which you will adopt it. I know this is a common argumentative tactic to attempt to get people to change thei…

> I know this is a common argumentative tactic to attempt to get people to change their mind. I don't know what would change my mind, but we're certainly not there yet as long as the risks which I cited still exist. This is a common tactic to best understand if I am wasting my time. Seems like I am. Hope you have a good rest of the day.

That's a convenient way not to engage with the actual arguments - seems like you have been wasting everyone's time. A good day to you as well!

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#129

Post by skohan »

dkshdkjshdk wrote: post #124
skohan wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes that was essentially the original question to begin with. You can make a pedantic distinction between "Bitcoin" and "blockchain", but your comments make it clear you are arguing in bad faith here.

I'm arguing in bad faith, according to you, even though I individually and respectfully tried to address every point you asked/made. Yet, you are the one doing unbased accusations of fraud ("stablecoins are essentially fraud"), and still haven't replied to the question I made 4 or 5 times already: What if I choose to get my returns in some asset that is pegged to USD (e.g. DAI, USDC), am I still speculating on the va…

> I individually and respectfully tried to address every point you asked/made.

Oh come on, look at your comment above mine in this thread. You're splitting hairs and trying to find minute flaws in the arguments against you instead of actually arguing the points. It certainly makes it look like you cannot defend your actual arguments.

> Yet, you are the one doing unbased accusations of fraud ("stablecoins are essentially fraud")

I never said all stablecoins, but some certainly look like they are.

> I'm done here, but I do hope you have a nice day. And, don't worry, I won't bite your bait ever again.

Oh I'm not worried!

Re: The Non-Innovation of Cryptocurrency

#130

Post by dkshdkjshdk »

skohan wrote: post #126
dkshdkjshdk wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As far as I know there are legal proceedings ongoing agains Tether - I don't think this is a conspiracy theory. Even so, how do you go from "there are legal proceedings against Tether" to "there seems to be very credible evidence that Tether and other stablecoins are essentially fraud"? Being hyperbolic does not help your argument here... it just makes it seem like you don't know what you are talking about (i.e. yo…

I am quite confident my arguments are sound. However you are posting from a brand new account, continuously splitting hairs rather than confronting the argument head-on, and generally engaging in bad-faith argumentation tactics. This might be effective on other forums, but I'm quite confident the HN audience will not be impressed.

> I am quite confident my arguments are sound.

Ah, yes. Like the argument that "Tether is being investigated for fraud" thus "every stablecoin is essentially fraud". Seems like a water-tight argument you have there.

> However you are posting from a brand new account,

So, instead of addressing my actual arguments, you're concerned about going through my account history? Great. Note that my account is not "brand new", though: I created the account days ago, to participate in discussions that have nothing to do with "blockchain". You can check it out in my history, if you haven't already.

> continuously splitting hairs rather than confronting the argument head-on

Point one one single argument that you have made to me, that I did not respond to head-on. Just one. I'll wait.

In the meantime, while you look for it, and as a proof that you are indeed argumenting in good faith, feel free to respond head-on to the question I already made 5 times: What if I choose to get my returns in some asset that is pegged to USD (e.g. DAI, USDC), am I still speculating on the value of BTC?

Until you do, I'll keep assuming you are discussing in bad faith and refuse to reply to anything else you write.

> and generally engaging in bad-faith argumentation tactics.

There is exactly one such comment from my side (or one that could be seen as bad-faith, if you consider "pedantry" to be a sign of bad-faith), and it was not directed at you, so I'm not seeing where your complaint comes from. I re-iterate: point out a single example of me engaing in bad-faith argumentation with you. A single actual example. And then, maybe, we can continue the conversation. Until then, and as I already said, hope you have a nice day.

Post reply on HN