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

On anti-crypto toxicity

blog.mollywhite.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 734 posts

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#61

Post by DebtDeflation »

Traster wrote: post #46

I think toxicity from the anti-crypto crowd is basically inevitable at this point. It has been a decade of dumb claims and ridiculous assertions from the pro-crypto crowd. None of their claims have materially panned out. There's some promise in some places - mainly in the most nerdy corners of ETH, but it's still only promises. Meanwhile, this long protracted failure has been accompanied by a massive increase in stup…

>It has been a decade of dumb claims and ridiculous assertions from the pro-crypto crowd.

Agreed. For me it was the NFT'ing of a fart that was the jumping the shark moment that drove me from being merely a crypto skeptic to being vociferously anti-crypto and advocating against it at every turn.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#62

Post by jasamer »

tarkin2 wrote: post #11

Why must we use the loaded term 'toxicity'? It starts your argument with: "Those who disagree with me are poison".

The author does not state that people "disagreeing" with crypto are toxic, just that a subset of anti-crypto people are toxic. (Same applies to some pro-crypto people).

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#63

Post by dspillett »

bedobi wrote: post #2

Waaay back, I thought Bitcoin was a cool technology, and convinced some friends of mine with businesses to accept it. We had a lot of fun with it - it was really cool to pay for your beer by scanning a QR code and seeing the transaction come through this public, distributed, tamper proof ledger, like magic, with no need for money, banks or any of the other financial infrastructure we're used to. Sadly, the "crypto sp…

> The potential for cool applications of blockchains is still there

It is important to note that crypto currencies are distributed blockchains, a subset of blockchain methods. Blockchains for tamper detection purposes have been around for longer than bitcoin and its ilk, IIRC they date back to the mid 80s or before.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#64

Post by rvz »

simias wrote: post #13

The problem is that while these topics are interesting (and even crucial these days) they're often used in bad faith by people who are just in it because of the get-rich-quick scheme. You'll often see people push some cryptotoken using a thin veneer of political activism, saying that it's about taking control back or redistributing wealth etc... but it's rarely more than that. In my experience if you attempt to push…

Your whole four paragraphs can be simplified to:

90% of projects out there are scams and have a crypto-token attached to it with a pyramid scheme on it and there also exists a 10% of projects somewhere that it is not purely a 'get-rich-quick-scheme', or a 'web3' crypto project that doesn't require a crypto-token attached to the product that has utility?

Thus, it also must mean that it is not going away 100% guaranteed, despite the rampant scams?

> So today I mostly dismiss anything cryptocurrency-related as a scam and move on. It works well, too.

So since 2017, there has been no regulations, crackdowns and legislation that has been proposed to regulate anything related to crypto and nothing has changed?

I really hope you try your best to avoid it and 'move on'. I should not expect you to continue to react to yet another HN post about crypto projects since you think all of them are a scam.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#65

Post by scrlk »

dreen wrote: post #50
bedobi wrote: post #2

Waaay back, I thought Bitcoin was a cool technology, and convinced some friends of mine with businesses to accept it. We had a lot of fun with it - it was really cool to pay for your beer by scanning a QR code and seeing the transaction come through this public, distributed, tamper proof ledger, like magic, with no need for money, banks or any of the other financial infrastructure we're used to. Sadly, the "crypto sp…

When do you think that happened? For me it was around 2012. Thats when I exited crypto and never looked back. I actually built an app before that which would easily transfer money between countries, by finding matching local trades. Unfortunately to turn it into a service, it requires the currency to both be popular and stable.

>I actually built an app before that which would easily transfer money between countries, by finding matching local trades.

Is this the same idea as Wise (aka TransferWise)/hawala?

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#66

Post by telomero22 »

egeozcan wrote: post #51

You cannot solve contract/legal problems and wrong transactions through decentralization. You can't also make a democratic system act on every conflict. You assign a central authority to act on them and you select that authority through a democratic process, which is what we already have. - I want to have a beer! - ok, scan this QR, and accept the transaction - there you go! - thank you, here are your 5 beers - oh, d…

What kind of example is this?

Try that with a credit card transaction and you'll get kicked out for ordering 5 beers and only trying to pay 1. :D

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#67

Post by mnw21cam »

I don't think I am ever going to get used to "crypto" meaning "cryptocurrency" and not "cryptography". Can't we just keep calling it "cryptocurrency"? I thought this article would be about the various misguided governments' attempts to outlaw cryptography.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#69

Post by bertil »

jack_pp wrote: post #42
bertil wrote: post #25

The largest and easiest argument against crypto is the environmental impact. It’s completely ignored in that piece.

It's not that easy. Renewable power plants could be setup in areas where it makes no sense due to the logistics of transporting that energy to normal society and that plant could be 100% used to mine crypto which in a way makes crypto a "wireless energy transport technology". Complaining that crypto uses a lot of power is like complaining India is trying to burn fossil fuels which will harm the planet. India wants to…

I strongly disagree with the points that you make. There are many ways to implement fair financial systems. Crypto activists chose to ignore them, refused to understand the sources of failures and just attact principles.

Instead, crypto advocates brandish an apparent technological solution that is at amost a very leaky abstraction. I can’t even stop screaming at how offensive is “wireless energy transport technology”. In doing so, you ignore that the scales in play are absurd: securing dozens of transactions should not have a larger environmental footprint than taking a billion people out of poverty. That you think this is even an argument is horrifying.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#70

Post by floss_silicate »

bertil wrote: post #25

The largest and easiest argument against crypto is the environmental impact. It’s completely ignored in that piece.

But that’s just an argument against any technology that will increase electricity demand, such as EVs.

When the web was growing the electrical demands were similarly criticised:

“The current fuel-economy rating: about 1 pound of coal to create, package, store and move 2 megabytes of data. The digital age, it turns out, is very energy-intensive. The Internet may someday save us bricks, mortar and catalog paper, but it is burning up an awful lot of fossil fuel in the process.”

https://www.forbes.com/forbes/1999/0531/6311070a.html?sh=5db...

Post reply on HN