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

251–260 of 734 posts

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#251

Post by Capira »

DebtDeflation wrote: post #61
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.

Bitcoin is a groundbreaking invention. All the "cryptos" and NFTs are just scams.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#252

Post by ulzeraj »

sofixa wrote: post #167
ulzeraj wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess its time for a reality check: Putin oligarchs are still filthy rich, the ruble has come back to pre-war levels while average Russian citizens who have been excluded from the rest of the world. https://developers.slashdot.org/story/22/04/18/016252/is-git...

The ruble's course doesn't matter because it's close to unusable. The Russian economy is cut off from vital supplies, and will soon have all sorts of shortages of all sorts of high tech/quality things - vehicles, phones, computer parts, sensors for their precious resource extractions. China and India cannot fill all the gaps, there's too many of them. As for the oligarchs, they're still rich, but much less so, and th…

> Yes, the average Russian citizen is excluded from the rest of the world, and will bear the brunt of the impact. As they should, because they're the ones who mostly sat idly and allowed all of this to happen.

Speaking for a point of privilege right here aren't we?

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#253

Post by bena »

c0mptonFP wrote: post #241
malthaus wrote: post #183

Unfortunately, given: "How can we create a more equitable financial system, where everyone has access to banking services? How can we reduce the power that a small few currently hold over the web? How can we improve data privacy and ensure that people have control over their personal information? How can we create reasonable privacy in the financial system? How can we make information more available to everyone? How…

Quoted post unavailable.

If you see someone pounding nails into his dick and when you ask what he's trying to do, he says "I'm building a house". It is fair to tell him that he's doing it wrong. That his proposed method will not get him any closer to a house than he already is. It does not matter that you are not also trying to build a house. It does not matter that you are not going to build him a house.

Knowing what will not work is important. And just because there is no proposed alternative does not mean we should keep doing the thing we know won't work. Especially when the thing we know won't work might even exacerbate the problem it is trying to solve. Sometimes, nothing is the right thing to do.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#254

Post by perlgeek »

rglullis wrote: post #240
DebtDeflation wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

This is like saying that you dismissed the web after you saw the 100th clone of the million dollar home page.

After the 100th clone of the million dollar home page, I would have dismissed the web, if there hadn't been also been hundreds of good/useful/entertaining websites around at that point.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#255

Post by the_only_law »

binibus wrote: post #166
igorkraw wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really not that hard. Libertarians, minarchists and "anarcho-capitalists" take one of the things which inherently need a state to uphold it (private property) and use it as the conceptual foundation of their social order - while not liking "the state". All other anarchists don't and hence get labeled as "left". That's the main difference, and the reason why "anarcho-capitalist" is inherently paradoxical. There i…

Hi, minarchist here. You are almost right in the distinction between right and left anarchism being about private property. But it's a little more profound. The main difference radicates in the conception of legitimate power. For a right anarchist, power is illegitimate only when it's carried out through violence. Meanwhile, for a left anarchist almost any power hierarchy is illegitimate in itself. To the extent that…

Just wanted to say thanks, for an actually informative comment that gets to the point without handwaving or strawmanning.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#256

Post by giaour »

trutannus wrote: post #206
a_humean wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that is another instance where many people part ways, because another big aspect of crypto is that it is partially motivated by a political ideology that most people politely reject and many people think is full of crackpots and scam artists (because it is).

I'm not advocating crypto here, I'm just pointing out that saying crypto is bad because you can "just pass a law" is just as illogical as saying "internet blockchain money will give us freedom".

> saying crypto is bad because you can "just pass a law"

I think you're misconstruing the original suggestion, which was that a legal solution to the problem of the unbanked would be viable. You could pass legislation mandating that banks turn no one away, you could establish a publicly run bank of last resort, etc.

I believe those measures would be "easier" solutions to the problem than replacing the entire financial system, but that's just an opinion about a hypothetical.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#257

Post by bombcar »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #226
malthaus wrote: post #183

Unfortunately, given: "How can we create a more equitable financial system, where everyone has access to banking services? How can we reduce the power that a small few currently hold over the web? How can we improve data privacy and ensure that people have control over their personal information? How can we create reasonable privacy in the financial system? How can we make information more available to everyone? How…

Bootstrapping a new cryptocurrency where 90% of the coins go to relatively few early adopters is the worst possible way to fix financial inequality. The crypto holders would love if the world switched to using the cryptocurrency they’re invested in because it would make them extraordinarily wealthy relative to the average person buying in late. I don’t understand how anyone can honestly suggest that a gradual changeo…

Pretending a system that has specific names for various scams will somehow reduce inequality is hilarious.

I feel people think “if everyone had bought Bitcoin when it was cheap, everyone would be rich now” and then think that Safemoon rugpull #42053 will somehow do it.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#258

Post by graypegg »

sneak wrote: post #202
mnw21cam wrote: post #67

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.

The infectious disease people would like a word. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptosporidiosis

I think we’d be all OK if this was the crypto we were outlawing.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#259

Post by asterix_pano »

codeflo wrote: post #12

I don’t think there’s a bifurcation between “good” and “bad” people in crypto, the real world is a lot more grey, and how people behave doesn’t depend so much on their character, but on culture and incentives. These days, we painfully observe the culture of crypto in every single online medium that isn’t very carefully moderated, for example Twitter. And about incentives, I think it’s very hard not to become some kin…

You have many cryptos with completely negligible environmental impact, thanks to smarter consensus mechanisms. It's a really new tech field, and as almost everything in tech, it improves over time.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#260

Post by lukeramsden »

S6eUL wrote: post #104

In my view it is quite difficult to find insightful and civilized long-form discussion on the topic of crypto, compared to most other "controversial" topics I'm personally intersted in (e.g. geopolitics or economics). I might be mistaken – but it is my impression that the blockchain-space is fast growing and attracts a ton of intelligent people. Surely there must be a lot to talk about? On reddit, the crypto-themed s…

There is plenty of interesting discussion, both on Twitter and in community-specific areas like blogs and Discords and such. It’s just drowned out by the nonsense, which is inevitable due to the association so many people have with getting rich quick with cryptocurrencies. It’s the same with retail traders buying options - there is some interesting discussions happening in some places, and interesting strategies being run, but it’s hard to find over the masses of spam.
Post reply on HN