FWIW, even though I'd probably disagree with your assessment of crypto overall, I love that your comment tries to take a reasonable position: not just blind hate or love. That's what is missing from many crypto discussions on HN because too many people have hitched their assessment of crypto into their personality and can't try and be even the tiniest bit nuanced. I hate that some people blindly want to boost crypto and can't say anything bad about it, and some people want to act like crypto personally shot their dog and is responsible for most of the ills of the world.
> Crypto has its positive uses, but you have to balance those against the negatives of slow transfer speeds, speculative bubbles, scams, energy consumption, and carbon emissions.
How people balance these things out is subjective, but I see it as a question of values. If for example, you believe that what safety net that crypto offers from government destruction of currencies is of paramount importance, then it might outweigh any conceivable negatives. Conversely, inflation and government destruction of currencies is (IMO still sadly) not even in many peoples' radar screen. Everybody's cost-benefit analysis would be different here because their values and knowledge are different.
> Also, it needs to be said that Nvidia is probably just jumping on the next marketing bandwagon by pivoting to LLMs after the collapse of crypto. This doesn't seem like a principled stance they are taking.
Agreed. And we can all predict that if/when Crypto makes any kind of big financial comeback, many people who tried to signal their virtue by denouncing it will adjust their public position on crypto and happily make money on it.
Hell, I'd be very surprised if the people personally involved in this story don't hold at least some crypto as a "just in case" sort of side-bet even while publicly denouncing it.