3 ms·
I went through it, and I can't say that it's any better than what your average corporate response is like. It brushes over Sirer's points by making note of irr
by grenoire 9y ago
I went through it, and I can't say that it's any better than what your average corporate response is like.
It brushes over Sirer's points by making note of irrelevant 'achievements' they have managed. The format also reads like a high school teacher nitpicking your paper, where most of his arguments boil down to 'yeah but that doesn't really matter, because...'
I read the whitepaper (a cryptocurrency-fanatic friend pointed it out to me) just a few days before Sirer's post was published, and I noted a few of Sirer's main arguments immediately after reading it. It's not hard to understand the essential problems regarding limited reserves and market-trailing, and this response addresses nothing. It's wishy-washy investor-rubbing talk, not the legitimate debate and discourse they say the want.
- Flenser 9y agoWhen they started off by saying it was going to be a "line by line response" I knew they weren't going to be applying the principle of charity[0] and addressing the most persuasive form of Sirer's argument and would be dismissing and—as you say—nitpicing his argument or side stepping the real issues. [0] http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html