5 ms·

No, you didn't get that right at all. Doubt and skepticism are inherent parts of creating new ideas, and at no point did I express that the people who are skept

by v64 9y ago

No, you didn't get that right at all. Doubt and skepticism are inherent parts of creating new ideas, and at no point did I express that the people who are skeptical are wrong. Rather, I am surprised to see comments on a technical website like Hacker News that are treating the long, drawn out development of cryptocurrencies and blockchains as something that is completely different than the long, drawn out development of the personal computer and the internet. It took the Internet more than 10 years to be useful, and so I think saying "shut it down, this is going nowhere" about Bitcoin today is not a useful viewpoint to take. Even if you doubt the technology itself, there is no reason to stifle its continued research and development.

jhwang5 9y ago
Yes, except, personal computers didn't have negative side effects like raising funds illegally outside of investor production regulations (icos) or facilitating dark web trade.
- v64 9y ago
  > Yes, except, personal computers didn't have negative side effects I disagree with this sentiment. In the early days, the dissemination of information like pornography and texts like the Anarchist Cookbook, which had instructions on how to create bombs and other weapons, were two examples of why the internet was a bad thing. Using a computer was considered by many to be antisocial due to the perception of people staring at screens 12 hours a day without talking to others in person. Even today, we have those arguing that the proliferation of computer technology has been detrimental to societal interactions.
- lazerpants 9y ago
  Actually, neither ICOs nor dark web trade would be possible without personal computers.
  - jhwang5 9y ago
    Right, and personal computers would not be possible without the invention of metallurgy.
    - hndamien 9y ago
      Nobody is questioning the positive or negative effects of metallurgy.
DenisM 9y ago
So your point is that some technologies take a lot longer to mature than average, for example {some examples}, and the delay itself should not be held against such late-blooming technologies. I'm onboard with that. Although your argument may benefit from better phrasing, because it actually does come across like that, which is a disservice to your advocacy effort. Back on topic, I don't see a lot of people in this thread saying "it's been forever and nothing came of it, let's just end the whole thing." What people are saying here is that there is no foreseeable legitimate (and legal) use case for the crypto currencies, hence let's not start the frenzy just yet. We should have a proposed legitimate use case first and a frenzy second, otherwise it's indistinguishable from millions of other exciting idea. Just because this particular idea excites you doesn't mean it has potential. So where is the potential? What is the use case?
- v64 9y ago
  > I'm onboard with that. Although your argument may benefit from better phrasing, because it actually does come across like that, which is a disservice to your advocacy effort. In the end I'm just a programmer, not an essayist :) I appreciate the feedback. > So where is the potential? What is the use case? I work in fintech and can speak firsthand about the potential use of this technology to reduce costs and reliance on third party auditing firms. I think people focus too much on cryptocurrencies just like people focus too much on AOL and Geocities. Those services weren't the internet, and cryptocurrency isn't the only use of blockchains. If anything, I would love for the shitcoin frenzy to die down so our efforts can be focused toward more useful/less scammy uses of the technology.
  - thatthatis 9y ago
    So far, the best use case of the block chain tech is to remove the necessity for a variety of industry associations few people have ever heard of. That's not world changing. Digital nearly frictionless currency is another use case, but so far it seems there is a vicious cycle of value, scarcity, hoarding, boom, and bust in most of these that makes them unsuitable for use as a medium of exchange. To go a bit further, I'm willing to wager that there is an inherent tradeoff in crypto between usefulness as a currency (stability vs fiat) and usefulness as an investment (appreciation). a stable store of value is also useful, just not as an investment. The crypto currency that eventually works won't make anybody rich.

by v64 9y ago

jhwang5 9y ago

Yes, except, personal computers didn't have negative side effects like raising funds illegally outside of investor production regulations (icos) or facilitating dark web trade.

v64 9y ago
> Yes, except, personal computers didn't have negative side effects I disagree with this sentiment. In the early days, the dissemination of information like pornography and texts like the Anarchist Cookbook, which had instructions on how to create bombs and other weapons, were two examples of why the internet was a bad thing. Using a computer was considered by many to be antisocial due to the perception of people staring at screens 12 hours a day without talking to others in person. Even today, we have those arguing that the proliferation of computer technology has been detrimental to societal interactions.
lazerpants 9y ago
Actually, neither ICOs nor dark web trade would be possible without personal computers.
- jhwang5 9y ago
  Right, and personal computers would not be possible without the invention of metallurgy.
  - hndamien 9y ago
    Nobody is questioning the positive or negative effects of metallurgy.

DenisM 9y ago

So your point is that some technologies take a lot longer to mature than average, for example {some examples}, and the delay itself should not be held against such late-blooming technologies. I'm onboard with that. Although your argument may benefit from better phrasing, because it actually does come across like that, which is a disservice to your advocacy effort. Back on topic, I don't see a lot of people in this thread saying "it's been forever and nothing came of it, let's just end the whole thing." What people are saying here is that there is no foreseeable legitimate (and legal) use case for the crypto currencies, hence let's not start the frenzy just yet. We should have a proposed legitimate use case first and a frenzy second, otherwise it's indistinguishable from millions of other exciting idea. Just because this particular idea excites you doesn't mean it has potential. So where is the potential? What is the use case?

v64 9y ago
> I'm onboard with that. Although your argument may benefit from better phrasing, because it actually does come across like that, which is a disservice to your advocacy effort. In the end I'm just a programmer, not an essayist :) I appreciate the feedback. > So where is the potential? What is the use case? I work in fintech and can speak firsthand about the potential use of this technology to reduce costs and reliance on third party auditing firms. I think people focus too much on cryptocurrencies just like people focus too much on AOL and Geocities. Those services weren't the internet, and cryptocurrency isn't the only use of blockchains. If anything, I would love for the shitcoin frenzy to die down so our efforts can be focused toward more useful/less scammy uses of the technology.
- thatthatis 9y ago
  So far, the best use case of the block chain tech is to remove the necessity for a variety of industry associations few people have ever heard of. That's not world changing. Digital nearly frictionless currency is another use case, but so far it seems there is a vicious cycle of value, scarcity, hoarding, boom, and bust in most of these that makes them unsuitable for use as a medium of exchange. To go a bit further, I'm willing to wager that there is an inherent tradeoff in crypto between usefulness as a currency (stability vs fiat) and usefulness as an investment (appreciation). a stable store of value is also useful, just not as an investment. The crypto currency that eventually works won't make anybody rich.