3 ms·

This quote applies especially to IOTA: "Cryptocurrencies are nothing except the marketing power of inventors, financiers and others who love the idea of buying

This quote applies especially to IOTA: "Cryptocurrencies are nothing except the marketing power of inventors, financiers and others who love the idea of buying a black box (which is obviously empty) for the price of a Kia and dreaming that it will turn into a Mercedes. There have been times recently when this dream has materialized within hours. This is not just a bubble. It is not just a fraud. It is perhaps the outer limit, the ultimate expression, of the ability of humans to seize upon ether and hope to ride it to the stars." - Paul Singer, Elliott Management IOTA's tech is shitty but they've convinced enough people that it's worth something that it's now worth something. Maybe that's all a crypto needs? I was honestly expecting all of this to crash and burn back in December- but it hasn't yet. Maybe these cryptocoins really are the future.

aje403 9y ago
Those Singer quotes almost killed me: "limitless ignorance of swaths of the human race". He's absolutely correct, but, deep down, secretly a little upset he did not purchase Ripple at 2 cents
- tim333 9y ago
  There is perhaps a bit more to cryptocurrencies that Singer gives them credit for. I've recently been reading some of the original stuff from Szabo / Satoshi eg http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html and https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf that partly explain why they have worked and not collapsed 9 years later. A lot of it is much clearer than the hype which has followed.
  - aje403 9y ago
    There are several thousand of those articles with the same points scrambled, filled with millions of comments with the same points scrambled. It's bait for people to jump in a pool with sharks. People like Singer and Buffett are driving by in a boat and looking in with binoculars. Hopefully enough people do not jump in that there ends up being a tidal wave.
    - ShorsHammer 9y ago
      Szabo is not another cryptocurrency talking head. He proposed smart contracts a decade before they became a reality.
      - lowbloodsugar 9y ago
        Who hasn't proposed smart contracts decades ago? We used to talk about formalizing the legal system so it could be processed by computer while sitting around the undergrad common room. You can't read, e.g. Asimov, without being exposed to such ideas. Not to mention the numerous times such an idea came up on usenet, slashdot, or here whenever some corrupt human-in-authority abused some legal system. Every one of those discussions, however, ended with the lightbulb that, unless you have AI that can comprehend intent, it is as impossible to write a smart contract as it is to write code without bugs. And if you have an AI, then laws written in English are all you need anyway. Coming up with the idea of smart contracts isn't a sign of unrecognized genius, but believing it to be a valid solution is a definite disqualification.
        ShorsHammer 9y ago
        I'd love to see some formalised non sci-fi works on smart contracts that existed before the mid 90's if you can point me in the direction?
      - aje403 9y ago
        Why you believe that validates any of the ideas is beyond me
        ShorsHammer 9y ago
        I'm not sure you are responding to the right comment?
    - tim333 9y ago
      Well those two are unusual in they were the original ones for the first cryptocurrency. Everything else is derivative. It's interesting the intent was >While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs... And then it argues trustless electronic money could reduce transaction costs. I think it was never intended to be a huge casino.

aje403 9y ago

Those Singer quotes almost killed me: "limitless ignorance of swaths of the human race". He's absolutely correct, but, deep down, secretly a little upset he did not purchase Ripple at 2 cents

tim333 9y ago
There is perhaps a bit more to cryptocurrencies that Singer gives them credit for. I've recently been reading some of the original stuff from Szabo / Satoshi eg http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html and https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf that partly explain why they have worked and not collapsed 9 years later. A lot of it is much clearer than the hype which has followed.
- aje403 9y ago
  There are several thousand of those articles with the same points scrambled, filled with millions of comments with the same points scrambled. It's bait for people to jump in a pool with sharks. People like Singer and Buffett are driving by in a boat and looking in with binoculars. Hopefully enough people do not jump in that there ends up being a tidal wave.
  - ShorsHammer 9y ago
    Szabo is not another cryptocurrency talking head. He proposed smart contracts a decade before they became a reality.
    - lowbloodsugar 9y ago
      Who hasn't proposed smart contracts decades ago? We used to talk about formalizing the legal system so it could be processed by computer while sitting around the undergrad common room. You can't read, e.g. Asimov, without being exposed to such ideas. Not to mention the numerous times such an idea came up on usenet, slashdot, or here whenever some corrupt human-in-authority abused some legal system. Every one of those discussions, however, ended with the lightbulb that, unless you have AI that can comprehend intent, it is as impossible to write a smart contract as it is to write code without bugs. And if you have an AI, then laws written in English are all you need anyway. Coming up with the idea of smart contracts isn't a sign of unrecognized genius, but believing it to be a valid solution is a definite disqualification.
      - ShorsHammer 9y ago
        I'd love to see some formalised non sci-fi works on smart contracts that existed before the mid 90's if you can point me in the direction?
    - aje403 9y ago
      Why you believe that validates any of the ideas is beyond me
      - ShorsHammer 9y ago
        I'm not sure you are responding to the right comment?
  - tim333 9y ago
    Well those two are unusual in they were the original ones for the first cryptocurrency. Everything else is derivative. It's interesting the intent was >While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs... And then it argues trustless electronic money could reduce transaction costs. I think it was never intended to be a huge casino.