5 ms·

> before landing at Nori, a company addressing climate change with blockchain where he still works Oh come on...

village-idiot 7y ago
Every time I hear “fixing X with blockchain” it gets dumber and dumber.
josteink 7y ago
I’m no native English speaker, but does “addressing” strictly have to mean fixing/solving something? Can it be employed to mean the opposite? As in, “addressing” things for the worse?
- jumpkick 7y ago
  No
- Riverheart 7y ago
  "Addressing a problem" is viewed the same way as fixing or attempting to fix a problem. I've not heard it used to imply making a problem worse.
- TehCorwiz 7y ago
  The word “Addressing” has a connotation in this usage context that the subject is focusing their attention on what they see as broken or deficient. The trick is that it’s relative to the subject or speaker’s point of view.
- dangerface 7y ago
  To address a problem is about intent rather than action. Usually it's an acknowledgement that a problem exists and a potential solution to that problem. You don't have to actually act on the problem or solve it just present a possible solution. For example I could address climate change with blockchain by suggesting that people don't use bitcoin. Even if I continue to use bitcoin this could be considered addressing the problem.
gustavmarwin 7y ago
Elaborate?
- szggzs27 7y ago
  how do you fix climate change with fucking blockchain?
  - gustavmarwin 7y ago
    Read the fucking whitepaper.
- srfilipek 7y ago
  http://doyouneedablockchain.com/ http://doyouneedablockchain.com/
  - lol768 7y ago
    Meta, but the text on that page renders awfully. Seems they're scaling the elements by 1.64297 instead of just setting a font-size?! Result is incredibly fuzzy https://lol768.com/i/AmpAbuseDormMendez https://lol768.com/i/AmpAbuseDormMendez
- pjc50 7y ago
  The use of proof-of-waste for cryptocurrency, which allows people to get rich by consuming extremely large amounts of electricity, is one of the worst inventions for the environment since CFCs and tetraethyl lead.
  - gustavmarwin 7y ago
    It's sad to see YT community members being so ill informed. Proof-of-Stake is coming in leading blockchains such as Ethereum, Polkadot, Cosmos, etc. This is changing. It's a new technology it takes time to improve. Anyway, do your homework before commenting on things you don't understand.
beager 7y ago
I imagine this company exists solely to trap VCs and harvest their organs.
- yitchelle 7y ago
  How can you not get VC money when you use two of most hyped up buzz-phrases going around?
  - bitL 7y ago
    But they are still missing machine learning and AR in the business plan...
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      They're saving that up for the next round of funding.
    - beager 7y ago
      I mean, I am starting a company that's using AR and machine learning to enable remote medical diagnostics for climate change, all on the blockchain, for rural America and the third world. But on the other hand, I'm not. Unless you're investing. In which case I am.
  - all2 7y ago
    Now I want to try this. I'll start my brainstorming session by watching this: https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4 https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4 I can make my website here: http://tiffzhang.com/startup/ http://tiffzhang.com/startup/ Now, what am I missing?
RickS 7y ago
It's for buying and selling carbon offsets. Which in the grand scheme of "crypto for X" is not bad, since it's at least a thing that's actually exchanged in an existing market. Farmers can sell their carbon credits to fund things that need to happen on their farm, to businesses that need to purchase carbon offsets because they're producing more than they should be. Could it be done without crypto? Almost certainly. But I think the article's flyby description gives the thing room to sound much sillier than it really is.
- wlesieutre 7y ago
  > Could it be done without crypto? Almost certainly. But I think the article's flyby description gives the thing room to sound much sillier than it really is. The particular irony here is that blockchains are a giant waste of energy compared to non-blockchain approaches, so of all the things to say “Do X with blockchain” about, “Reduce carbon emissions” is an odd choice. If it were me I’d think you’d want to put I extra effort to not have a blockchain based solution, but I have a feeling the idea cane about from “what can we do with a blockchain” rather than “what is the best solution to this problem?”
  - eropple 7y ago
    So I am on record around here as kinda thinking that cryptocurrency people are worse than coal-rollers with the cavalier garbage they do to our planet, but it's worth pointing out that a "blockchain" need not do that--cryptocurrency needs to do that because it has to be "hard" to create some kind of phantom scarcity and therefore rarity and therefore perceived value for the Ponzi schemers at the top of them to sell to the next sucker in line. Blockchain multi-party verification can be fairly fast when you take out the grift. Well, that grift. The buzzword-solution-searching-for-a-problem grift, as you note, is still very much in play.
  - zeroxfe 7y ago
    > The particular irony here is that blockchains are a giant waste of energy compared to non-blockchain approaches Not all blockchains are proof-of-work. Almost all modern implementations (particularly for federated blockchains like OPs) use more power-efficient consensus algorithms. (I don't have an opinion on whether blockchains are the best solution to their problem, but a decentralized marketplace for carbon offsets does sound compelling.)
dang 7y ago
Would you please not break the HN guidelines when posting here? This comment broke at least three: Don't be snarky. Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents. Blockchain startups may be tedious, but not as tedious as blockchain threads on HN. Let alone blockchain climate change threads. Your comment probably felt like a harmless dig when you posted it, but snark and indignation get the most upvotes, so this subthread ended up sitting at the top of the page, collecting mass, emitting fumes, and generally being off topic. Had we seen it we'd have marked it off topic, but we didn't see it until 2 days later, at which point moderation makes no difference.

Every time I hear “fixing X with blockchain” it gets dumber and dumber.

I’m no native English speaker, but does “addressing” strictly have to mean fixing/solving something? Can it be employed to mean the opposite? As in, “addressing” things for the worse?

jumpkick 7y ago
No
Riverheart 7y ago
"Addressing a problem" is viewed the same way as fixing or attempting to fix a problem. I've not heard it used to imply making a problem worse.
TehCorwiz 7y ago
The word “Addressing” has a connotation in this usage context that the subject is focusing their attention on what they see as broken or deficient. The trick is that it’s relative to the subject or speaker’s point of view.
dangerface 7y ago
To address a problem is about intent rather than action. Usually it's an acknowledgement that a problem exists and a potential solution to that problem. You don't have to actually act on the problem or solve it just present a possible solution. For example I could address climate change with blockchain by suggesting that people don't use bitcoin. Even if I continue to use bitcoin this could be considered addressing the problem.

gustavmarwin 7y ago

Elaborate?

szggzs27 7y ago
how do you fix climate change with fucking blockchain?
- gustavmarwin 7y ago
  Read the fucking whitepaper.
srfilipek 7y ago
http://doyouneedablockchain.com/ http://doyouneedablockchain.com/
- lol768 7y ago
  Meta, but the text on that page renders awfully. Seems they're scaling the elements by 1.64297 instead of just setting a font-size?! Result is incredibly fuzzy https://lol768.com/i/AmpAbuseDormMendez https://lol768.com/i/AmpAbuseDormMendez
pjc50 7y ago
The use of proof-of-waste for cryptocurrency, which allows people to get rich by consuming extremely large amounts of electricity, is one of the worst inventions for the environment since CFCs and tetraethyl lead.
- gustavmarwin 7y ago
  It's sad to see YT community members being so ill informed. Proof-of-Stake is coming in leading blockchains such as Ethereum, Polkadot, Cosmos, etc. This is changing. It's a new technology it takes time to improve. Anyway, do your homework before commenting on things you don't understand.

beager 7y ago

I imagine this company exists solely to trap VCs and harvest their organs.

yitchelle 7y ago
How can you not get VC money when you use two of most hyped up buzz-phrases going around?
- bitL 7y ago
  But they are still missing machine learning and AR in the business plan...
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    They're saving that up for the next round of funding.
  - beager 7y ago
    I mean, I am starting a company that's using AR and machine learning to enable remote medical diagnostics for climate change, all on the blockchain, for rural America and the third world. But on the other hand, I'm not. Unless you're investing. In which case I am.
- all2 7y ago
  Now I want to try this. I'll start my brainstorming session by watching this: https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4 https://youtu.be/GyV_UG60dD4 I can make my website here: http://tiffzhang.com/startup/ http://tiffzhang.com/startup/ Now, what am I missing?

RickS 7y ago

It's for buying and selling carbon offsets. Which in the grand scheme of "crypto for X" is not bad, since it's at least a thing that's actually exchanged in an existing market. Farmers can sell their carbon credits to fund things that need to happen on their farm, to businesses that need to purchase carbon offsets because they're producing more than they should be. Could it be done without crypto? Almost certainly. But I think the article's flyby description gives the thing room to sound much sillier than it really is.

wlesieutre 7y ago
> Could it be done without crypto? Almost certainly. But I think the article's flyby description gives the thing room to sound much sillier than it really is. The particular irony here is that blockchains are a giant waste of energy compared to non-blockchain approaches, so of all the things to say “Do X with blockchain” about, “Reduce carbon emissions” is an odd choice. If it were me I’d think you’d want to put I extra effort to not have a blockchain based solution, but I have a feeling the idea cane about from “what can we do with a blockchain” rather than “what is the best solution to this problem?”
- eropple 7y ago
  So I am on record around here as kinda thinking that cryptocurrency people are worse than coal-rollers with the cavalier garbage they do to our planet, but it's worth pointing out that a "blockchain" need not do that--cryptocurrency needs to do that because it has to be "hard" to create some kind of phantom scarcity and therefore rarity and therefore perceived value for the Ponzi schemers at the top of them to sell to the next sucker in line. Blockchain multi-party verification can be fairly fast when you take out the grift. Well, that grift. The buzzword-solution-searching-for-a-problem grift, as you note, is still very much in play.
- zeroxfe 7y ago
  > The particular irony here is that blockchains are a giant waste of energy compared to non-blockchain approaches Not all blockchains are proof-of-work. Almost all modern implementations (particularly for federated blockchains like OPs) use more power-efficient consensus algorithms. (I don't have an opinion on whether blockchains are the best solution to their problem, but a decentralized marketplace for carbon offsets does sound compelling.)

dang 7y ago

Would you please not break the HN guidelines when posting here? This comment broke at least three: Don't be snarky. Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents. Blockchain startups may be tedious, but not as tedious as blockchain threads on HN. Let alone blockchain climate change threads. Your comment probably felt like a harmless dig when you posted it, but snark and indignation get the most upvotes, so this subthread ended up sitting at the top of the page, collecting mass, emitting fumes, and generally being off topic. Had we seen it we'd have marked it off topic, but we didn't see it until 2 days later, at which point moderation makes no difference.