6 ms·

The Europol investigation and presentation says Monero works as advertised, I trust that, especially since chain analysis companies aren't on the other side adv

The Europol investigation and presentation says Monero works as advertised, I trust that, especially since chain analysis companies aren't on the other side advertising their capabilities to undermine Monero

DonHopkins 7y ago
It doesn't matter if the technology or the mathematical theory behind it is trustworthy or not, the problem is that get-rich-quick money-for-free pyramid schemes attract untrustworthy people, so even if they technically work on the chalkboard in the lab, those people ruin them in the real world. Social engineering and deceptive marketing trump Razzle-Dazzle Globetrotter Calculus every day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P1bu4HUAMs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P1bu4HUAMs
- rolltiide 7y ago
  I just find it incredibly easy to understand private digital assets without being led on to the guru's other untrustworthy product What you are basically saying is that because people lack critical thinking skills, you distrust the other people that happen/claim to actually know about the topic, that seems awfully reductive.
  - DonHopkins 7y ago
    No, that's not what I'm saying at all. "Incredibly easy", huh? Incredibly: adverb. used to introduce a statement that is hard to believe; strangely. "incredibly, he was still alive" See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    - rolltiide 7y ago
      Even after your edit, I don't know what you are saying and how it relates to trusting people less for a relevant short comment mentioning Monero. Care to articulate that specific sentiment or how its doing more than painting with a large ignorant brush?
      - DonHopkins 7y ago
        In the case of buboard's post, first he posted something wrong about Bitcoin (and plugged upvotes.club), then when corrected, backtracked to "then Monero". In the case of your post, first you posted something promoting Monero, then you claimed you found it "incredibly easy to understand private digital assets", but then criticized other people who "lack critical thinking skills". What do you find so "incredibly easy to understand" about private digital assets that people who "lack critical thinking skills" don't get, and why are you more trustworthy than they are? "Incredible" literally means "not credible". Bragging about how "incredibly" clever you are and how dumb other people are doesn't make you sound trustworthy.
        rolltiide 7y ago
        > "Incredible" literally means "not credible" Like many words, incredible has multiple definitions usable in context, such as nothing to do with credibility, and typically what English users do is pick the most likely applicable context to the circumstance, such as the definition which completely undermines your entire argument and is more congruent with everything I have said. With that in mind, how would you rewrite your entire post?
        DonHopkins 7y ago
        Since you asked: With the fact in mind that you're deliberately trying to misunderstand what I'm saying, I'd repeat my question that you didn't answer: What do you find so "incredibly easy to understand" about private digital assets that people who "lack critical thinking skills" don't get, and why are you more trustworthy than they are? Isn't it a bit ironic that you want us to trust your claim that we should trust Europol about a "trustless" system? "There are trustless systems though, like bitcoin" -buboard; "there is a system [Bitcoin -- bzzt -- oops! -- Monero then] that minimizes trust" -buboard; "I trust that [the Europol investigation and presentation about Monero]" -rolltiide. So why should we trust you and buboard, then? Care to link to your resume or PhD dissertation or any code or research papers you've written on the topic, since it's so "incredibly easy" for you to understand? Or should we just trust you without any evidence to tell us who to trust about a trustless?

DonHopkins 7y ago

It doesn't matter if the technology or the mathematical theory behind it is trustworthy or not, the problem is that get-rich-quick money-for-free pyramid schemes attract untrustworthy people, so even if they technically work on the chalkboard in the lab, those people ruin them in the real world. Social engineering and deceptive marketing trump Razzle-Dazzle Globetrotter Calculus every day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P1bu4HUAMs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P1bu4HUAMs

rolltiide 7y ago
I just find it incredibly easy to understand private digital assets without being led on to the guru's other untrustworthy product What you are basically saying is that because people lack critical thinking skills, you distrust the other people that happen/claim to actually know about the topic, that seems awfully reductive.
- DonHopkins 7y ago
  No, that's not what I'm saying at all. "Incredibly easy", huh? Incredibly: adverb. used to introduce a statement that is hard to believe; strangely. "incredibly, he was still alive" See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  - rolltiide 7y ago
    Even after your edit, I don't know what you are saying and how it relates to trusting people less for a relevant short comment mentioning Monero. Care to articulate that specific sentiment or how its doing more than painting with a large ignorant brush?
    - DonHopkins 7y ago
      In the case of buboard's post, first he posted something wrong about Bitcoin (and plugged upvotes.club), then when corrected, backtracked to "then Monero". In the case of your post, first you posted something promoting Monero, then you claimed you found it "incredibly easy to understand private digital assets", but then criticized other people who "lack critical thinking skills". What do you find so "incredibly easy to understand" about private digital assets that people who "lack critical thinking skills" don't get, and why are you more trustworthy than they are? "Incredible" literally means "not credible". Bragging about how "incredibly" clever you are and how dumb other people are doesn't make you sound trustworthy.
      - rolltiide 7y ago
        > "Incredible" literally means "not credible" Like many words, incredible has multiple definitions usable in context, such as nothing to do with credibility, and typically what English users do is pick the most likely applicable context to the circumstance, such as the definition which completely undermines your entire argument and is more congruent with everything I have said. With that in mind, how would you rewrite your entire post?
        DonHopkins 7y ago
        Since you asked: With the fact in mind that you're deliberately trying to misunderstand what I'm saying, I'd repeat my question that you didn't answer: What do you find so "incredibly easy to understand" about private digital assets that people who "lack critical thinking skills" don't get, and why are you more trustworthy than they are? Isn't it a bit ironic that you want us to trust your claim that we should trust Europol about a "trustless" system? "There are trustless systems though, like bitcoin" -buboard; "there is a system [Bitcoin -- bzzt -- oops! -- Monero then] that minimizes trust" -buboard; "I trust that [the Europol investigation and presentation about Monero]" -rolltiide. So why should we trust you and buboard, then? Care to link to your resume or PhD dissertation or any code or research papers you've written on the topic, since it's so "incredibly easy" for you to understand? Or should we just trust you without any evidence to tell us who to trust about a trustless?