3 ms·

You make a very compelling argument, especially #1 that there can't be an expectation of any new technology or science to come out of money spent on speculation

You make a very compelling argument, especially #1 that there can't be an expectation of any new technology or science to come out of money spent on speculation or mining. Equivalently, any progress in blockchain technology doesn't require the existence of the Bitcoin network to be implemented. I now see some holes in my Apollo analogy (also government vs individual spending). I am lucky there is always someone on HN who will make a better point :)

shawnz 6y ago
I actually think there is an expectation that increased trust/acceptance in Bitcoin will help the success of future improved cryptocurrency technologies. Bitcoin gives users a trustworthy decentralized store of value today that they could easily move to another cryptocurrency in future using some kind of decentralized exchange based on smart contracts. It provides liquidity for all future cryptocurrencies.
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  That is a different argument than the comparison with the Apollo mission, and entirely relies on believing that the end-goal itself, a crypto-currency based financial system, is a net good in itself. The Apollo argument was more compelling because it didn't require any value-judgement of the end-goal (but it was less appealing to me for the reasons I outlined). It is an argument about the process, regardless of the results (in the end, the lunar landings in themselves were a symbolic victory more than any great advancement of science - the science happened on the way). We can go into arguments on why I think the end-goal of crypto-currency believers a la Satoshi would be a net negative, but others have covered it pretty well (deflation, fraud, money laundering, having your life savings destroyed by a hack etc).
- thejynxed 6y ago
  To a point, but that trust by the public can be easily swayed and destroyed - see Biden pick Janet Yellen and her recent comments about how BTC is used for and good for nothing but criminal activity including that by state sponsors of terrorism.

shawnz 6y ago

I actually think there is an expectation that increased trust/acceptance in Bitcoin will help the success of future improved cryptocurrency technologies. Bitcoin gives users a trustworthy decentralized store of value today that they could easily move to another cryptocurrency in future using some kind of decentralized exchange based on smart contracts. It provides liquidity for all future cryptocurrencies.

tsimionescu 6y ago
That is a different argument than the comparison with the Apollo mission, and entirely relies on believing that the end-goal itself, a crypto-currency based financial system, is a net good in itself. The Apollo argument was more compelling because it didn't require any value-judgement of the end-goal (but it was less appealing to me for the reasons I outlined). It is an argument about the process, regardless of the results (in the end, the lunar landings in themselves were a symbolic victory more than any great advancement of science - the science happened on the way). We can go into arguments on why I think the end-goal of crypto-currency believers a la Satoshi would be a net negative, but others have covered it pretty well (deflation, fraud, money laundering, having your life savings destroyed by a hack etc).
thejynxed 6y ago
To a point, but that trust by the public can be easily swayed and destroyed - see Biden pick Janet Yellen and her recent comments about how BTC is used for and good for nothing but criminal activity including that by state sponsors of terrorism.