4 ms·
Cryptocurrency promotion implies to some extent that central control of money is a bad thing. So it is somewhat political. I think most HN folks are against it
by matvore 6y ago
Cryptocurrency promotion implies to some extent that central control of money is a bad thing. So it is somewhat political.
I think most HN folks are against it for political reasons to a certain extent. Even if they say they aren't, they are getting their information from and socializing in a bubble with a political bias.
There are some news topics on HN that i will never read the comments of because of how motivated and biased the reasoning is behind them. Bitcoin comments I will still read though, since it's fun to see everyone's tone and reasoning evolve as Bitcoin slowly gets more traction and rises in price over time.
- dmitriid 6y agoThere's nothing political in the simple fact that Bitcoin (and blockchains in general) is a bad technology for any of the uses that it's advertised for: https://medium.com/@kaistinchcombe/ten-years-in-nobody-has-come-up-with-a-use-case-for-blockchain-ee98c180100 https://medium.com/@kaistinchcombe/ten-years-in-nobody-has-c... (and the second part, linked directly from that article)
- matvore 6y agoI agreed with the part of the first paragraph that says that most uses of blockchain are deadends or solutions looking for problems. I'm coming from "Bitcoin blockchain + POW is a store of value," and "LN is the fast, convenient transaction mechanism" that sits on top. Dabbling in other cryptocurrencies with comparable POW's and blockchains to Bitcoin is basically speculation and gambling. I don't think they have very compelling use cases that Bitcoin+LN doesn't solve already. I assume non-BTC cryptocurrencies will survive in the long run, but who knows which ones, and eventually the LN will make swapping and conversion of currencies trivial and/or automatic.