9 ms·

Money corrupts; bitcoin corrupts absolutely

155 points by Priem19 6y ago

wturner 6y ago
"Relieving humans from having to worry about or deal with money would be an actual Copernican revolution. How that would work is beyond me, but that's precisely why it would be revolutionary." This
- stormqloud 6y ago
  It's called communism and everytime it's tried it ends in genocide and hundreds of millions murdered.
  - tehlike 6y ago
    No, it's called absolute automation, and it's hard but possible within realm of capitalism.
    - WanderPanda 6y ago
      You assume that homo sapiens would be satisfied at an arbitrary stage of the Maslow pyramid
      - tekromancr 6y ago
        Not being forced to choose "work or death" every day of their lives would free people to actualize the fuck outta themselves
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - wturner 6y ago
    It exist in granular form in government safety nets, universal healthcare and a handful of other policies in some parts of the world. it also exists in various disjointed pockets of the human experience outside of any easily identified ideological framework. Beyond those tools, it's not called anything because it doesn't exist in totality.
  - Priem19 6y ago
    No it's not. Your argument is a straw man fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man.
machinelabo 6y ago
We need to fix the loop holes. Money is also an amazing instrument that keeps us motivated. Without the lure of money and its power, we wouldn’t do anything. Startups? Why bother when there is no money involved. I really think if there was one thing we got right - that’s money as a civilization. What we need to do is fix the loop holes. That includes taxes, corporation as persons, the whole 2011 movement of Occupy Wall Street.
- samhh 6y ago
  No statement in this arena taken to an extreme stands to reason, including "without the lure of money and its power, we wouldn't do anything". I contribute to open source, as many others here do. Lots and lots of people contribute to society and the common good in other ways without the expectation of capitalistic reward.
- InvisibleUp 6y ago
  > Why bother when there is no money involved Because you want to make something useful and helpful for the world? Personal satisfaction? Passion? Necessity? Granted, those are no arguments to work for free in a world where operating a business and keeping yourself fed cost money, but if somehow those weren't concerns, I can assure you people would still have plenty of motivation to innovate still.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- diob 6y ago
  I think basic income solves it nicely. You still get the allure of money (folks want to make more), but they can also now focus on innovation and creative endeavors. It's a win win in my opinion.
  - WanderPanda 6y ago
    I‘m not so sure if nicely is the right term. Mass starvation as an outcome is not off the table I would say
timdaub 6y ago
Ok, this seems to be a well-thought out argument against Bitcoin. I'm happy to buy into it. Yes, maybe BTC corrupts people. But then without proper digital money protocols, how are we supposed to build the next wave of web applications? Ethereum can be used to do useful things. E.g. we're rating data sets by quality through staking [1]. NFTs seem to make sense for artists (see what Mike Shinoda from Linkin Park said) [2]. Those products are simply not possible without projects like Ethereum. 1: https://rugpullindex.com https://rugpullindex.com 2: https://mobile.twitter.com/mikeshinoda/status/1358090976414236674 https://mobile.twitter.com/mikeshinoda/status/13580909764142...
- sdenton4 6y ago
  We have lots of non-crypto digital money protocols. Millions of people use them every day. Crypto currencies and block chains are mostly reinventing existing wheels, with a weak promise of decentralization on top, which seems to break down whenever a big-enough event happens.
  - timdaub 6y ago
    I tried using traditional banking to build modern applications. In Germany, it's a nightmare. Additionally the space is heavily regulated. I worked for a company that did several million EUR a year legit revenue in the music industry. Stripe, Adyen and others slammed the door in front of us when we wanted to build automated royalty payments.
david927 6y ago
I think the author needs to integrate into these arguments the Nixon Shock of 1971 and what’s happening with inflation in the US since 2008. There’s a reason the Dow just hit a record high and it’s not because the fundamentals of those firms are strong. I’m not a Bitcoin holder but the correct finger pointing here is at monetary policy.
- ur-whale 6y ago
  > the correct finger pointing here is at monetary policy. At this point, even calling it "policy" is utter delusion: it would somehow implies the people who hold the wheel have a minimal clue about what the impact of their decisions ("Policies") will have for the mid to long term future of the economy. They absolutely don't. They are driving without a map, only worrying about the next turn in the road. We are raised to believe our leaders are at least vaguely competent. At best: they aren't. At worst: their actual competence is centered around how much they can do for themselves.
  - david927 6y ago
    It’s really akin to doctors centuries ago who would bleed out patients. Their cure is worse than the disease.
- ffggvv 6y ago
  i agree if you mean the unlimited liquidity and fiscal has pumped up asset speculation to historic proportions i disagree if you mean people are somehow buying it as a hedge to the dollar
  - david927 6y ago
    Those are the same thing
wolfretcrap 6y ago
Problem with bitcoin is there's no way to redistribute wealth. How about giving inactive bitcoins to new people? Is it possible? Can you really access the bitcoins that were created at the beginning without updating your bitcoins to latest standards. How do you even update your bitcoin?
- drcode 6y ago
  Yes theft becomes more difficult, but I'm sure governments will still figure out ways to steal.
- CryptoBanker 6y ago
  Could you access your money in the bank if you refused to update their app? Or if you refused to use technology more modern than a carrier pigeon? Or what if you refused to update your drivers license?
  - sdenton4 6y ago
    And more importantly, how could any modern person get through life without a laser disc player? Or Google glass? Or Foursquare check-ins? Which is to say: Your examples have a strong stink of survival bias. There are endless examples of technologies which failed, even where proponents were being heavily that they would be world changing.
  - lottin 6y ago
    Yes. Why?
- leesalminen 6y ago
  > there's no way to redistribute wealth. There are those who would call that a feature, not a bug.
  - 8fGTBjZxBcHq 6y ago
    For the people who look around at the current world and think "ah yes, the problem is too much wealth redistribution?"
drcode 6y ago
I agree with OP that all the honking horns from automobiles can be a drag, but the manure left from the horses also had some downsides.
seibelj 6y ago
> and lastly, it having a multitude of popular proponents with extreme viewpoints such as “animals have no rights”, or the right to bear arms which strikes me as vile, unethical, and borderline insane The right to bear arms is an extreme right wing viewpoint? This is quite the rant but the author is all over the map
- 8fGTBjZxBcHq 6y ago
  Wealthy democracies have a fairly wide range of acceptable views and policy decisions about firearms but in almost all of them except the US "civilians should have nearly unrestricted access to personal weapons" is an extreme view yes.
- overscore 6y ago
  Based on their bio, the author appears to be based in Belgium. Although I have my own thoughts on the matter, outside the US, the right to bear arms is indeed an extreme right-wing viewpoint.
  - beaconstudios 6y ago
    I'm in the UK - I used to belong to a gun club and could have easily gone forward to own a rifle if I wanted to, including a semi-automatic (only in .22). I believe most countries in Europe have similar policies. The main difference between here and the US is the categories of weapon you're allowed to use; here it's primarily sporting or hunting weapons where in the US, using guns for defence (and using serious calibres for sporting/hunting) is within the Overton window. Note that you can get serious calibre rifles in the UK but only in bolt or lever action. Case in point: https://www.gunstar.co.uk/desert-tech-hti-bolt-action-50-rifles/rifles/1302189 https://www.gunstar.co.uk/desert-tech-hti-bolt-action-50-rif...
matheusmoreira 6y ago
> Have I been salty? Definitely. There's no point in denying that. I could've purchased a home had I been in a coma until now. That about sums it all up. I too watched the rise of bitcoin and was too lazy to mine some on my own computer. I have screenshots of people buying pizza for like 20 BTC. All we had to do was buy some. We can still do it. > If I'd have deserved it is something else. Does it matter if you "deserved" it? So many literal sociopaths are running the world and getting rich by exploiting everyone else. Did they deserve it? Does a lottery winner deserve their gains? Better to throw out all these notions and just start playing the game. Anything else means being exploited as well.
- randomsearch 6y ago
  Tyranny that way leads.
- jancsika 6y ago
  > All we had to do was buy some. We can still do it. So you look at the four orders of magnitude that separate the famous "dude overpaying for pizza with Bitcoins" from the current price. And you apparently feel so strongly you leave out the argument for why that is relevant to encouraging others on HN to make a current investment in Bitcoin. Are you seriously implying that a Bitcoin will be worth $500,000,000 over the next decade? I don't think you are, so what's the relevance of history of Bitcoin's price? Why does that generate FOMO in you? Is there a more persuasive explanation than simple gold fever? Are you really not able to think of practical circumstances which would cause the price of Bitcoin to go down?
  - matheusmoreira 6y ago
    > Are you seriously implying that a Bitcoin will be worth $500,000,000 over the next decade? Why wouldn't it? Is there anything that would put a cap on its price? The value will keep increasing for as long as people keep believing it's valuable. It may or may not reach absurd prices like 100 thousand dollars or more. I think there's a good chance that it will. The set of people who value the coin keeps growing. It's grown to the point even companies are buying bitcoin now. > Are you really not able to think of practical circumstances which would cause the price of Bitcoin to go down? Sure I can. People could attempt to sell large quantities, crashing the market. Bitcoin itself could be attacked in any number of ways. Electricity costs could be adjusted to reduce mining efficiency. Nation states could seize control of the network via 51% attacks. I'm not really sure whether these events will come to pass though.
peter422 6y ago
I have thought about this with Bitcoin: if the protocol and potential capabilities are so interesting, why is 99% of the conversation related to Bitcoin about the current price. It does make me believe that greed is the predominant driver of most Bitcoin holders, which to me makes the whole concept a lot less principled than people pretend it is.
- WanderPanda 6y ago
  Greed until Gold market-cap, idealism afterwards
- timdaub 6y ago
  Actually, it's not. I tried to make a meaningful comment about building apps in this thread and it got downvoted... [1] 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26448222 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26448222
- rawtxapp 6y ago
  > why is 99% of the conversation related to Bitcoin about the current price. Because of the circles you're in and the loud minority that's constantly talking about the price. There's a whole community of people just building stuff without wasting their time constantly arguing for price on social networks.
  - verdverm 6y ago
    Many still talk about how much money they will make despite not shilling on social media. There is still a focus on price inflation. Look at a16z investments and see how the bar for larger amounts of funding is different for crypto companies. They know they have earlier liquidity events with hype cycles and lack of regulation.
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  Making money and wealth is more interesting to more people than some nerdy engineering crap. Is this a surprise?
- bazooka_penguin 6y ago
gnrlst 6y ago
The community around Bitcoin is one of the most toxic. It's the main reason I haven't bought, and won't buy, any BTC (regardless of the fact I think the tech is completely subpar). Having said that, there's plenty of really great communities around crypto that shouldn't be pooled together along with Bitcoin. Nano, for example, is probably the most hated altcoin by Bitcoin maximalists (probably because they feel threatened?) and coincidently is one of the most tight-knit and constructive communities I found (don't take my word for it, check out the nanocurrency subreddit). There's tons of developers sharing their projects, users tipping all over the place like the good 'ol BTC days, people brainstorming ways of dropping Nano in places where the local currency is in hyperinflation via WeNano. It's just a really cool bunch of peeps. I frankly don't care if the price of Nano plummets to 1 cent. And I actually hope it doesn't skyrocket and get the attention BTC got, because, to quote the article, "I came for the money", but I stayed for the community. The tech being superior to Bitcoin is just a bonus.
- rawtxapp 6y ago
  > The community around Bitcoin is one of the most toxic. If you go on places like Twitter and reddit somewhat, I agree with you. But if you look on Github, you'll see some of the smartest engineers of our generation working real hard and I wouldn't discount their work based on some loud mouths on social networks.
  - wmf 6y ago
    Those engineers are so smart they refuse to scale Bitcoin.
    - rawtxapp 6y ago
      No, they built some of the most well thought scaling solutions in forms of layer 2 (payment channels, lightning network, zk-rollups) and many other solutions like sharding, etc. You're the one who refuses to see those solutions.
      - mweberxyz 6y ago
DaniloDias 6y ago
This is a weird, angry screed. Op should read The Ascent of Money and maybe worry less about the moral failings of other humans. Peace and trust cannot exist without currency. Money lubricates peaceful resolution of conflict. If you need food and I have it, trade or violence are your only options if currency doesn’t exist. Screaming at Bitcoin is like screaming at evolution. As long as humans evolve, money will keep pace.
- bordercases 6y ago
  What makes Bitcoin marginally better money when its valuations are primarily driven by its ability to be a hedge against a system which intends to and is capable of capturing and controlling it?
- ur-whale 6y ago
  https://www.google.com/search?q=old+man+yells+at+bitcoin https://www.google.com/search?q=old+man+yells+at+bitcoin
- zepto 6y ago
  Or Bitcoin could just be an energy wasting failure that distracts people from building important things. Will money evolve? Certainly. Does Bitcoin have a future beyond a bubble? We don’t know.
- lottin 6y ago
  But bitcoin isn't an advanced form of money.
- slibhb 6y ago
  > If you need food and I have it, trade or violence are your only options if currency doesn’t exist. Another option is debt. You give me the food and I owe you something equivalent later.
- Swenrekcah 6y ago
  >Peace and trust cannot exist without currency. This is completely false. Currency is orthogonal to trust. >Money lubricates peaceful resolution of conflict. Just as easily as it is the driver behind conflict. >If you need food and I have it, trade or violence are your only options if currency doesn’t exist. Trade, gift or violence are your only options regardless of the existence of currency. What currency does is help to expand the number of people that can do business beyond the number of people one can have a personal relationship with. That is immensely powerful, but it also enables a whole world of fraud and bad things that we need a functioning trusted regulator to deal with.
zozin 6y ago
Greed isn't good or bad, it just is. It's a known variable. Greed makes something that's very complicated (human behavior) simpler to understand.
bitcoinGod88 6y ago
This thread sounds like a whole bunch of poor nerds who are mad they didn't buy bitcoin. Just admit you don't have the courage or foresight to invest, and stop upvoting this trash... oh btw you can still buy in while its cheap ;)
throwaway_1237 6y ago
Welcome to the no-coiner comment section! Please share why you prefer to stay poor!
- rawtxapp 6y ago
  I think this is the kind of comment that pushes those "no-coiners" even further, please try to give them a good reason why they should change their mind rather than empty statements like these.
  - xiphias2 6y ago
    There's so much hate towards Bitcoiners, even with all the ,,Google is bad'' stuff happening around, an Alphabet investor is not getting that amount of hate and shaming. All the information is out there, and I am always downvoted here on HN anyways when I try to defent Bitcoin. In short: Have fun staying poor :)
fullshark 6y ago
The NFT fad has definitely turned me off as it seems totally bonkers, also the fact that the problem BTC is supposedly solving constantly changes based on whatever gets people to put money into it. Add to this exchanges / tether printing manipulating the price and i'm pretty bearish on BTC and crypto right now, seems like the only problem they are trying to solve is "how can I become ludicrously rich by writing some code from scratch." But what if I'm wrong?....
- drcode 6y ago
  > constantly changes Suggested correction: "is constantly being expanded and added to"
  - ufo 6y ago
    The bitcoin community often removes things from the list. I remember the days when bitcoin was supposed to be a revolutionary platform for microtransactions...
    - bingbong70 6y ago
      The person behind strike built an application that allows him to stream money (a payment every second) to his programmer in Europe with 0 fees using the LN... If you don't keep up with the tech, you shouldnt make these proclamations.
- jerry1979 6y ago
  >the fact that the problem BTC is supposedly solving constantly changes I grew my own Bitcoin thesis (legally in my basement for fun and profit). When people say that people changed the Bitcoin narrative, I can always unwrap those layers of opinions and evaluate them against my home-grown thesis.
- dgellow 6y ago
  I'm not sure I understand the hate for NFTs. Don't get me wrong, the concept of NFT as currently used is completely absurd and definitely overhyped. But what is bad about it? People who spend their money on NFTs mostly do it because they got rich in the past few years gambling on BTC or ETH, and now use that money to basically tip the artists they like. Or they plan to resell the token at some point, which is pure speculation, but nobody other than themselves risk to get burn. Minting and selling NFTs is almost zero work and effort for artists, all the risks are on the buyers side, and only if they buy them as speculative assets. It still make no sense to me, but if rich people want to gamble their money and by doing so support some artists, that doesn't sound too bad IMHO. I would be more cautious if retail investors would start to gamble in this market, but that's not what I've seen so far. (I'm also bearish on BTC, mainly because of Tether and the horrible incentives of PoW)
oliv__ 6y ago
Money doesn't corrupt, it simply reveals character
- randomsearch 6y ago
  I like this and heard it said before... power doesn’t corrupt, it reveals. Works for founders.
nemo44x 6y ago
The price of BTC must be going up since we are seeing these sour grapes stories on the front page again. An NFT sold for 69 million the other day. Crypto is here to stay. It’s time to rethink the critical analysis of crypto. What percentage of stimulus checks are going to be spent on BTC?
- fallingknife 6y ago
  BTC 60K! With an Elon tweet! Great way to start the day! Haters gonna hate.
- sixQuarks 6y ago
  I'm a bit fascinated by the negativity of bitcoin on HN. It goes all the way back to when it was trading for below $1. I almost purchased some but decided not to DUE to HN comments, I assumed they knew what they were talking about, I was wrong.
wbobeirne 6y ago
This article has some substance to it that is worth discussion, but I feel it's value is greatly diminished by the sheer amount of ad hominem in it. Don't buy Bitcoin because Michael Saylor and Elon Musk also own some? That's terrible advice. The USD is also owned by terrible people, and is used to fund terrible things. I agree with the author that many people rationalize or fall into some of the standard Bitcoin beliefs to justify their desire to get rich, but to project their own case of that on all Bitcoin enthusiasts is completely unfair. Some of the smartest engineers I know work on Bitcoin, and don't see a paycheck for it. The availability of grants for Bitcoin open source work is pretty new, and many of these people have been working on BTC long before there was a strong financial incentive. The real money-motivated play for them would have been to fall into a FAANG and collect a guaranteed high salary.
- Priem19 6y ago
  >“This article has some substance to it that is worth discussion” Thank you, I appreciate that. >“sheer amount of ad hominem in it.” I wouldn't say sheer, but admittedly yes, I couldn't help myself since that's part of the reason I opted out. I just don't like to invest in things associated with shady people. And if calling Saylor shady is an ad hominem, then I'll live with that. Rebuke accepted. >“The USD is also owned by terrible people, and is used to fund terrible things.” This is whataboutism which I mention in the article as well. >“but to project their own case of that on all Bitcoin enthusiasts is completely unfair.” I'm not doing that, or at least it wasn't my intention. That's why I opened with “Realizing the extent”. By using “extent” I mean a lot, not everyone. That why I also added: “So, governments are not without faults, but likewise not the evil bogeymen as many people make them out to be, and neither are bitcoin enthusiasts.” I am definitely aware that not everyone is toxic. Although I could've given it some more weight throughout the article. But I stand by my observation that cryptocurrencies really are the most toxic communities I've ever encountered, on par with religious fanatics. Anyway, I'll look where I can add some extra nuance. >“Some of the smartest engineers I know work on Bitcoin” Anyone can say about anyone that they're the smartest people they know. It carries zero validity. I'll just copy-paste my reaction to an identical comment, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26448833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26448833: «“you'll see some of the smartest engineers of our generation working real hard” “I've been reading those cheap empty words way too much lately. Unless they are the likes of John von Neumann I'll just assume they're people of average intelligence working on things that look incredibly intimidating to outsiders.” Also, an excerpt from Marcus Aurelius - Meditations: “How corrupt and two-faced is one who claims, 'I intend to be fair and honest in my dealings with you.' What are you up to, my friend? There is really no need for this preamble. The matter will soon become plain. It should be written on your face,* it should ring out immediately in your voice, and shine out at once in your eyes, as the loved one at once knows everything about his lovers from the manner of their glance. In short, a good and honest person should resemble one who smells like a goat in this respect, that anyone who comes near him is immediately aware of it whether he wishes it or not. But the mere pretence of simplicity is like an open blade. There is nothing more odious than the friendship of the wolf for the lamb; avoid this above all. A good, straightforward, and kindly person reveals these qualities in his eyes, and they will not escape you.”» That being said, I appreciate your civility. Have a great one.
dastx 6y ago
Bitcoin isn't claiming that it takes corruption out of the human psyche. Corrupt people stay corrupt. All bitcoin does is take unfounded trust away from individual organisations and governments, and instead puts that trust in maths and the collective. It never claimed that it will combat corruption, and likely never will. NFTs are definitely switching me off from cryptocurrencies as I find the use of it ridiculous. Sure there are _some_ genuine use cases, but so far it's just been terrible, and does not fill me with confidence. Time will tell if NFTs are gonna become anything that's not silliness among the rich.
- Klinky 6y ago
  > take unfounded trust away from individual organisations and governments, and instead puts that trust in maths and the collective If by "collective" you mean a tiny portion of the community that are core developers, megaminers, megapools, exchanges and whales, uhh, then sure, but that doesn't seem much different than fiat. There is still an elite minority in control.
  - dastx 6y ago
    Sure, but not everyone can foresee everything. Email was meant to be a decentralised, self-hosted service, yet here we are, gmail, outlook have the majority of users. In addition to that, most of those megaminers, and megapools, can't do much without working with a large chunk of other miners. Without it, the worse they can do is not fulfill individual transactions (which other miners can continue to accept). Just because a minority is hoarding bitcoin, does not make bitcoin's core issue invalid, that is, don't trust financial institutions or governments. Bitcoin never claimed to solve the issues that are at the core of monetary systems (greed, corruption etc). It solves the issue of trust. I don't have to trust a financial institutions or government to tell me how much money I own. Nor is there a government or bank that can freeze my account because I've been naughty (or, in certain cases, because the government deems you naughty because of $ideology). That's what bitcoin solves. Not the issues that are core to monetary systems. Issues that mostly come from human psyche.
    - 6y ago
Aunche 6y ago
I agree with most of this article except the part about fractional reserve banking. All fractional reserve banking means is that banks are allowed to loan out their customer's money. People have known this to be more economically efficient since the Middle Ages. If you're not using your money, it's better in the hands of someone actively using it to conduct a commercial transaction. Without a central bank to print out money, it's unlikely for there ever to be a fractional reserve banking system in Bitcoin. Any large scale bitcoin bank exit event would completely crash the bitcoin economy.
- Priem19 6y ago
  I added a paragraph clarifying my stance on fractional reserve banking. That section could've indeed been easily misinterpreted. Thank you.
CyberRabbi 6y ago
This is a rant about a personal experience. I couldn’t help but imagine tears running down his face while he wrote this. Bitcoin has done a lot of good in the world, the existence of some trolls on the internet doesn’t negate that.
randomsearch 6y ago
Ok I’ve been reading about BTC and I’m finally falling into the “it’s a terrible idea” camp. Here are the problems I’m concerned about. If Bitcoin supporters want to defend it, please could you explain why: 1. A scaling proof of work is not environmentally disastrous. The “renewable energy” argument doesn’t make sense, I think, and existing financial systems seem to be more energy efficient, but open to other counter arguments. 2. A decentralised ledger which concentrates initial supply amongst a tiny fraction of the world’s population would be a good idea and somehow preferable to the current situation. Finally, please explain whether Bitcoin is a currency (like the dollar) or a store of value (like gold). If it’s a currency, please explain how it can be used as such when transactions are slow and expensive. If it’s a store of value, please explain why the fact that gold is physically useful and in strictly finite supply (on earth) compared to crypto currencies (in general), does not matter.
vesinisa 6y ago
It's really sad that his story got flagged. I think it's a reasonable and well-argued opinion piece, and I can only assume it got flagged because some users vigorously disagree with the opinion. @mods any input?
- stunt 6y ago
  +1 for what you said. I also think it's a reasonable opinion piece worth to be discussed. But, I think it may got flagged simply because it's (or part of it) kind of off-topic for HN. What is more bizarre is that some comments here got down voted without answers even though they are relevant to the post. It's becoming a bit harder to talk about Bitcoin while we need to discuss it more than before. And these fanatic energies from Bitcoin lovers and haters don't help.
knorker 6y ago
I just wish bitcoin holders would realize that they're the baddies.

155 points by Priem19 6y ago

"Relieving humans from having to worry about or deal with money would be an actual Copernican revolution. How that would work is beyond me, but that's precisely why it would be revolutionary." This

stormqloud 6y ago
It's called communism and everytime it's tried it ends in genocide and hundreds of millions murdered.
- tehlike 6y ago
  No, it's called absolute automation, and it's hard but possible within realm of capitalism.
  - WanderPanda 6y ago
    You assume that homo sapiens would be satisfied at an arbitrary stage of the Maslow pyramid
    - tekromancr 6y ago
      Not being forced to choose "work or death" every day of their lives would free people to actualize the fuck outta themselves
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- wturner 6y ago
  It exist in granular form in government safety nets, universal healthcare and a handful of other policies in some parts of the world. it also exists in various disjointed pockets of the human experience outside of any easily identified ideological framework. Beyond those tools, it's not called anything because it doesn't exist in totality.
- Priem19 6y ago
  No it's not. Your argument is a straw man fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man.

machinelabo 6y ago

We need to fix the loop holes. Money is also an amazing instrument that keeps us motivated. Without the lure of money and its power, we wouldn’t do anything. Startups? Why bother when there is no money involved. I really think if there was one thing we got right - that’s money as a civilization. What we need to do is fix the loop holes. That includes taxes, corporation as persons, the whole 2011 movement of Occupy Wall Street.

samhh 6y ago
No statement in this arena taken to an extreme stands to reason, including "without the lure of money and its power, we wouldn't do anything". I contribute to open source, as many others here do. Lots and lots of people contribute to society and the common good in other ways without the expectation of capitalistic reward.
InvisibleUp 6y ago
> Why bother when there is no money involved Because you want to make something useful and helpful for the world? Personal satisfaction? Passion? Necessity? Granted, those are no arguments to work for free in a world where operating a business and keeping yourself fed cost money, but if somehow those weren't concerns, I can assure you people would still have plenty of motivation to innovate still.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
diob 6y ago
I think basic income solves it nicely. You still get the allure of money (folks want to make more), but they can also now focus on innovation and creative endeavors. It's a win win in my opinion.
- WanderPanda 6y ago
  I‘m not so sure if nicely is the right term. Mass starvation as an outcome is not off the table I would say

timdaub 6y ago

Ok, this seems to be a well-thought out argument against Bitcoin. I'm happy to buy into it. Yes, maybe BTC corrupts people. But then without proper digital money protocols, how are we supposed to build the next wave of web applications? Ethereum can be used to do useful things. E.g. we're rating data sets by quality through staking [1]. NFTs seem to make sense for artists (see what Mike Shinoda from Linkin Park said) [2]. Those products are simply not possible without projects like Ethereum. 1: https://rugpullindex.com https://rugpullindex.com 2: https://mobile.twitter.com/mikeshinoda/status/1358090976414236674 https://mobile.twitter.com/mikeshinoda/status/13580909764142...

sdenton4 6y ago
We have lots of non-crypto digital money protocols. Millions of people use them every day. Crypto currencies and block chains are mostly reinventing existing wheels, with a weak promise of decentralization on top, which seems to break down whenever a big-enough event happens.
- timdaub 6y ago
  I tried using traditional banking to build modern applications. In Germany, it's a nightmare. Additionally the space is heavily regulated. I worked for a company that did several million EUR a year legit revenue in the music industry. Stripe, Adyen and others slammed the door in front of us when we wanted to build automated royalty payments.

david927 6y ago

I think the author needs to integrate into these arguments the Nixon Shock of 1971 and what’s happening with inflation in the US since 2008. There’s a reason the Dow just hit a record high and it’s not because the fundamentals of those firms are strong. I’m not a Bitcoin holder but the correct finger pointing here is at monetary policy.

ur-whale 6y ago
> the correct finger pointing here is at monetary policy. At this point, even calling it "policy" is utter delusion: it would somehow implies the people who hold the wheel have a minimal clue about what the impact of their decisions ("Policies") will have for the mid to long term future of the economy. They absolutely don't. They are driving without a map, only worrying about the next turn in the road. We are raised to believe our leaders are at least vaguely competent. At best: they aren't. At worst: their actual competence is centered around how much they can do for themselves.
- david927 6y ago
  It’s really akin to doctors centuries ago who would bleed out patients. Their cure is worse than the disease.
ffggvv 6y ago
i agree if you mean the unlimited liquidity and fiscal has pumped up asset speculation to historic proportions i disagree if you mean people are somehow buying it as a hedge to the dollar
- david927 6y ago
  Those are the same thing

wolfretcrap 6y ago

Problem with bitcoin is there's no way to redistribute wealth. How about giving inactive bitcoins to new people? Is it possible? Can you really access the bitcoins that were created at the beginning without updating your bitcoins to latest standards. How do you even update your bitcoin?

drcode 6y ago
Yes theft becomes more difficult, but I'm sure governments will still figure out ways to steal.
CryptoBanker 6y ago
Could you access your money in the bank if you refused to update their app? Or if you refused to use technology more modern than a carrier pigeon? Or what if you refused to update your drivers license?
- sdenton4 6y ago
  And more importantly, how could any modern person get through life without a laser disc player? Or Google glass? Or Foursquare check-ins? Which is to say: Your examples have a strong stink of survival bias. There are endless examples of technologies which failed, even where proponents were being heavily that they would be world changing.
- lottin 6y ago
  Yes. Why?
leesalminen 6y ago
> there's no way to redistribute wealth. There are those who would call that a feature, not a bug.
- 8fGTBjZxBcHq 6y ago
  For the people who look around at the current world and think "ah yes, the problem is too much wealth redistribution?"

drcode 6y ago

I agree with OP that all the honking horns from automobiles can be a drag, but the manure left from the horses also had some downsides.

seibelj 6y ago

> and lastly, it having a multitude of popular proponents with extreme viewpoints such as “animals have no rights”, or the right to bear arms which strikes me as vile, unethical, and borderline insane The right to bear arms is an extreme right wing viewpoint? This is quite the rant but the author is all over the map

8fGTBjZxBcHq 6y ago
Wealthy democracies have a fairly wide range of acceptable views and policy decisions about firearms but in almost all of them except the US "civilians should have nearly unrestricted access to personal weapons" is an extreme view yes.
overscore 6y ago
Based on their bio, the author appears to be based in Belgium. Although I have my own thoughts on the matter, outside the US, the right to bear arms is indeed an extreme right-wing viewpoint.
- beaconstudios 6y ago
  I'm in the UK - I used to belong to a gun club and could have easily gone forward to own a rifle if I wanted to, including a semi-automatic (only in .22). I believe most countries in Europe have similar policies. The main difference between here and the US is the categories of weapon you're allowed to use; here it's primarily sporting or hunting weapons where in the US, using guns for defence (and using serious calibres for sporting/hunting) is within the Overton window. Note that you can get serious calibre rifles in the UK but only in bolt or lever action. Case in point: https://www.gunstar.co.uk/desert-tech-hti-bolt-action-50-rifles/rifles/1302189 https://www.gunstar.co.uk/desert-tech-hti-bolt-action-50-rif...

matheusmoreira 6y ago

> Have I been salty? Definitely. There's no point in denying that. I could've purchased a home had I been in a coma until now. That about sums it all up. I too watched the rise of bitcoin and was too lazy to mine some on my own computer. I have screenshots of people buying pizza for like 20 BTC. All we had to do was buy some. We can still do it. > If I'd have deserved it is something else. Does it matter if you "deserved" it? So many literal sociopaths are running the world and getting rich by exploiting everyone else. Did they deserve it? Does a lottery winner deserve their gains? Better to throw out all these notions and just start playing the game. Anything else means being exploited as well.

randomsearch 6y ago
Tyranny that way leads.
jancsika 6y ago
> All we had to do was buy some. We can still do it. So you look at the four orders of magnitude that separate the famous "dude overpaying for pizza with Bitcoins" from the current price. And you apparently feel so strongly you leave out the argument for why that is relevant to encouraging others on HN to make a current investment in Bitcoin. Are you seriously implying that a Bitcoin will be worth $500,000,000 over the next decade? I don't think you are, so what's the relevance of history of Bitcoin's price? Why does that generate FOMO in you? Is there a more persuasive explanation than simple gold fever? Are you really not able to think of practical circumstances which would cause the price of Bitcoin to go down?
- matheusmoreira 6y ago
  > Are you seriously implying that a Bitcoin will be worth $500,000,000 over the next decade? Why wouldn't it? Is there anything that would put a cap on its price? The value will keep increasing for as long as people keep believing it's valuable. It may or may not reach absurd prices like 100 thousand dollars or more. I think there's a good chance that it will. The set of people who value the coin keeps growing. It's grown to the point even companies are buying bitcoin now. > Are you really not able to think of practical circumstances which would cause the price of Bitcoin to go down? Sure I can. People could attempt to sell large quantities, crashing the market. Bitcoin itself could be attacked in any number of ways. Electricity costs could be adjusted to reduce mining efficiency. Nation states could seize control of the network via 51% attacks. I'm not really sure whether these events will come to pass though.

peter422 6y ago

I have thought about this with Bitcoin: if the protocol and potential capabilities are so interesting, why is 99% of the conversation related to Bitcoin about the current price. It does make me believe that greed is the predominant driver of most Bitcoin holders, which to me makes the whole concept a lot less principled than people pretend it is.

WanderPanda 6y ago
Greed until Gold market-cap, idealism afterwards
timdaub 6y ago
Actually, it's not. I tried to make a meaningful comment about building apps in this thread and it got downvoted... [1] 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26448222 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26448222
rawtxapp 6y ago
> why is 99% of the conversation related to Bitcoin about the current price. Because of the circles you're in and the loud minority that's constantly talking about the price. There's a whole community of people just building stuff without wasting their time constantly arguing for price on social networks.
- verdverm 6y ago
  Many still talk about how much money they will make despite not shilling on social media. There is still a focus on price inflation. Look at a16z investments and see how the bar for larger amounts of funding is different for crypto companies. They know they have earlier liquidity events with hype cycles and lack of regulation.
hombre_fatal 6y ago
Making money and wealth is more interesting to more people than some nerdy engineering crap. Is this a surprise?
bazooka_penguin 6y ago

gnrlst 6y ago

The community around Bitcoin is one of the most toxic. It's the main reason I haven't bought, and won't buy, any BTC (regardless of the fact I think the tech is completely subpar). Having said that, there's plenty of really great communities around crypto that shouldn't be pooled together along with Bitcoin. Nano, for example, is probably the most hated altcoin by Bitcoin maximalists (probably because they feel threatened?) and coincidently is one of the most tight-knit and constructive communities I found (don't take my word for it, check out the nanocurrency subreddit). There's tons of developers sharing their projects, users tipping all over the place like the good 'ol BTC days, people brainstorming ways of dropping Nano in places where the local currency is in hyperinflation via WeNano. It's just a really cool bunch of peeps. I frankly don't care if the price of Nano plummets to 1 cent. And I actually hope it doesn't skyrocket and get the attention BTC got, because, to quote the article, "I came for the money", but I stayed for the community. The tech being superior to Bitcoin is just a bonus.

rawtxapp 6y ago
> The community around Bitcoin is one of the most toxic. If you go on places like Twitter and reddit somewhat, I agree with you. But if you look on Github, you'll see some of the smartest engineers of our generation working real hard and I wouldn't discount their work based on some loud mouths on social networks.
- wmf 6y ago
  Those engineers are so smart they refuse to scale Bitcoin.
  - rawtxapp 6y ago
    No, they built some of the most well thought scaling solutions in forms of layer 2 (payment channels, lightning network, zk-rollups) and many other solutions like sharding, etc. You're the one who refuses to see those solutions.
    - mweberxyz 6y ago

DaniloDias 6y ago

This is a weird, angry screed. Op should read The Ascent of Money and maybe worry less about the moral failings of other humans. Peace and trust cannot exist without currency. Money lubricates peaceful resolution of conflict. If you need food and I have it, trade or violence are your only options if currency doesn’t exist. Screaming at Bitcoin is like screaming at evolution. As long as humans evolve, money will keep pace.

bordercases 6y ago
What makes Bitcoin marginally better money when its valuations are primarily driven by its ability to be a hedge against a system which intends to and is capable of capturing and controlling it?
ur-whale 6y ago
https://www.google.com/search?q=old+man+yells+at+bitcoin https://www.google.com/search?q=old+man+yells+at+bitcoin
zepto 6y ago
Or Bitcoin could just be an energy wasting failure that distracts people from building important things. Will money evolve? Certainly. Does Bitcoin have a future beyond a bubble? We don’t know.
lottin 6y ago
But bitcoin isn't an advanced form of money.
slibhb 6y ago
> If you need food and I have it, trade or violence are your only options if currency doesn’t exist. Another option is debt. You give me the food and I owe you something equivalent later.
Swenrekcah 6y ago
>Peace and trust cannot exist without currency. This is completely false. Currency is orthogonal to trust. >Money lubricates peaceful resolution of conflict. Just as easily as it is the driver behind conflict. >If you need food and I have it, trade or violence are your only options if currency doesn’t exist. Trade, gift or violence are your only options regardless of the existence of currency. What currency does is help to expand the number of people that can do business beyond the number of people one can have a personal relationship with. That is immensely powerful, but it also enables a whole world of fraud and bad things that we need a functioning trusted regulator to deal with.

zozin 6y ago

Greed isn't good or bad, it just is. It's a known variable. Greed makes something that's very complicated (human behavior) simpler to understand.

bitcoinGod88 6y ago

This thread sounds like a whole bunch of poor nerds who are mad they didn't buy bitcoin. Just admit you don't have the courage or foresight to invest, and stop upvoting this trash... oh btw you can still buy in while its cheap ;)

throwaway_1237 6y ago

Welcome to the no-coiner comment section! Please share why you prefer to stay poor!

rawtxapp 6y ago
I think this is the kind of comment that pushes those "no-coiners" even further, please try to give them a good reason why they should change their mind rather than empty statements like these.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  There's so much hate towards Bitcoiners, even with all the ,,Google is bad'' stuff happening around, an Alphabet investor is not getting that amount of hate and shaming. All the information is out there, and I am always downvoted here on HN anyways when I try to defent Bitcoin. In short: Have fun staying poor :)

fullshark 6y ago

The NFT fad has definitely turned me off as it seems totally bonkers, also the fact that the problem BTC is supposedly solving constantly changes based on whatever gets people to put money into it. Add to this exchanges / tether printing manipulating the price and i'm pretty bearish on BTC and crypto right now, seems like the only problem they are trying to solve is "how can I become ludicrously rich by writing some code from scratch." But what if I'm wrong?....

drcode 6y ago
> constantly changes Suggested correction: "is constantly being expanded and added to"
- ufo 6y ago
  The bitcoin community often removes things from the list. I remember the days when bitcoin was supposed to be a revolutionary platform for microtransactions...
  - bingbong70 6y ago
    The person behind strike built an application that allows him to stream money (a payment every second) to his programmer in Europe with 0 fees using the LN... If you don't keep up with the tech, you shouldnt make these proclamations.
jerry1979 6y ago
>the fact that the problem BTC is supposedly solving constantly changes I grew my own Bitcoin thesis (legally in my basement for fun and profit). When people say that people changed the Bitcoin narrative, I can always unwrap those layers of opinions and evaluate them against my home-grown thesis.
dgellow 6y ago
I'm not sure I understand the hate for NFTs. Don't get me wrong, the concept of NFT as currently used is completely absurd and definitely overhyped. But what is bad about it? People who spend their money on NFTs mostly do it because they got rich in the past few years gambling on BTC or ETH, and now use that money to basically tip the artists they like. Or they plan to resell the token at some point, which is pure speculation, but nobody other than themselves risk to get burn. Minting and selling NFTs is almost zero work and effort for artists, all the risks are on the buyers side, and only if they buy them as speculative assets. It still make no sense to me, but if rich people want to gamble their money and by doing so support some artists, that doesn't sound too bad IMHO. I would be more cautious if retail investors would start to gamble in this market, but that's not what I've seen so far. (I'm also bearish on BTC, mainly because of Tether and the horrible incentives of PoW)

oliv__ 6y ago

Money doesn't corrupt, it simply reveals character

randomsearch 6y ago
I like this and heard it said before... power doesn’t corrupt, it reveals. Works for founders.

nemo44x 6y ago

The price of BTC must be going up since we are seeing these sour grapes stories on the front page again. An NFT sold for 69 million the other day. Crypto is here to stay. It’s time to rethink the critical analysis of crypto. What percentage of stimulus checks are going to be spent on BTC?

fallingknife 6y ago
BTC 60K! With an Elon tweet! Great way to start the day! Haters gonna hate.
sixQuarks 6y ago
I'm a bit fascinated by the negativity of bitcoin on HN. It goes all the way back to when it was trading for below $1. I almost purchased some but decided not to DUE to HN comments, I assumed they knew what they were talking about, I was wrong.

wbobeirne 6y ago

This article has some substance to it that is worth discussion, but I feel it's value is greatly diminished by the sheer amount of ad hominem in it. Don't buy Bitcoin because Michael Saylor and Elon Musk also own some? That's terrible advice. The USD is also owned by terrible people, and is used to fund terrible things. I agree with the author that many people rationalize or fall into some of the standard Bitcoin beliefs to justify their desire to get rich, but to project their own case of that on all Bitcoin enthusiasts is completely unfair. Some of the smartest engineers I know work on Bitcoin, and don't see a paycheck for it. The availability of grants for Bitcoin open source work is pretty new, and many of these people have been working on BTC long before there was a strong financial incentive. The real money-motivated play for them would have been to fall into a FAANG and collect a guaranteed high salary.

Priem19 6y ago
>“This article has some substance to it that is worth discussion” Thank you, I appreciate that. >“sheer amount of ad hominem in it.” I wouldn't say sheer, but admittedly yes, I couldn't help myself since that's part of the reason I opted out. I just don't like to invest in things associated with shady people. And if calling Saylor shady is an ad hominem, then I'll live with that. Rebuke accepted. >“The USD is also owned by terrible people, and is used to fund terrible things.” This is whataboutism which I mention in the article as well. >“but to project their own case of that on all Bitcoin enthusiasts is completely unfair.” I'm not doing that, or at least it wasn't my intention. That's why I opened with “Realizing the extent”. By using “extent” I mean a lot, not everyone. That why I also added: “So, governments are not without faults, but likewise not the evil bogeymen as many people make them out to be, and neither are bitcoin enthusiasts.” I am definitely aware that not everyone is toxic. Although I could've given it some more weight throughout the article. But I stand by my observation that cryptocurrencies really are the most toxic communities I've ever encountered, on par with religious fanatics. Anyway, I'll look where I can add some extra nuance. >“Some of the smartest engineers I know work on Bitcoin” Anyone can say about anyone that they're the smartest people they know. It carries zero validity. I'll just copy-paste my reaction to an identical comment, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26448833 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26448833: «“you'll see some of the smartest engineers of our generation working real hard” “I've been reading those cheap empty words way too much lately. Unless they are the likes of John von Neumann I'll just assume they're people of average intelligence working on things that look incredibly intimidating to outsiders.” Also, an excerpt from Marcus Aurelius - Meditations: “How corrupt and two-faced is one who claims, 'I intend to be fair and honest in my dealings with you.' What are you up to, my friend? There is really no need for this preamble. The matter will soon become plain. It should be written on your face,* it should ring out immediately in your voice, and shine out at once in your eyes, as the loved one at once knows everything about his lovers from the manner of their glance. In short, a good and honest person should resemble one who smells like a goat in this respect, that anyone who comes near him is immediately aware of it whether he wishes it or not. But the mere pretence of simplicity is like an open blade. There is nothing more odious than the friendship of the wolf for the lamb; avoid this above all. A good, straightforward, and kindly person reveals these qualities in his eyes, and they will not escape you.”» That being said, I appreciate your civility. Have a great one.

dastx 6y ago

Bitcoin isn't claiming that it takes corruption out of the human psyche. Corrupt people stay corrupt. All bitcoin does is take unfounded trust away from individual organisations and governments, and instead puts that trust in maths and the collective. It never claimed that it will combat corruption, and likely never will. NFTs are definitely switching me off from cryptocurrencies as I find the use of it ridiculous. Sure there are _some_ genuine use cases, but so far it's just been terrible, and does not fill me with confidence. Time will tell if NFTs are gonna become anything that's not silliness among the rich.

Klinky 6y ago
> take unfounded trust away from individual organisations and governments, and instead puts that trust in maths and the collective If by "collective" you mean a tiny portion of the community that are core developers, megaminers, megapools, exchanges and whales, uhh, then sure, but that doesn't seem much different than fiat. There is still an elite minority in control.
- dastx 6y ago
  Sure, but not everyone can foresee everything. Email was meant to be a decentralised, self-hosted service, yet here we are, gmail, outlook have the majority of users. In addition to that, most of those megaminers, and megapools, can't do much without working with a large chunk of other miners. Without it, the worse they can do is not fulfill individual transactions (which other miners can continue to accept). Just because a minority is hoarding bitcoin, does not make bitcoin's core issue invalid, that is, don't trust financial institutions or governments. Bitcoin never claimed to solve the issues that are at the core of monetary systems (greed, corruption etc). It solves the issue of trust. I don't have to trust a financial institutions or government to tell me how much money I own. Nor is there a government or bank that can freeze my account because I've been naughty (or, in certain cases, because the government deems you naughty because of $ideology). That's what bitcoin solves. Not the issues that are core to monetary systems. Issues that mostly come from human psyche.
  - 6y ago

Aunche 6y ago

I agree with most of this article except the part about fractional reserve banking. All fractional reserve banking means is that banks are allowed to loan out their customer's money. People have known this to be more economically efficient since the Middle Ages. If you're not using your money, it's better in the hands of someone actively using it to conduct a commercial transaction. Without a central bank to print out money, it's unlikely for there ever to be a fractional reserve banking system in Bitcoin. Any large scale bitcoin bank exit event would completely crash the bitcoin economy.

Priem19 6y ago
I added a paragraph clarifying my stance on fractional reserve banking. That section could've indeed been easily misinterpreted. Thank you.

CyberRabbi 6y ago

This is a rant about a personal experience. I couldn’t help but imagine tears running down his face while he wrote this. Bitcoin has done a lot of good in the world, the existence of some trolls on the internet doesn’t negate that.

randomsearch 6y ago

Ok I’ve been reading about BTC and I’m finally falling into the “it’s a terrible idea” camp. Here are the problems I’m concerned about. If Bitcoin supporters want to defend it, please could you explain why: 1. A scaling proof of work is not environmentally disastrous. The “renewable energy” argument doesn’t make sense, I think, and existing financial systems seem to be more energy efficient, but open to other counter arguments. 2. A decentralised ledger which concentrates initial supply amongst a tiny fraction of the world’s population would be a good idea and somehow preferable to the current situation. Finally, please explain whether Bitcoin is a currency (like the dollar) or a store of value (like gold). If it’s a currency, please explain how it can be used as such when transactions are slow and expensive. If it’s a store of value, please explain why the fact that gold is physically useful and in strictly finite supply (on earth) compared to crypto currencies (in general), does not matter.

vesinisa 6y ago

It's really sad that his story got flagged. I think it's a reasonable and well-argued opinion piece, and I can only assume it got flagged because some users vigorously disagree with the opinion. @mods any input?

stunt 6y ago
+1 for what you said. I also think it's a reasonable opinion piece worth to be discussed. But, I think it may got flagged simply because it's (or part of it) kind of off-topic for HN. What is more bizarre is that some comments here got down voted without answers even though they are relevant to the post. It's becoming a bit harder to talk about Bitcoin while we need to discuss it more than before. And these fanatic energies from Bitcoin lovers and haters don't help.

knorker 6y ago

I just wish bitcoin holders would realize that they're the baddies.