3 ms·

The fine article and your comment both say crypto is 'old' tech. TFA points to iPhone's 2007 release date as if no one (even apple themselves had tried to crack

by bhawks 5y ago

The fine article and your comment both say crypto is 'old' tech. TFA points to iPhone's 2007 release date as if no one (even apple themselves had tried to crack the personal digital assistant before). Which is a laughable omission of history. The first PDA landed in the 80s. Apple started development in 87 on the newton and didn't have a product til 93. The iphone stands on the ashes of 2 decades of product and engineering iterations. The AI winter lasted from 80s until the 2010s. Technology takes time and innovation is a discrete not continuous function. If we all gave up after 10 years we would be sitting in caves and probably not even planting seeds. TFA is full of blustery arguments to say that crypto is a worthless dead end and should be banned deserves more reasoned arguments. Toning down the emotional levels might be a good first step.

skohan 5y ago
I don't think you should conflate my comment with the TFA article. I didn't write it, and I have no interest in defending it's points. But I don't totally understand your comparison of early PDA's to the current state of cryptocurrency. Palm pilots were a successful product in their day. Blackberries were hugely successful. It's not as if the iPhone was the first example of value being created in this space. As far as blockchain, from what I can tell, the only value its creating so far is for drug dealers, those executing ransomware attacks, and people running cryptocurrency exchanges. I'm not ruling out the idea that someone will find an interesting use-case for cryptocurrency in the future. But what seems a bit strange to me is that cryptocurrency advocates seem to want us all to give a ton of attention and investment towards this space which so far has produced nothing of value. It seems to me that the rational standpoint will be to ignore it until someone can actually demonstrate the "potential" which has been promised for so many years now.

by bhawks 5y ago

skohan 5y ago

I don't think you should conflate my comment with the TFA article. I didn't write it, and I have no interest in defending it's points. But I don't totally understand your comparison of early PDA's to the current state of cryptocurrency. Palm pilots were a successful product in their day. Blackberries were hugely successful. It's not as if the iPhone was the first example of value being created in this space. As far as blockchain, from what I can tell, the only value its creating so far is for drug dealers, those executing ransomware attacks, and people running cryptocurrency exchanges. I'm not ruling out the idea that someone will find an interesting use-case for cryptocurrency in the future. But what seems a bit strange to me is that cryptocurrency advocates seem to want us all to give a ton of attention and investment towards this space which so far has produced nothing of value. It seems to me that the rational standpoint will be to ignore it until someone can actually demonstrate the "potential" which has been promised for so many years now.