5 ms·

Yeah, crypto = hidden. In this context, crypto = cryptocurrency, because MasterCard is a major fintech company. The context is obvious. Don't die on the crypt

Yeah, crypto = hidden. In this context, crypto = cryptocurrency, because MasterCard is a major fintech company. The context is obvious. Don't die on the crypto != cryptocurrency hill. Its not worth it. Language is fluid and words represent concepts that change over time. We use contextual information to solidify the concepts. There is nothing special about cryptography that owns the word. Cryptozoology and Cryptosporidium are also valid candidates for using the short form.

stouset 5y ago
The issue is that cryptography and cryptocurrency overlap relevancy in the fintech space. Without specifying which, it’s ambiguous. I say this as an engineer on the security team of a major fintech company who also has a cryptocurrency arm. It’s fine to call cryptocurrencies “crypto”. It’s less fine to be unnecessarily ambiguous and create confusion when either might be relevant. If not for this discussion, I had assumed the article would be about them acquiring an HSM vendor or someone else in the cryptography space. Admittedly this is the original title. But it’s an ambiguous and confusing title.
- 0des 5y ago
  Unless you also say "cellular telephone" I wouldn't lean into this one too hard, it's not worth it.
- vmception 5y ago
  They are tracing cryptographic hashes that represent transactions in cryptocurrencies, as thats how cryptocurrencies work. Its the proper use of the word in one, two or even three contexts. If you're not interested in it, you'll find out from the subtitle or the first paragraph and move on.
echelon 5y ago
I totally misread this and rolled my eyes about MasterCard getting into the cryptocurrency business. It's to the point where we need to start labeling cryptography as such. Crypto now means cryptocurrency because the crypto folks like to shorten it in every conversation.
- vmception 5y ago
  This is about Mastercard expanding their digital asset business. I don't think you misread anything. Not sure why you rolled your eyes, lots of liquidity and transaction activity there and Mastercard is a liquidity and transaction activity business.
baron_harkonnen 5y ago
> Language is fluid and words represent concepts that change over time. HN is largely a technical site so using the technically correct language is meaningful. Chemists often joke about that all foods are "organic" foods, but this is a deliberate joke about two technical terms for the word "organic". In both contexts using the correct is important. Language of course evolves, but it always evolves with this tensions between changing use and consistent use. The argument that one should just lay down and let words mean anything is silly. > We use contextual information to solidify the concepts. In this context both meanings of the word "crypto" make perfect sense to me. It's quite possible (and imho more interesting) that MasterCard is interesting in having more advanced cryptographic capabilities as it is for MasterCard to expand its use of cryptocurrencies. I would read an article about the former and am not interested in the latter.
- vmception 5y ago
  They are tracing cryptographic hashes that represent transactions in cryptocurrencies, as thats how cryptocurrencies work. Who cares what you're interested in. Skim the first paragraph and move on.
denton-scratch 5y ago
Well, I for one thought Mastercard had acquired a cryptography company, so felt let down when I arrived at the article. I accept that "crypto" nowadays mainly means "cryptocurrency"; and that I will have to learn to sound-out "cryptography" in full. What I meant, using that terse notation, was that crypto is not identical with cryptocurrency.
defanor 5y ago
> In this context, crypto = cryptocurrency, because MasterCard is a major fintech company. The context is obvious. I, for one, was confused while taking the context into account (but having no idea what CipherTrace does): fintech companies, and especially those dealing with bank cards, are among the most common examples of encryption and authentication usage; I think it's even common to say "that's how your bank card transfers are secured" when explaining the usage of asymmetric cryptography to laypeople. Though the possibilities I've imagined were rather silly: e.g., some custom cryptographic hardware, for either efficiency or doing something fancy with quantum cryptography. Upon skimming the article, I'm not sure if the reality is much less silly, but the brief confusion happened either way.

stouset 5y ago

The issue is that cryptography and cryptocurrency overlap relevancy in the fintech space. Without specifying which, it’s ambiguous. I say this as an engineer on the security team of a major fintech company who also has a cryptocurrency arm. It’s fine to call cryptocurrencies “crypto”. It’s less fine to be unnecessarily ambiguous and create confusion when either might be relevant. If not for this discussion, I had assumed the article would be about them acquiring an HSM vendor or someone else in the cryptography space. Admittedly this is the original title. But it’s an ambiguous and confusing title.

0des 5y ago
Unless you also say "cellular telephone" I wouldn't lean into this one too hard, it's not worth it.
vmception 5y ago
They are tracing cryptographic hashes that represent transactions in cryptocurrencies, as thats how cryptocurrencies work. Its the proper use of the word in one, two or even three contexts. If you're not interested in it, you'll find out from the subtitle or the first paragraph and move on.

echelon 5y ago

I totally misread this and rolled my eyes about MasterCard getting into the cryptocurrency business. It's to the point where we need to start labeling cryptography as such. Crypto now means cryptocurrency because the crypto folks like to shorten it in every conversation.

vmception 5y ago
This is about Mastercard expanding their digital asset business. I don't think you misread anything. Not sure why you rolled your eyes, lots of liquidity and transaction activity there and Mastercard is a liquidity and transaction activity business.

baron_harkonnen 5y ago

> Language is fluid and words represent concepts that change over time. HN is largely a technical site so using the technically correct language is meaningful. Chemists often joke about that all foods are "organic" foods, but this is a deliberate joke about two technical terms for the word "organic". In both contexts using the correct is important. Language of course evolves, but it always evolves with this tensions between changing use and consistent use. The argument that one should just lay down and let words mean anything is silly. > We use contextual information to solidify the concepts. In this context both meanings of the word "crypto" make perfect sense to me. It's quite possible (and imho more interesting) that MasterCard is interesting in having more advanced cryptographic capabilities as it is for MasterCard to expand its use of cryptocurrencies. I would read an article about the former and am not interested in the latter.

vmception 5y ago
They are tracing cryptographic hashes that represent transactions in cryptocurrencies, as thats how cryptocurrencies work. Who cares what you're interested in. Skim the first paragraph and move on.

denton-scratch 5y ago

Well, I for one thought Mastercard had acquired a cryptography company, so felt let down when I arrived at the article. I accept that "crypto" nowadays mainly means "cryptocurrency"; and that I will have to learn to sound-out "cryptography" in full. What I meant, using that terse notation, was that crypto is not identical with cryptocurrency.

defanor 5y ago

> In this context, crypto = cryptocurrency, because MasterCard is a major fintech company. The context is obvious. I, for one, was confused while taking the context into account (but having no idea what CipherTrace does): fintech companies, and especially those dealing with bank cards, are among the most common examples of encryption and authentication usage; I think it's even common to say "that's how your bank card transfers are secured" when explaining the usage of asymmetric cryptography to laypeople. Though the possibilities I've imagined were rather silly: e.g., some custom cryptographic hardware, for either efficiency or doing something fancy with quantum cryptography. Upon skimming the article, I'm not sure if the reality is much less silly, but the brief confusion happened either way.