6 ms·

Why are such articles constantly popping up on HN? It's clear that the HN crowd does not like Bitcoin. So why keep reiterating similar arguments all over? The

Why are such articles constantly popping up on HN? It's clear that the HN crowd does not like Bitcoin. So why keep reiterating similar arguments all over? There is zero utility in the article shared. It states some anti crypto views and that's it. Even the author concedes that this is according to his own definition and not based on real life legal tests (which have of course shown that Bitcoin is not a ponzi). Just let Crypto users be. I get it. You don't like Crypto, but at this point it's not like an opinion piece can change the their views. Users transacted in the trillions of USD over last month. Crypto got institutions, countries, wealthy individuals, poor individuals using it every day. It's clear it has some utility to them. It's time to reflect and consider that your anti Crypto position might be wrong. Edit: clarity

kaczordon 5y ago
By this articles definition WeWork is a Ponzi scheme, as would most startups.
- cerved 5y ago
  wework is
- arcticbull 5y ago
  WeWork is, startups are not. This is also covered in the article.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
bb88 5y ago
> It's clear that the HN crowd does not like Bitcoin. So why keep reiterating similar arguments all over? When we take a closer look at crypto it appears to be as corrupt or even more as the institutions it was trying to replace. Tether, of course, is the poster child of crypto corruption.
BelenusMordred 5y ago
You can go back 5 years and find all the exact same arguments in the comments on any bitcoin article. It's basically a HN circlejerk at this point and incredibly rare to find something new actually added to the conversation.
arcticbull 5y ago
There's great reasons not to. Unless we nip this in the bud, we face a potential repeat of the 1997 Albanian Ponzi crisis that brought about the total collapse of their economy. Everyone in Albania jumped in and started participating in a number of big Ponzi schemes. Their finance minister tried to stop them, so they threw him in jail. They then had a civil war about it, and the IMF had to drop in big bags of money. [1] This is what the maxis are after. If we don't cut this off ASAP, we all stand to lose. [1] https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2000/03/jarvis.htm https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2000/03/jarvis.ht...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- imgabe 5y ago
  > This is what the maxis are after. When you find yourself saying that the people you disagree with are deliberately seeking catastrophic outcomes, it's time to take a step back and reconsider. I don't think anyone wants to destroy the global economy and cause a global war. Maybe the Bitcoin maxis are wrong about the long-term viability of Bitcoin, but I doubt very much they are some kind of nihilistic death cult bent on destroying civilization. Maybe dial it back a notch.
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    That's fair, and I walk that back. I don't think they're intentionally taking us into a Mad Max future, but I don't think their intent changes much if they get their way.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- hackingforfun 5y ago
  There is no nipping this in the bud. That's the point. It's already too late.
  - 5y ago
srge 5y ago
Exactly. And the argument crypto = ponzi is so wrong. What about other investment vehicles? Gold? Real estate? Stock market. Come on!
- arcticbull 5y ago
  The article literally covers each of those cases and explains exactly why those are not Ponzi schemes while Bitcoin is ([edit] under "Common Objections" - which should really read "Common Whataboutisms"). > By that definition, stocks too are ponzis. No. Stocks have an external source of revenue, namely the profit that the company makes by selling its products and services to customers (not investors); and these profits eventually return to the investors through dividends or cash buybacks. In time, those profits are expected to exceed the amount invested, with a significant profit for all investors -- that is, they are expected to be positive-sum games. The market value of stocks reflects these expectations among investors. While some companies fail to achieve this goal, enough of them succeed to make stocks the favorite option of savvy investors. > By that definition, real estate too is a ponzi. No. Like stocks, real estate creates value while it is being owned, namely the sheltering service it provides to those who live in it. That value returns to the investor (owner) either by him living in the property, or by renting it to others. > By that definition, gold too is a ponzi. No, gold clearly fails to satisfy that definition on two counts...
  - rob74 5y ago
    Yup, but that explanation is not satisfactory IMHO. Of course stocks, real estate etc. have an "underlying value", but in case of a market bubble, these values lose all connection with reality, and some will profit while others (typically the late comers) will lose out when the bubble bursts. And Bitcoin's value is currenty overinflated in the same way...
  - koonsolo 5y ago
    Gold doesn't have a source of revenue.
    - arcticbull 5y ago
rvense 5y ago
Maybe when cryptocurrency enthusiasts stop running around with bullhorns telling people about how they're going to save the world. You're not saving anything. There are valid criticisms of the current financial system, but cryptocurrencies are not a good answer to them.
- luka-birsa 5y ago
  The initial post is literally the flip side of the same coin. We've had romantic Bitcoin maxis in the beginning, saying Crypto will change the world, we now have luddists screaming to stop the crypto as it will destroy the world. Only a small portion of users are the Crypto maxis. And they truly can't care less about such posts. They might have been wrong about what Crypto means, but you cannot deny the use. BC is a reserve currency of a nation. EU is contemplating digital euro. People invented a way and are exchanging ownership of IP daily with various block chains. Crypto is here. I highly doubt it its going away. Too much value and utility. Perhaps it would be best to simply create a HN News policy to ban crypto related stuff as it really boils down to maxi-haters reiterating their views over and over. But I do understand that is great for Karma farming.
zenbai 5y ago
People should learn about how much money the Fed is printing these days. Bitcoin is getting a lot of attention from a lot of very smart financial people around the world because they see that with so much USD being printed, inflation is bound to happen and Bitcoin is one of many ways they can hedge against it. HN is where you can find great commentary about tech related stuff. But outside of that eg. financial matters .. no.
graeme 5y ago
You don’t seem to have reflected on the article. If it’s wrong, surely it would be trivial to rebut even one of its points. > which have of course shown that Bitcoin is not a ponzi What are you referring to here? This would be a rebuttal if it exists, but to my knowledge no such thing does > Just let Crypto users be This is your main point of substance. But as another user pointed out, the collapse of the Albanian ponzi started a war and devastated a country. Bitcoin, if it is the ponzi it appears to be, is the biggest ponzi in history. It is unwise to merely leave ponzis alone. They’re illegal for a reason
skinnyasianboi 5y ago
A few years ago I was upvoting such articles myself, probably out of annoyance that I had known about Bitcoin since 2010 but had no financial interest in it. What got me into it was the open source aspect. I expect that many users on HN have known about Bitcoins since the beginning and are upset that they didn't look into it years ago. Many will find their niche in it(smart contracts, NFTs..), younger people more so. Stateless P2P open source currency is an incredibly powerful combination of words.

kaczordon 5y ago

By this articles definition WeWork is a Ponzi scheme, as would most startups.

cerved 5y ago
wework is
arcticbull 5y ago
WeWork is, startups are not. This is also covered in the article.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

bb88 5y ago

> It's clear that the HN crowd does not like Bitcoin. So why keep reiterating similar arguments all over? When we take a closer look at crypto it appears to be as corrupt or even more as the institutions it was trying to replace. Tether, of course, is the poster child of crypto corruption.

BelenusMordred 5y ago

You can go back 5 years and find all the exact same arguments in the comments on any bitcoin article. It's basically a HN circlejerk at this point and incredibly rare to find something new actually added to the conversation.

arcticbull 5y ago

There's great reasons not to. Unless we nip this in the bud, we face a potential repeat of the 1997 Albanian Ponzi crisis that brought about the total collapse of their economy. Everyone in Albania jumped in and started participating in a number of big Ponzi schemes. Their finance minister tried to stop them, so they threw him in jail. They then had a civil war about it, and the IMF had to drop in big bags of money. [1] This is what the maxis are after. If we don't cut this off ASAP, we all stand to lose. [1] https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2000/03/jarvis.htm https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2000/03/jarvis.ht...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
imgabe 5y ago
> This is what the maxis are after. When you find yourself saying that the people you disagree with are deliberately seeking catastrophic outcomes, it's time to take a step back and reconsider. I don't think anyone wants to destroy the global economy and cause a global war. Maybe the Bitcoin maxis are wrong about the long-term viability of Bitcoin, but I doubt very much they are some kind of nihilistic death cult bent on destroying civilization. Maybe dial it back a notch.
- arcticbull 5y ago
  That's fair, and I walk that back. I don't think they're intentionally taking us into a Mad Max future, but I don't think their intent changes much if they get their way.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
hackingforfun 5y ago
There is no nipping this in the bud. That's the point. It's already too late.
- 5y ago

srge 5y ago

Exactly. And the argument crypto = ponzi is so wrong. What about other investment vehicles? Gold? Real estate? Stock market. Come on!

arcticbull 5y ago
The article literally covers each of those cases and explains exactly why those are not Ponzi schemes while Bitcoin is ([edit] under "Common Objections" - which should really read "Common Whataboutisms"). > By that definition, stocks too are ponzis. No. Stocks have an external source of revenue, namely the profit that the company makes by selling its products and services to customers (not investors); and these profits eventually return to the investors through dividends or cash buybacks. In time, those profits are expected to exceed the amount invested, with a significant profit for all investors -- that is, they are expected to be positive-sum games. The market value of stocks reflects these expectations among investors. While some companies fail to achieve this goal, enough of them succeed to make stocks the favorite option of savvy investors. > By that definition, real estate too is a ponzi. No. Like stocks, real estate creates value while it is being owned, namely the sheltering service it provides to those who live in it. That value returns to the investor (owner) either by him living in the property, or by renting it to others. > By that definition, gold too is a ponzi. No, gold clearly fails to satisfy that definition on two counts...
- rob74 5y ago
  Yup, but that explanation is not satisfactory IMHO. Of course stocks, real estate etc. have an "underlying value", but in case of a market bubble, these values lose all connection with reality, and some will profit while others (typically the late comers) will lose out when the bubble bursts. And Bitcoin's value is currenty overinflated in the same way...
- koonsolo 5y ago
  Gold doesn't have a source of revenue.
  - arcticbull 5y ago

rvense 5y ago

Maybe when cryptocurrency enthusiasts stop running around with bullhorns telling people about how they're going to save the world. You're not saving anything. There are valid criticisms of the current financial system, but cryptocurrencies are not a good answer to them.

luka-birsa 5y ago
The initial post is literally the flip side of the same coin. We've had romantic Bitcoin maxis in the beginning, saying Crypto will change the world, we now have luddists screaming to stop the crypto as it will destroy the world. Only a small portion of users are the Crypto maxis. And they truly can't care less about such posts. They might have been wrong about what Crypto means, but you cannot deny the use. BC is a reserve currency of a nation. EU is contemplating digital euro. People invented a way and are exchanging ownership of IP daily with various block chains. Crypto is here. I highly doubt it its going away. Too much value and utility. Perhaps it would be best to simply create a HN News policy to ban crypto related stuff as it really boils down to maxi-haters reiterating their views over and over. But I do understand that is great for Karma farming.

zenbai 5y ago

People should learn about how much money the Fed is printing these days. Bitcoin is getting a lot of attention from a lot of very smart financial people around the world because they see that with so much USD being printed, inflation is bound to happen and Bitcoin is one of many ways they can hedge against it. HN is where you can find great commentary about tech related stuff. But outside of that eg. financial matters .. no.

graeme 5y ago

You don’t seem to have reflected on the article. If it’s wrong, surely it would be trivial to rebut even one of its points. > which have of course shown that Bitcoin is not a ponzi What are you referring to here? This would be a rebuttal if it exists, but to my knowledge no such thing does > Just let Crypto users be This is your main point of substance. But as another user pointed out, the collapse of the Albanian ponzi started a war and devastated a country. Bitcoin, if it is the ponzi it appears to be, is the biggest ponzi in history. It is unwise to merely leave ponzis alone. They’re illegal for a reason

skinnyasianboi 5y ago

A few years ago I was upvoting such articles myself, probably out of annoyance that I had known about Bitcoin since 2010 but had no financial interest in it. What got me into it was the open source aspect. I expect that many users on HN have known about Bitcoins since the beginning and are upset that they didn't look into it years ago. Many will find their niche in it(smart contracts, NFTs..), younger people more so. Stateless P2P open source currency is an incredibly powerful combination of words.