3 ms·

The automotive industry is 100+ years old whilst Bitcoin is only 13 years old, so you can't fairly compare them on the basis of "who would notice". My previous

The automotive industry is 100+ years old whilst Bitcoin is only 13 years old, so you can't fairly compare them on the basis of "who would notice". My previous skepticism of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency was due to short-sightedness. You almost have to dip your toes in, in order to understand its potential.

acdha 5y ago
Okay, use the web. Within a couple of years of its creation it had transformed businesses in all kinds of industries, government, education, recreational activities, etc. By the time it was as old as Bitcoin, the world was completely different and people were walking around with web clients in their pockets; in contrast, the most impact Bitcoin has had outside of its own community seems to be that it can be slightly cheaper than Western Union to send money to another country.
- BLKNSLVR 5y ago
  I'm going to disagree with your timescale, mainly in the use of 'web' rather than 'internet'. The 'internet', which set the foundation for the 'web' started its existence in the 70's, and the 'web' wasn't really invented until the late 80's / early 90's. Memory of time passing seemingly gets very compressed the further back you go. Additionally, Bitcoin is an attempt at disrupting elements of the financial world (and cryptocurrencies as-a-whole are going after ALL of finance, not just elements of it). This is _the most powerful and well-funded aspect of modern civilisation_, so there's going to be severe resistance (to put it mildly) to any threat. It's also difficult to understand the concepts that are foundational to cryptocurrencies, and the average persons eyes glaze over (personal terminology my wife uses when I try to explain technologically difficult things that she really has no interest in) at the slightest dip into its technicalities. Better examples may be smart phones, but mobiles have been around since the mid-80's at least (that suitcase-sized portable phone in Lethal Weapon), and laptops are of a similar vintage (my argument being that smart phones are a combination of these two existing technologies). Smart phones also have that immediate-dopamine-hit working for their adoption rate whilst Bitcoin and cryptocurrency are a 'longer game' (arguably you could say those already on the 'inside' for crypto get the dopamine hit of profit or potential riches - rightly or wrongly, healthily or otherwise). Think of cryptocurrency as building a brand new Central Banking and Wall Street infrastructure. 13 years is still breast-feeding against that behemoth.
  - WA 5y ago
    Smartphones, internet, web – these things had perceived value without complicated language. Bitcoin, crypto, NFTs, it's always the same: "You don't get it, because you don't understand the fundamentals. <Insert obscure lingo here>". It's just wrong. There is no real value for most people. That's why crypto bros hide behind complicated terminology. That's why the value proposition of Bitcoin changed a couple times. That's why the terminology shifts all the time as well. "DeFI" wasn't mainstream until like a year ago or two. The next bullshit terminology is "web3".
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - BLKNSLVR 5y ago
      "It's just wrong" is wrong. It's complicated because it's complicated. Try explaining quantum physics. Complexity is a function of the shoulders upon which the new thing is standing. Cryptocurrency sits atop cryptography, which is conceptually difficult to grasp even for HN regulars. The potential (I say potential because I'm aware enough to know that certain things are not yet proven) value for "most people" is a reduction of the corruption inherent in the processing of financial transactions. This is far enough separated from the average persons day to day that it doesn't seem to have value. But things like the GFC bring that awareness to the fore... briefly. The terminology doesn't "shift all the time" and if that's how you see it then you're not keeping up and therefore your opinion and commentary carries little weight. The terminology you're talking about is new functionality offered by the ecosystem, it's not a rebranding or business pivot, it's a new branch of services. DeFi is an example of the services that can be built upon cryptocurrency (with smart contracts) and, like the cause of this discussion, takes time to build awareness and a customer base. Web3 is just another branch of functionality that can sit atop cryptocurrency / smart contracts. The terminology may well be bullshit, just like "social" was web-2-point-oh way back seven years ago, but it's the concept that matters, and the alternative, or disruption, that it facilitates. Web3 appears to be a kind of meta-internet. Bullshit terminology aside, I'm interested to see what will come of it.
  - acdha 5y ago

acdha 5y ago

Okay, use the web. Within a couple of years of its creation it had transformed businesses in all kinds of industries, government, education, recreational activities, etc. By the time it was as old as Bitcoin, the world was completely different and people were walking around with web clients in their pockets; in contrast, the most impact Bitcoin has had outside of its own community seems to be that it can be slightly cheaper than Western Union to send money to another country.

BLKNSLVR 5y ago
I'm going to disagree with your timescale, mainly in the use of 'web' rather than 'internet'. The 'internet', which set the foundation for the 'web' started its existence in the 70's, and the 'web' wasn't really invented until the late 80's / early 90's. Memory of time passing seemingly gets very compressed the further back you go. Additionally, Bitcoin is an attempt at disrupting elements of the financial world (and cryptocurrencies as-a-whole are going after ALL of finance, not just elements of it). This is _the most powerful and well-funded aspect of modern civilisation_, so there's going to be severe resistance (to put it mildly) to any threat. It's also difficult to understand the concepts that are foundational to cryptocurrencies, and the average persons eyes glaze over (personal terminology my wife uses when I try to explain technologically difficult things that she really has no interest in) at the slightest dip into its technicalities. Better examples may be smart phones, but mobiles have been around since the mid-80's at least (that suitcase-sized portable phone in Lethal Weapon), and laptops are of a similar vintage (my argument being that smart phones are a combination of these two existing technologies). Smart phones also have that immediate-dopamine-hit working for their adoption rate whilst Bitcoin and cryptocurrency are a 'longer game' (arguably you could say those already on the 'inside' for crypto get the dopamine hit of profit or potential riches - rightly or wrongly, healthily or otherwise). Think of cryptocurrency as building a brand new Central Banking and Wall Street infrastructure. 13 years is still breast-feeding against that behemoth.
- WA 5y ago
  Smartphones, internet, web – these things had perceived value without complicated language. Bitcoin, crypto, NFTs, it's always the same: "You don't get it, because you don't understand the fundamentals. <Insert obscure lingo here>". It's just wrong. There is no real value for most people. That's why crypto bros hide behind complicated terminology. That's why the value proposition of Bitcoin changed a couple times. That's why the terminology shifts all the time as well. "DeFI" wasn't mainstream until like a year ago or two. The next bullshit terminology is "web3".
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - BLKNSLVR 5y ago
    "It's just wrong" is wrong. It's complicated because it's complicated. Try explaining quantum physics. Complexity is a function of the shoulders upon which the new thing is standing. Cryptocurrency sits atop cryptography, which is conceptually difficult to grasp even for HN regulars. The potential (I say potential because I'm aware enough to know that certain things are not yet proven) value for "most people" is a reduction of the corruption inherent in the processing of financial transactions. This is far enough separated from the average persons day to day that it doesn't seem to have value. But things like the GFC bring that awareness to the fore... briefly. The terminology doesn't "shift all the time" and if that's how you see it then you're not keeping up and therefore your opinion and commentary carries little weight. The terminology you're talking about is new functionality offered by the ecosystem, it's not a rebranding or business pivot, it's a new branch of services. DeFi is an example of the services that can be built upon cryptocurrency (with smart contracts) and, like the cause of this discussion, takes time to build awareness and a customer base. Web3 is just another branch of functionality that can sit atop cryptocurrency / smart contracts. The terminology may well be bullshit, just like "social" was web-2-point-oh way back seven years ago, but it's the concept that matters, and the alternative, or disruption, that it facilitates. Web3 appears to be a kind of meta-internet. Bullshit terminology aside, I'm interested to see what will come of it.
- acdha 5y ago