3 ms·

I think that is disingenuous. Because there remain interesting things to discus and consider in the world of 'crypto', even if you acknowledge there are issues

by rocqua 5y ago

I think that is disingenuous. Because there remain interesting things to discus and consider in the world of 'crypto', even if you acknowledge there are issues and its not perfect yet. There certainly are some loud 'shills' out there. But there are also actual interesting technical developments. It seems to me that between the shills and the people shouting down who they perceive to be shills, the interesting discussion gets drowned out.

Applejinx 5y ago
If you're a sufficiently intelligent person, you can frame said interesting things in such a way that it establishes your position w.r.t crypto. It's like a sort of chess. If you're a sufficiently intelligent person, you can recognize arguments like "you oppose X, but you do not acknowledge Y. And Y exists. Therefore, you are disingenuous: you are not candid or sincere, you're pretending that you don't know Y. Therefore nobody should listen to you about X.' Um… I oppose X. At this stage, not interested in Y. And I keep running into arguments that are trying to shut me up about X… by any means necessary, including flat-out sophistry of every possible description. And this becomes an intellectual game. How can this NOT be fascinating to Hacker News readers? :)