3 ms·

This is the second time this week I've seen an article from Diehl on the front page that is critical of cryptocurrency but has next to zero substance. Weird tha

by cwkoss 5y ago

This is the second time this week I've seen an article from Diehl on the front page that is critical of cryptocurrency but has next to zero substance. Weird that people regard him as a crypto expert, he doesn't seem to understand the space very well. - Comparing Bitcoin to doge and shiba is laughable - Re progcoins, he says "After twelve years of these technologies existing" - Ethereum is only 6 years old... - Like most other crypto skeptics, this author doesn't understand the value of decentralized value transfer, so his analysis entirely misses the pro's of these technologies. It's like someone trying to understand why candy is popular by only looking at the nutritional information - never tasting it. I'd bet 1000 SHIBA that one of Diehl's friends tried to convince him to buy in years ago, and now the cognitive dissonance of that rejection costing him hundreds of thousands of dollars in potential gains is forcing him to double down: his ego cannot tolerate crypto success - or else he'd have to admit to himself he was naive and short sided by discounting it years ago. The majority of coins will eventually fail, and it's even possible all the currently popular ones will be included in that. The road to maturity has been and will continue to be bumpy. But the writing is on the wall that crypto is going to be a major force in global finance for decades to come. Pandora's box is open, anyone who thinks it will entirely flame out and disappear doesn't understand what has happened over the past decade.

medo-bear 5y ago
>this author doesn't understand the value of decentralized value transfer, so his analysis entirely misses the pro's of these technologies came here to say the same thing, with one addition: unregulated decentralized transfer the author seems to brush this off as only appealing to criminals
isoprophlex 5y ago
The thinly veiled ad hominem stuff against Diehl is uncalled for.
louwrentius 5y ago
> This is the second time this week I've seen an article from Diehl on the front page that is critical of cryptocurrency but has next to zero substance. Weird that people regard him as a crypto expert, he doesn't seem to understand the space very well. What is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. These unfounded personal attacks is not what HW was about, I remember. > Comparing Bitcoin to doge and shiba is laughable such insight! > - Re progcoins, he says "After twelve years of these technologies existing" - Ethereum is only 6 years old... Damn, you got him! By reading the text as literally as possible... I'm impressed! > - Like most other crypto skeptics, this author doesn't understand the value of decentralized value transfer, so his analysis entirely misses the pro's of these technologies. It's like someone trying to understand why candy is popular by only looking at the nutritional information - never tasting it. Didn't you get the memo of his article(s) that crypto is anything but decentralised? The good thing is that you yourself didn't proclaim to be a crypto expert. Fair enough! > I'd bet 1000 SHIBA that one of Diehl's friends tried to convince him to buy in years ago, and now the cognitive dissonance of that rejection costing him hundreds of thousands of dollars in potential gains is forcing him to double down: his ego cannot tolerate crypto success - or else he'd have to admit to himself he was naive and short sided by discounting it years ago. Is this just psychological projection? Is that really all you have to offer?
- cwkoss 5y ago
  > What is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Lol, there is no evidence in this article, it's pure conjecture.
  - louwrentius 5y ago
    It’s the crypto people that have to prove that their stuff means something, the burden of proof is on them
    - cwkoss 5y ago
      What happened to "What is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."?
      - louwrentius 5y ago
        What happens to the claims that crypto is something but after 12 years it is still a solution in search of a (legal) problem. Nobody has anything to show for it. And you can state the article is conjecture all you want, but if you don’t substantiate that… welll…
_xnmw 5y ago
> crypto is going to be a major force in global finance for decades to come. Oh it'll stick around alright, and it will be a major force, just like drug dealing and insider trading and other illegal activities and scams that run rampant in the world. Ponzi schemes and promises of new riches will always exist, and there are enough suckers born every day to fall for new iterations of fancy digital woo-woo. > this author doesn't understand the value of decentralized value transfer You know what the original "decentralized value transfer" mechanism was? Cash. Those paper bills and metal coins we've been using for thousands of years. Nobody doubts the value of decentralized value transfer. Stablecoins, which aim to replace cash, are covered in that article. Personally, I think this is where crypto offers the most promise, but then it isn't really crypto at all, it is just a digitally managed Automated Clearing House for transferring value, i.e. an improved traditional finance, like most countries in Europe have had instant transfers for decades. Nothing "cryptographic" about that.
- cwkoss 5y ago
  The original decentralized value transfer was gold and other precious commodities. Stablecoins are more like cash because, similarly, they are both subject to central bank's monetary policy. Bitcoin is much more like gold, in that it can only be indirectly influenced by political policy.

by cwkoss 5y ago

medo-bear 5y ago

>this author doesn't understand the value of decentralized value transfer, so his analysis entirely misses the pro's of these technologies came here to say the same thing, with one addition: unregulated decentralized transfer the author seems to brush this off as only appealing to criminals

isoprophlex 5y ago

The thinly veiled ad hominem stuff against Diehl is uncalled for.

louwrentius 5y ago

> This is the second time this week I've seen an article from Diehl on the front page that is critical of cryptocurrency but has next to zero substance. Weird that people regard him as a crypto expert, he doesn't seem to understand the space very well. What is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. These unfounded personal attacks is not what HW was about, I remember. > Comparing Bitcoin to doge and shiba is laughable such insight! > - Re progcoins, he says "After twelve years of these technologies existing" - Ethereum is only 6 years old... Damn, you got him! By reading the text as literally as possible... I'm impressed! > - Like most other crypto skeptics, this author doesn't understand the value of decentralized value transfer, so his analysis entirely misses the pro's of these technologies. It's like someone trying to understand why candy is popular by only looking at the nutritional information - never tasting it. Didn't you get the memo of his article(s) that crypto is anything but decentralised? The good thing is that you yourself didn't proclaim to be a crypto expert. Fair enough! > I'd bet 1000 SHIBA that one of Diehl's friends tried to convince him to buy in years ago, and now the cognitive dissonance of that rejection costing him hundreds of thousands of dollars in potential gains is forcing him to double down: his ego cannot tolerate crypto success - or else he'd have to admit to himself he was naive and short sided by discounting it years ago. Is this just psychological projection? Is that really all you have to offer?

cwkoss 5y ago
> What is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Lol, there is no evidence in this article, it's pure conjecture.
- louwrentius 5y ago
  It’s the crypto people that have to prove that their stuff means something, the burden of proof is on them
  - cwkoss 5y ago
    What happened to "What is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."?
    - louwrentius 5y ago
      What happens to the claims that crypto is something but after 12 years it is still a solution in search of a (legal) problem. Nobody has anything to show for it. And you can state the article is conjecture all you want, but if you don’t substantiate that… welll…

_xnmw 5y ago

> crypto is going to be a major force in global finance for decades to come. Oh it'll stick around alright, and it will be a major force, just like drug dealing and insider trading and other illegal activities and scams that run rampant in the world. Ponzi schemes and promises of new riches will always exist, and there are enough suckers born every day to fall for new iterations of fancy digital woo-woo. > this author doesn't understand the value of decentralized value transfer You know what the original "decentralized value transfer" mechanism was? Cash. Those paper bills and metal coins we've been using for thousands of years. Nobody doubts the value of decentralized value transfer. Stablecoins, which aim to replace cash, are covered in that article. Personally, I think this is where crypto offers the most promise, but then it isn't really crypto at all, it is just a digitally managed Automated Clearing House for transferring value, i.e. an improved traditional finance, like most countries in Europe have had instant transfers for decades. Nothing "cryptographic" about that.

cwkoss 5y ago
The original decentralized value transfer was gold and other precious commodities. Stablecoins are more like cash because, similarly, they are both subject to central bank's monetary policy. Bitcoin is much more like gold, in that it can only be indirectly influenced by political policy.