6 ms·

BTC and ETH can not be stopped, ever. Their utility for society is far too high, despite the tradeoffs.

by block_dagger 5y ago

bsagdiyev 5y ago
And what, exactly, is this utility?
- fnord123 5y ago
  Ecoterrorist Ponzi scheme.
- rajamaka 5y ago
  Money laundering
quietbritishjim 5y ago
This sort of comment is exactly why articles like this will never result in constructive discussion on HN (or elsewhere). It doesn't address any of the comments in the article and doesn't even give any concrete examples of its point (in this case the "utility to society"). Don't take this personally, crypto always results in comments like this. It just turns into a vacuous slinging match. I tend to flag the articles about cryptocurrency/blockchain unless they contain some actually new technical innovation.
- luka-birsa 5y ago
  Oh come on, we're on HN. This is the most anti-cryptocurrency tech page that I can think of, with daily negative sentiment articles popping up. It's either bitcoin will destroy the world, ether is a giant cesspool that can be implemented with a database or the favourite Tether is a huge scam and will destroy the world. Let's not forget the NFT's are full-on money laundering scheme and LOL why would you buy JPGs if you can right click and save. Trust me, people (as in cryptocurrency realists) tried explaining in the comments, but the sentiment is too strong. Due to the meteoric rise in value and the fact that a lot of HN somehow ended sitting on the sidelines, people can't stop foretelling the impending doom and gloom while being oblivious to the underlying tenet that all of this crypto technology brings. I fully agree with you that articles like this turn into vacuous slinging match between camps. It's not tho because there are no concrete answers from the crypto side, it's simply due to the population on HN - it's impossible to have a constructive discussion if the sentiment is so negative. So yes, I also flag such content, because these discussions represent catnip for me and provide zero value.
  - S6eUL 5y ago
    I think the issue is more nuanced. Many of the arguments against cryptocurrencies (or blockchain technologies) do have merit in my view (e.g. Theter being a scam, economic concerns such as deflation or the problematic envrionmental impact of PoW) but that does not mean that the entire space and any further innovation in it should be dismissed outright. However, I agree with you that this is the prevailing sentiment on HN. I find this quite sad because substantiated discussions on reddit about cryptocurrencies gets drowned out by all the shilling that is going on.
    - luka-birsa 5y ago
      I'd really like to discuss arguments against blockchain as I view some very valid (especially long-term deflation concerns) others not so much (Tether, PoW), but sadly not here (or reddit for that matter). I wonder if just stating my views around Tether (eg. not a problem, not relevant, not really a scam) will be enough to trigger knee-jerk reaction. Sad that it has to be like that, I view HN as the #1 place where engineers, technologists, geeks and nerds meet. Looks like they all enjoy some blockchain bashing.
      - S6eUL 5y ago
        Could you maybe expand a bit on why you think Tether is not much of a problem or link me to a ressource making that case?
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  Well, what's the point? We've argued the same points with the same people over and over again. It's always the same arguments and nobody is convincing anyone of anything.
usrbinbash 5y ago
What's the utility for society exactly? As a currency? I have that already. And its stable, accepted almost everywhere, doesn't waste tons of energy and cannot be lost by forgetting a password. As ownership verification for items? I have that as well: Contracts, Bills and Agreements. They can even be digitally signed, which has all the advantages of an NFT (integrity, authentication, non-repuditation) with none of the disadvantages. So what tangible advantages does "crypto" have in these areas for society?
- Feeble 5y ago
  > As a currency? I have that already. And its stable, accepted almost everywhere, doesn't waste tons of energy and cannot be lost by forgetting a password. So you were born (or at least live) in a country that has a stable currency which is accepted almost everywhere, and you can trust your politicians to not undermine this currency by bad economic policies and/or creating very high inflation. Congratulations! However, a large part of earth's population do not enjoy this stability. For them crypto offers a way to store wealth that cannot be debased nor easily seized by authorities in bad faith. Some estimates are that 2 billion adults do not even have banking. You say your currency does not waste tons of energy. How much energy would you say the financial system in your country use in order to keep a sound ledger and enforce the monetary rules & policies? Bitcoin uses less energy than the gold industry. And gold mines wreck the environment (https://earthworks.org/campaigns/no-dirty-gold/impacts/ https://earthworks.org/campaigns/no-dirty-gold/impacts/). But you don't hear much about that even though most gold is used as a store of wealth, much like Bitcoin is. Energy usage should also not be equated to bad energy production, though of course miners can use bad energy source instead of sustainable energy.
  - Nursie 5y ago
    > How much energy would you say the financial system in your country... This is trivial to calculate. BTC alone uses more power than a number of mid-sized countries, like New Zealand. New Zealand, who run their own financial systems, payment networks, banks, insurance, industry, agriculture and .. well just an entire country off less power, providing more services to more people and higher transaction throughput while they're at it too. (NZ's payment card transaction rate appears to be an average of around 550 per second.)
user-the-name 5y ago
The utility for society is basically negative, given that they enable far more crime and fraud than anything else.
- hk__2 5y ago
  > The utility for society is basically negative, given that they enable far more crime and fraud than anything else. This could be said about money in general, but in both cases it’s not really helpful for the debate.
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    It could not.
    - jonwinstanley 5y ago
      I'd probably bet that most criminals just use standard money rather than crypto
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        The ratio of legitimate to illegitimate use of traditional currencies is way different than the ratio for cryptocurrencies. Of course the total number is smaller, since the total number of cryptocurrency users in general is smaller. The point is that there is massive legitimate use of traditional currencies, which makes them a benefit despite the illegitimate uses. The same is just not true for cryptocurrencies. Also, traditional currencies have many, many safeguards against illegitimate use. Cryptocurrencies are specifically designed to prevent those safeguards. There is a good reason that ransomware only took off once cryptocurrencies became available.
        denton-scratch 5y ago
        > legitimate use It is "legitimate" to use a cryptocurrency to buy pot. It may not be legal, depending on your jurisdiction; but "illegitimate" is a fuzzy word, expressing some kind of subjective disapproval. I personally think it's illegitimate to criminalise drug use. But that's just a subjective, personal opinion.
burnished 5y ago
What specifically? I haven't heard of anything yet.

BTC and ETH can not be stopped, ever. Their utility for society is far too high, despite the tradeoffs.

bsagdiyev 5y ago

And what, exactly, is this utility?

fnord123 5y ago
Ecoterrorist Ponzi scheme.
rajamaka 5y ago
Money laundering

quietbritishjim 5y ago

This sort of comment is exactly why articles like this will never result in constructive discussion on HN (or elsewhere). It doesn't address any of the comments in the article and doesn't even give any concrete examples of its point (in this case the "utility to society"). Don't take this personally, crypto always results in comments like this. It just turns into a vacuous slinging match. I tend to flag the articles about cryptocurrency/blockchain unless they contain some actually new technical innovation.

luka-birsa 5y ago
Oh come on, we're on HN. This is the most anti-cryptocurrency tech page that I can think of, with daily negative sentiment articles popping up. It's either bitcoin will destroy the world, ether is a giant cesspool that can be implemented with a database or the favourite Tether is a huge scam and will destroy the world. Let's not forget the NFT's are full-on money laundering scheme and LOL why would you buy JPGs if you can right click and save. Trust me, people (as in cryptocurrency realists) tried explaining in the comments, but the sentiment is too strong. Due to the meteoric rise in value and the fact that a lot of HN somehow ended sitting on the sidelines, people can't stop foretelling the impending doom and gloom while being oblivious to the underlying tenet that all of this crypto technology brings. I fully agree with you that articles like this turn into vacuous slinging match between camps. It's not tho because there are no concrete answers from the crypto side, it's simply due to the population on HN - it's impossible to have a constructive discussion if the sentiment is so negative. So yes, I also flag such content, because these discussions represent catnip for me and provide zero value.
- S6eUL 5y ago
  I think the issue is more nuanced. Many of the arguments against cryptocurrencies (or blockchain technologies) do have merit in my view (e.g. Theter being a scam, economic concerns such as deflation or the problematic envrionmental impact of PoW) but that does not mean that the entire space and any further innovation in it should be dismissed outright. However, I agree with you that this is the prevailing sentiment on HN. I find this quite sad because substantiated discussions on reddit about cryptocurrencies gets drowned out by all the shilling that is going on.
  - luka-birsa 5y ago
    I'd really like to discuss arguments against blockchain as I view some very valid (especially long-term deflation concerns) others not so much (Tether, PoW), but sadly not here (or reddit for that matter). I wonder if just stating my views around Tether (eg. not a problem, not relevant, not really a scam) will be enough to trigger knee-jerk reaction. Sad that it has to be like that, I view HN as the #1 place where engineers, technologists, geeks and nerds meet. Looks like they all enjoy some blockchain bashing.
    - S6eUL 5y ago
      Could you maybe expand a bit on why you think Tether is not much of a problem or link me to a ressource making that case?
matheusmoreira 5y ago
Well, what's the point? We've argued the same points with the same people over and over again. It's always the same arguments and nobody is convincing anyone of anything.

usrbinbash 5y ago

What's the utility for society exactly? As a currency? I have that already. And its stable, accepted almost everywhere, doesn't waste tons of energy and cannot be lost by forgetting a password. As ownership verification for items? I have that as well: Contracts, Bills and Agreements. They can even be digitally signed, which has all the advantages of an NFT (integrity, authentication, non-repuditation) with none of the disadvantages. So what tangible advantages does "crypto" have in these areas for society?

Feeble 5y ago
> As a currency? I have that already. And its stable, accepted almost everywhere, doesn't waste tons of energy and cannot be lost by forgetting a password. So you were born (or at least live) in a country that has a stable currency which is accepted almost everywhere, and you can trust your politicians to not undermine this currency by bad economic policies and/or creating very high inflation. Congratulations! However, a large part of earth's population do not enjoy this stability. For them crypto offers a way to store wealth that cannot be debased nor easily seized by authorities in bad faith. Some estimates are that 2 billion adults do not even have banking. You say your currency does not waste tons of energy. How much energy would you say the financial system in your country use in order to keep a sound ledger and enforce the monetary rules & policies? Bitcoin uses less energy than the gold industry. And gold mines wreck the environment (https://earthworks.org/campaigns/no-dirty-gold/impacts/ https://earthworks.org/campaigns/no-dirty-gold/impacts/). But you don't hear much about that even though most gold is used as a store of wealth, much like Bitcoin is. Energy usage should also not be equated to bad energy production, though of course miners can use bad energy source instead of sustainable energy.
- Nursie 5y ago
  > How much energy would you say the financial system in your country... This is trivial to calculate. BTC alone uses more power than a number of mid-sized countries, like New Zealand. New Zealand, who run their own financial systems, payment networks, banks, insurance, industry, agriculture and .. well just an entire country off less power, providing more services to more people and higher transaction throughput while they're at it too. (NZ's payment card transaction rate appears to be an average of around 550 per second.)

user-the-name 5y ago

The utility for society is basically negative, given that they enable far more crime and fraud than anything else.

hk__2 5y ago
> The utility for society is basically negative, given that they enable far more crime and fraud than anything else. This could be said about money in general, but in both cases it’s not really helpful for the debate.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  It could not.
  - jonwinstanley 5y ago
    I'd probably bet that most criminals just use standard money rather than crypto
    - user-the-name 5y ago
      The ratio of legitimate to illegitimate use of traditional currencies is way different than the ratio for cryptocurrencies. Of course the total number is smaller, since the total number of cryptocurrency users in general is smaller. The point is that there is massive legitimate use of traditional currencies, which makes them a benefit despite the illegitimate uses. The same is just not true for cryptocurrencies. Also, traditional currencies have many, many safeguards against illegitimate use. Cryptocurrencies are specifically designed to prevent those safeguards. There is a good reason that ransomware only took off once cryptocurrencies became available.
      - denton-scratch 5y ago
        > legitimate use It is "legitimate" to use a cryptocurrency to buy pot. It may not be legal, depending on your jurisdiction; but "illegitimate" is a fuzzy word, expressing some kind of subjective disapproval. I personally think it's illegitimate to criminalise drug use. But that's just a subjective, personal opinion.

burnished 5y ago

What specifically? I haven't heard of anything yet.