6 ms·

David Gerard has an anti-crypto agenda and is a regular on r/buttcoin. He has publicly trashed crypto multiple times. [0]https://old.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comm

David Gerard has an anti-crypto agenda and is a regular on r/buttcoin. He has publicly trashed crypto multiple times. [0]https://old.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/nwblbp/podcast_proof_of_waste_w_david_gerard_when_the/ https://old.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/nwblbp/podcast_pr... [1]https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2021/0611/In-El-Salvador-rural-community-offers-glimpse-at-crypto-economy https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2021/0611/In-El-Salvador-... [2]http://blocktribune.com/david-gerard-can-get-long-way-just-buzzwords-big-claims/ http://blocktribune.com/david-gerard-can-get-long-way-just-b... [3] https://old.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6dkc8w/why_do_we_keep_letting_david_gerard_who_obviously/ https://old.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6dkc8w/why_do_we_...

NicoJuicy 5y ago
Or just check https://rekt.news https://rekt.news if you are open to see additional proof of some of the hacks occuring in crypto/defi land.
JKCalhoun 5y ago
Agenda? Hit-piece? Are people allowed to have opinions any more, allowed to draw conclusions and take a side? As if Albert Einstein authored anti-quantum hit-pieces, had a classical physics agenda (or choose any other contentious issue in history where people had divided opinions).
- acdha 5y ago
  It’s pure projection: cryptocurrency holders have to promote their goods for sale constantly because there’s no innate value. This does not constitute an “agenda” to them because recognizing it as such would basically be acknowledging their lack of utility.
- paulgb 5y ago
  It's a reflex I see a lot when crypto comes up. Instead of refuting any claims of the article (which almost nobody in these comments has attempted to do!), any negative commentary on crypto is dismissed as the self-preservation attempts of doomed globalist elites or bitter people who missed the boat. If only people applied the same media criticism to crypto trade publications, which are awash in conflicts of interest.
  - howdydoo 5y ago
    >Instead of refuting any claims of the article (which almost nobody in these comments has attempted to do!) That's the bullshit asymmetry principle in action. Let's go ahead and fact-check the first claim in the article. >More than 91 percent of Salvadorans want dollars, not bitcoins. Following the source, we see this quote (google-translated from Spanish): >University indicates that, when presenting the option of both currencies, 91.4% of Salvadorans favor the dollar, 4.9% for Bitcoin and 3.7% do not. answered. We also see: >However, when asked about the decision to adopt Bitcoin as a currency, 35% said they were in favor and 40% against. These both make perfect sense. Since my landlord won't accept bitcoin as rent payment, I would rather have dollars than be homeless. But in the future, maybe my landlord will accept bitcoin? If the poll is to be believed, 35% of the country wants that future, 40% do not, and 25% are undecided. I think that's a pretty amazing level of public support, accomplished in only a few months, especially in a country where 70% of people don't even have a bank account. However you feel about it, I don't think a 35%-40% split in the polls is enough to call the president a con artist and declare it a failure one week after the law passes. The author's bias is clear. --- I'll leave the rest of the article as an exercise for the reader, since (1) no one would take the time to read a fact check of the whole article, and (2) I don't have the time to write one. See also: bullshit asymmetry principle.
    - twelve40 5y ago
      Is this bullshit too? (honest question, i don't know) > but industrial rates in El Salvador are US13¢ to US15¢ per kilowatt-hour. In one four-day period, the Berlín operation mined $US269 of bitcoin — and was estimated to have spent at least $US4672 worth of electricity doing so because if it's not bullshit, the economics of this are firmly in the scam territory.
  - meowkit 5y ago
    This is a problem of echo chambers. Bring the criticisms to a pro crypto forum (or a development discord channel maybe) and you will get actual answers that may or may not satisfy you. If you haven’t noticed, HN hates crypto. Its why posts like these rise up every other week. Its a losing battle trying to argue the value and merits of crypto, when most have made up their mind and will downvote you anyways or parrot memes.
- howdydoo 5y ago
  In his opening paragraph, he calls a sitting president a con artist. The first "source" he cites is his own article, written only a few days after the law passed, already calling it a failure. I don't care which "side" you're on, it's a stretch to call this news. The real shame is that if the article were less biased, it would never have made it this high on the front page.
  - lalaland1125 5y ago
    > The first "source" he cites is his own article, written only a few days after the law passed, already calling it a failure. And then proceeds to cite over 10 outside sources. Why don't you just point out why you think the piece is wrong?

NicoJuicy 5y ago

Or just check https://rekt.news https://rekt.news if you are open to see additional proof of some of the hacks occuring in crypto/defi land.

JKCalhoun 5y ago

Agenda? Hit-piece? Are people allowed to have opinions any more, allowed to draw conclusions and take a side? As if Albert Einstein authored anti-quantum hit-pieces, had a classical physics agenda (or choose any other contentious issue in history where people had divided opinions).

acdha 5y ago
It’s pure projection: cryptocurrency holders have to promote their goods for sale constantly because there’s no innate value. This does not constitute an “agenda” to them because recognizing it as such would basically be acknowledging their lack of utility.
paulgb 5y ago
It's a reflex I see a lot when crypto comes up. Instead of refuting any claims of the article (which almost nobody in these comments has attempted to do!), any negative commentary on crypto is dismissed as the self-preservation attempts of doomed globalist elites or bitter people who missed the boat. If only people applied the same media criticism to crypto trade publications, which are awash in conflicts of interest.
- howdydoo 5y ago
  >Instead of refuting any claims of the article (which almost nobody in these comments has attempted to do!) That's the bullshit asymmetry principle in action. Let's go ahead and fact-check the first claim in the article. >More than 91 percent of Salvadorans want dollars, not bitcoins. Following the source, we see this quote (google-translated from Spanish): >University indicates that, when presenting the option of both currencies, 91.4% of Salvadorans favor the dollar, 4.9% for Bitcoin and 3.7% do not. answered. We also see: >However, when asked about the decision to adopt Bitcoin as a currency, 35% said they were in favor and 40% against. These both make perfect sense. Since my landlord won't accept bitcoin as rent payment, I would rather have dollars than be homeless. But in the future, maybe my landlord will accept bitcoin? If the poll is to be believed, 35% of the country wants that future, 40% do not, and 25% are undecided. I think that's a pretty amazing level of public support, accomplished in only a few months, especially in a country where 70% of people don't even have a bank account. However you feel about it, I don't think a 35%-40% split in the polls is enough to call the president a con artist and declare it a failure one week after the law passes. The author's bias is clear. --- I'll leave the rest of the article as an exercise for the reader, since (1) no one would take the time to read a fact check of the whole article, and (2) I don't have the time to write one. See also: bullshit asymmetry principle.
  - twelve40 5y ago
    Is this bullshit too? (honest question, i don't know) > but industrial rates in El Salvador are US13¢ to US15¢ per kilowatt-hour. In one four-day period, the Berlín operation mined $US269 of bitcoin — and was estimated to have spent at least $US4672 worth of electricity doing so because if it's not bullshit, the economics of this are firmly in the scam territory.
- meowkit 5y ago
  This is a problem of echo chambers. Bring the criticisms to a pro crypto forum (or a development discord channel maybe) and you will get actual answers that may or may not satisfy you. If you haven’t noticed, HN hates crypto. Its why posts like these rise up every other week. Its a losing battle trying to argue the value and merits of crypto, when most have made up their mind and will downvote you anyways or parrot memes.
howdydoo 5y ago
In his opening paragraph, he calls a sitting president a con artist. The first "source" he cites is his own article, written only a few days after the law passed, already calling it a failure. I don't care which "side" you're on, it's a stretch to call this news. The real shame is that if the article were less biased, it would never have made it this high on the front page.
- lalaland1125 5y ago
  > The first "source" he cites is his own article, written only a few days after the law passed, already calling it a failure. And then proceeds to cite over 10 outside sources. Why don't you just point out why you think the piece is wrong?