5 ms·

Honestly you couldnt explain at all what could be interesting usecase and resulted to saying "its not for you". Whats killer app of TOR? Well its TOR - its pret

Honestly you couldnt explain at all what could be interesting usecase and resulted to saying "its not for you". Whats killer app of TOR? Well its TOR - its pretty clear proposition even to mainstream users it will be instantly obvious - the privacy is the feature.

selestify 5y ago
> Honestly you couldnt explain at all what could be interesting usecase and resulted to saying "its not for you". I've explained again and again in other comments. As did the parent comment of this whole thread. It's really not that hard to understand, but there's nothing I can do if you don't want to understand. > Well its TOR - its pretty clear proposition even to mainstream users it will be instantly obvious - the privacy is the feature. Really? Have you ever met a non-technical user who said they wanted to use Tor for anything? Regardless, that's entirely besides the point. So what if a mainstream user doesn't understand why version control would be useful for their Excel sheets? The rest of us carry on using version control just fine.
- acdha 5y ago
  > I've explained again and again in other comments. As did the parent comment of this whole thread. It's really not that hard to understand, but there's nothing I can do if you don't want to understand. Look, we all know how MLMs work. Just say that you’re finding reasons for other people to pay money for your tokens rather than accusing people of not understanding. None of your comments have included a compelling sales pitch and it’s not the reader’s obligation to help you improve it.
  - selestify 5y ago
    There's no compelling sales pitch because I'm not trying to make one. I think there's already too much dumb money in it already, and I sure don't want yours either. Those of us who want or need it will continue to use it. Those of us who don't... well then, just don't. You're looking for something that just isn't there, so you can sneer at it and show your snide superiority. Go somewhere else for that sort of validation, because you're not getting it from me.
    - smoldesu 5y ago
      Why are you being so rude to people who just want to foster a real conversation with you about cryptocurrency? When you're backed into a corner you can't resort to "it's not for you", and start making personal attacks. It frankly makes your case look paper-thin and further reinforces the idea that cryptocurrency is a chump's game.
      - selestify 5y ago
        These people are hardly trying to foster a real conversation. Person I was responding to implied I'm trying to rope him into an MLM scheme. I respond in kind, and I'm the one being rude? > When you're backed into a corner you can't resort to "it's not for you" I think your bias is showing. I'm hardly backed into a corner. From my perspective, I've only ever stated hard facts. They're the ones backed into a corner by these facts, and all they can ever muster up is "Oh but I don't find that useful. My use case is an app that literally only myself uses." It's like wading into a conversation about Spark and saying it's overkill when you just want to process a hundred line CSV file. No duh, that's not what it's meant for. It gets real old when commenter after commenter -- and often even the same commenter -- misses the same point again and again. And I'll say, that includes you. You're backed into a corner and unable to name any alternatives here [1], so you resort to criticizing my tone instead. > It frankly makes your case look paper-thin and further reinforces the idea that cryptocurrency is a chump's game. I wasn't looking to convince anyone in particular, and that includes you. It seems you're more swayed by tone than by facts. So be it. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29588753 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29588753
        smoldesu 5y ago
        Your hard facts are really just reframing a conversation that time and time again you've failed to engage with. People are calling Web3 a fraud; a system where value is derived simply from the demand of crypto in general, and purely serves to benefit people who invested first (like MLM). When confronted about the possibility of all of it being a scam, your only response was "caveat emptor". When people say that's stupid, you resort to "well that's fine, I didn't want your money anyways". What people want to see is how Web3 iterates on the internet as it exists right now. You've provided a few implementation details, and repeatedly stated that it's different, but at no point have you produced a compelling refutation to the idea that, as a concept, it is a scam. Web3 is a bubble, even you're willing to admit as much; "there's already too much dumb money in it already" you claimed. Furthermore, you're arguing for a level of utility that doesn't exist out of the context of transferring money to wildly unstable assets. This is a textbook scam, and your rhetoric will perpetually be at odds with the rest of the discussion unless you engage them on their own terms. Web3 is marketing itself as something it is not. You're using a combination of expectation management and goalpost shifting to refute that, and people have called you on it. I can imagine that you don't see yourself as "losing" these arguments, since you haven't even responded to them in the first place.

selestify 5y ago

> Honestly you couldnt explain at all what could be interesting usecase and resulted to saying "its not for you". I've explained again and again in other comments. As did the parent comment of this whole thread. It's really not that hard to understand, but there's nothing I can do if you don't want to understand. > Well its TOR - its pretty clear proposition even to mainstream users it will be instantly obvious - the privacy is the feature. Really? Have you ever met a non-technical user who said they wanted to use Tor for anything? Regardless, that's entirely besides the point. So what if a mainstream user doesn't understand why version control would be useful for their Excel sheets? The rest of us carry on using version control just fine.

acdha 5y ago
> I've explained again and again in other comments. As did the parent comment of this whole thread. It's really not that hard to understand, but there's nothing I can do if you don't want to understand. Look, we all know how MLMs work. Just say that you’re finding reasons for other people to pay money for your tokens rather than accusing people of not understanding. None of your comments have included a compelling sales pitch and it’s not the reader’s obligation to help you improve it.
- selestify 5y ago
  There's no compelling sales pitch because I'm not trying to make one. I think there's already too much dumb money in it already, and I sure don't want yours either. Those of us who want or need it will continue to use it. Those of us who don't... well then, just don't. You're looking for something that just isn't there, so you can sneer at it and show your snide superiority. Go somewhere else for that sort of validation, because you're not getting it from me.
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    Why are you being so rude to people who just want to foster a real conversation with you about cryptocurrency? When you're backed into a corner you can't resort to "it's not for you", and start making personal attacks. It frankly makes your case look paper-thin and further reinforces the idea that cryptocurrency is a chump's game.
    - selestify 5y ago
      These people are hardly trying to foster a real conversation. Person I was responding to implied I'm trying to rope him into an MLM scheme. I respond in kind, and I'm the one being rude? > When you're backed into a corner you can't resort to "it's not for you" I think your bias is showing. I'm hardly backed into a corner. From my perspective, I've only ever stated hard facts. They're the ones backed into a corner by these facts, and all they can ever muster up is "Oh but I don't find that useful. My use case is an app that literally only myself uses." It's like wading into a conversation about Spark and saying it's overkill when you just want to process a hundred line CSV file. No duh, that's not what it's meant for. It gets real old when commenter after commenter -- and often even the same commenter -- misses the same point again and again. And I'll say, that includes you. You're backed into a corner and unable to name any alternatives here [1], so you resort to criticizing my tone instead. > It frankly makes your case look paper-thin and further reinforces the idea that cryptocurrency is a chump's game. I wasn't looking to convince anyone in particular, and that includes you. It seems you're more swayed by tone than by facts. So be it. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29588753 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29588753
      - smoldesu 5y ago
        Your hard facts are really just reframing a conversation that time and time again you've failed to engage with. People are calling Web3 a fraud; a system where value is derived simply from the demand of crypto in general, and purely serves to benefit people who invested first (like MLM). When confronted about the possibility of all of it being a scam, your only response was "caveat emptor". When people say that's stupid, you resort to "well that's fine, I didn't want your money anyways". What people want to see is how Web3 iterates on the internet as it exists right now. You've provided a few implementation details, and repeatedly stated that it's different, but at no point have you produced a compelling refutation to the idea that, as a concept, it is a scam. Web3 is a bubble, even you're willing to admit as much; "there's already too much dumb money in it already" you claimed. Furthermore, you're arguing for a level of utility that doesn't exist out of the context of transferring money to wildly unstable assets. This is a textbook scam, and your rhetoric will perpetually be at odds with the rest of the discussion unless you engage them on their own terms. Web3 is marketing itself as something it is not. You're using a combination of expectation management and goalpost shifting to refute that, and people have called you on it. I can imagine that you don't see yourself as "losing" these arguments, since you haven't even responded to them in the first place.