5 ms·

> Because technical minutiae are completely irrelevant if they don't eventually convert into useful features for products with at least some level of mass-marke

> Because technical minutiae are completely irrelevant if they don't eventually convert into useful features for products with at least some level of mass-market appeal. Why? You might care about building businesses, mass-market appeal, blah blah, but many (most?) technologies were created because people thought they were cool or interesting or just because they could. Nobody knew what LASERs were for when they invented them. To me the point of tech is to invent stuff and see what people do with it, not to make money or feed the economy or whatever, that’s a byproduct. Which coin is worth more money or what will gain mass market adoption is the least exciting part of the whole thing to me. We started with bitcoin having BFT consensus and proof of work to create decentralised, permissionless value (volatile or not!) but we now have multiple chains that can execute arbitrary code, sharding, performance improvements, lightweight chains, various types of proof of stake, token standards, automated market makers, DeFI, NFTs, DAOs, data availability proofs, IPFS, etc. etc.… that’s incredibly exciting! And if you read the actual academic and published research and see the advances being made, it’s even more incredible and wide ranging, and progress is very rapid. Of course it’d be nice if _some_ of it changed the world (and maybe it already has), but there’s plenty of time for that and it may only be 1% of the interesting new tech that turns out to do so. So what? It’s incredibly cool just to learn and understand it all and think about what might be. (And sure, buy tokens or whatever if you like them or just fancy a gamble. Do your research and don’t spend what you can’t afford to lose.)

chx 5y ago
> to create decentralised, permissionless value Since when do we call a Ponzi value?
- mw888 5y ago
  Right when it wasn’t subject to centralized control which could actually, easily, and covertly scam people. Just because you say something doesn’t mean it’s true or smart. Being short in the delusion of being clever is a sin of rationality and you should repent to Hitchens as soon as you can.
  - chx 5y ago
    2015: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/08/bitcoin-isnt-the-future-of-money-its-either-a-ponzi-scheme-or-a-pyramid-scheme/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/08/bitco... More current: https://ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2020-12-31-bitcoin-ponzi.html https://ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2020-12-31-bitcoin-pon... https://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2021-01-16-yes-ponzi.html https://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2021-01-16-yes-pon...
    - barnabee 5y ago
      Bitcoin is not a Ponzi scheme because IF it successfully achieves a certain level of adoption or usage it WILL have some intrinsic value. The current value can be seen as a view of the average expected future value. A risky bet/investment is not the same as a Ponzi scheme, even if _some_ people are talking it up like scammers. The fact that YOU do not believe that future will happen doesn't make it a Ponzi, just a bad investment in your eyes. And yes, some people talking up their book and trying to manipulate it's price — a pump and dump — is still a scam on their part, but it doesn't make the underlying asset a Ponzi scheme. At a bare minimum there are some fringe use cases (no matter how unsavoury - dark web, ransomware, etc.), so I'd argue that barring a major security flaw, even if bitcoin was banned everywhere, the floor price would be >0. (I am considerably more optimistic for long term use cases, but we're just talking about whether it's a Ponzi or not here, which doesn't require any extra optimism.) I honestly don't know if BTC will end up above the current price in 2, 5, 10, 50 years time, but I do still think it's incredibly cool that we were able to create something with a demonstrable non-zero value and no centralised control. The challenge now is to keep iterating the ideas, make new weird and wonderful things, throw them all at the wall, and see if anything sticks. Luckily plenty of people seem as excited about that research and exploration for the sake of it as me, so I think we're going to get to find out :)
      - volkk 5y ago
        its interesting that at this point, the arguments on HN have become so one sided and idiotic, that every time i see a web3 article, you might as well skip the comment section. the actual smart people that are into the blockchain as tech and a concept are providing really interesting points/examples, while maintaining a healthy and educated level of skepticism. then you have the HN holier than thou geniuses who think they have it all figured out because they can quickly scream ponzi over and over. it's fuckin weird. i always subscribed to this forum because it's full of nerds who are deeply interested in tech and can debate things neutrally. so not the case lately. and this is coming from someone who is deeply interested in the tech and fascinated by some of the subscultures that had been created out of crypto, while also remaining extremely skeptical and very turned off by some of the scams and mindless fanatics that exist. but, i still dive deep into whitepapers, and read a lot to have a good opinion on a subject, like...you should. there is A LOT of interesting shit in this space. i've been into it for a couple of months now and have yet to scratch the surface, honestly. ...yet the comments are always the same low effort crap which makes me realize nobody knows or understands a goddamn thing about this tech on here. really reductive surface level points.
Daishiman 5y ago

chx 5y ago

> to create decentralised, permissionless value Since when do we call a Ponzi value?

mw888 5y ago
Right when it wasn’t subject to centralized control which could actually, easily, and covertly scam people. Just because you say something doesn’t mean it’s true or smart. Being short in the delusion of being clever is a sin of rationality and you should repent to Hitchens as soon as you can.
- chx 5y ago
  2015: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/08/bitcoin-isnt-the-future-of-money-its-either-a-ponzi-scheme-or-a-pyramid-scheme/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/08/bitco... More current: https://ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2020-12-31-bitcoin-ponzi.html https://ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2020-12-31-bitcoin-pon... https://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2021-01-16-yes-ponzi.html https://www.ic.unicamp.br/~stolfi/bitcoin/2021-01-16-yes-pon...
  - barnabee 5y ago
    Bitcoin is not a Ponzi scheme because IF it successfully achieves a certain level of adoption or usage it WILL have some intrinsic value. The current value can be seen as a view of the average expected future value. A risky bet/investment is not the same as a Ponzi scheme, even if _some_ people are talking it up like scammers. The fact that YOU do not believe that future will happen doesn't make it a Ponzi, just a bad investment in your eyes. And yes, some people talking up their book and trying to manipulate it's price — a pump and dump — is still a scam on their part, but it doesn't make the underlying asset a Ponzi scheme. At a bare minimum there are some fringe use cases (no matter how unsavoury - dark web, ransomware, etc.), so I'd argue that barring a major security flaw, even if bitcoin was banned everywhere, the floor price would be >0. (I am considerably more optimistic for long term use cases, but we're just talking about whether it's a Ponzi or not here, which doesn't require any extra optimism.) I honestly don't know if BTC will end up above the current price in 2, 5, 10, 50 years time, but I do still think it's incredibly cool that we were able to create something with a demonstrable non-zero value and no centralised control. The challenge now is to keep iterating the ideas, make new weird and wonderful things, throw them all at the wall, and see if anything sticks. Luckily plenty of people seem as excited about that research and exploration for the sake of it as me, so I think we're going to get to find out :)
    - volkk 5y ago
      its interesting that at this point, the arguments on HN have become so one sided and idiotic, that every time i see a web3 article, you might as well skip the comment section. the actual smart people that are into the blockchain as tech and a concept are providing really interesting points/examples, while maintaining a healthy and educated level of skepticism. then you have the HN holier than thou geniuses who think they have it all figured out because they can quickly scream ponzi over and over. it's fuckin weird. i always subscribed to this forum because it's full of nerds who are deeply interested in tech and can debate things neutrally. so not the case lately. and this is coming from someone who is deeply interested in the tech and fascinated by some of the subscultures that had been created out of crypto, while also remaining extremely skeptical and very turned off by some of the scams and mindless fanatics that exist. but, i still dive deep into whitepapers, and read a lot to have a good opinion on a subject, like...you should. there is A LOT of interesting shit in this space. i've been into it for a couple of months now and have yet to scratch the surface, honestly. ...yet the comments are always the same low effort crap which makes me realize nobody knows or understands a goddamn thing about this tech on here. really reductive surface level points.

Daishiman 5y ago