35 ms·
If the article wasn't as old as it is (almost eight years), I'd take it as a given that the author deliberately omitted a whole lot of things that might put BTC
by usrusr 5y ago
If the article wasn't as old as it is (almost eight years), I'd take it as a given that the author deliberately omitted a whole lot of things that might put BTC in a bad light. Considering that even in 2014 the days of whole-number BTC amounting to play money had long been over, I wouldn't be surprised if there was self-censoring due to being personally invested even back then (but I wouldn't have suspected it back then)
- kens 5y agoI'm somewhat offended by your comment. For the record, I did not deliberately omit things that would put BTC in a bad light. I was not personally invested in Bitcoin (beyond a dollar or so for experiments). I wrote plenty of things negative about Bitcoin, enough to be disliked by part of the community.