4 ms·
1. not a single mention of any scaling solutions whatsoever. 2. "zomg carbon footprint" - apparently renewables can't properly supply enough to power a tiny co
by inter_netuser 5y ago
1. not a single mention of any scaling solutions whatsoever.
2. "zomg carbon footprint" - apparently renewables can't properly supply enough to power a tiny country size of Portugal or Netherlands? I thought we are going to power the Earth with renewables? Something seems rather inconsistent here. Of course this Malthusian cannot bring himself to utter the word "nuclear".
3. Mining pools are made up of many individual miners andm depending on the protocol, the lucky hashing units and not the pool, constructs the block, and as such would not be a trusted third party. Something he seems to be blissfully unaware of.
Even if the pool constructs the block - hashing units can be pivoted away from a malicious pool in seconds.
4. Banks get hacked and lose money on the regular, it's not unique to DeFi. Insurance for DeFi exists, just it banks purchase fidelity bonds.
5. Not a single mention of censorship resistance at all. This alone should disqualify this immediately, tbh.
Reads like something written by a privileged, out of touch person who has never had to face a day of actual hardship in his life, such as: confiscation of wealth, destruction of savings by inflation, personal bankruptcy due to sovereign default, or even outright denial of access to banking for the politically suppressed minorities.
- thematrixturtle 5y ago1. For scaling, the burden of proof lies on Lightning Network/ETH2/whatever they're calling them today to demonstrate that they can scale (how many years has it been now?), and he demolishes two widely proposed alternatives to PoW, namely proof of storage and proof of stake. 2. This is a rant, not an error. 3. I'm not sure what you're arguing here? His argument is that in practice, a tiny cartel of mining pools exerts central control over most cryptos, meaning they're not really decentralized at all. 4. There are a) way, way, way more DeFi hacks and exploits than TradFi ones, and b) consumers don't get wiped out when a bank gets robbed or hacked. 5. Omission != error 6. Ad hominem.
- inter_netuser 5y ago1. burden is on those claiming expertise. 2. being luddite in 2022 is a grave error. 3. he's absolutely dead wrong. pools do not exercise central control which has been observed empirically numerous times. 4. Card industry alone loses $40B per year. That's just cards. Lending and wealth is a whole other universe. So make it roughly 1-2T per year, which is the entire crypto marketcap lost every year by tradfi, roughly 10x than DeFi. F. GG. 5. omission of the most key topic at hand, isn't a simple error, it's proof of ignorance. 6. ad hom, but by you. (since when is it an ad hom to call someone wealthy and successful to the point they are immune to vagaries of daily life in most locales on Earth? Amazing.)
- derac 5y agoCan I see some sources for (4) and your claim that his sources are biased?
- inter_netuser 5y ago
- timeon 5y agoIt seems that in the end the one spreading the 'FUD' is you.
- dmitriid 5y ago> being luddite in 2022 is a grave error. > ad hom, but by you. riiiight