3 ms·

Another article with a bunch of questionable data. Why can't crypto be dealt with the same as other technologies we don't like? Vote with your wallet, you don't

Another article with a bunch of questionable data. Why can't crypto be dealt with the same as other technologies we don't like? Vote with your wallet, you don't like it don't use it. But don't try to convince me that I'm wrong because I do use it. Because if you do, but leave things of the table, such as fashion, military, sporting entertainment and a million other things people are not up in arms about, that makes you ignorant at best.

nosianu 5y ago
> Another article with a bunch of questionable data Could you please elaborate? > Vote with your wallet, you don't like it don't use it. But don't try to convince me I don't understand this argument. You can easily do exactly what you ask of others: Don't click on the headline (the reader equivalent of "vote with your wallet"). Nobody is trying to convince you of anything. You came to the thread all on your own, and there since nobody reads every single topic posted on HN you made a conscious decision and an effort to expose yourself to this article and this discussion. > Because if you do, but leave things of the table... That argument makes just as little sense. We cannot discuss something because we have not yet discussed something else? Since this can be applied to every single topic, nothing can ever be discussed. The argument only makes some sense, depending on context, if the topics are chained together and the one being discussed depends on some other, and we don't have a result yet, so discussing the dependent one is not possible without knowing more about the previous one.
- jakupovic 5y ago
  > Because if you do, but leave things of the table... [......] The point of the article is: "BTC POW bad because too much energy". So, author is allowed to discuss, bitcoin, energy, waste, other equivalent technologies, but I cannot bring up other industries which also waste energy and whose use is questionable? That's the sense or logic if you prefer.
koonsolo 5y ago
There is 1 difference. People are voting with their wallets, and it's paying off. So even though we are reaping the benefits now, they need to prove we are all "stupid and the whole ponzi scheme will collapse and you will cry and we will say told you so." Jealousy, plain and simple. HN hates crypto, but instead of ignoring it, articles such as these keep popping up, to comfort everyone that "we're not stupid but they are."
burnished 5y ago
Just to get this straight, your argument isnt that the author is wrong, but that they shouldnt write about crypto until they've.. gotten mad about other things first? They probably already did, so, you can relax on that count.

nosianu 5y ago

> Another article with a bunch of questionable data Could you please elaborate? > Vote with your wallet, you don't like it don't use it. But don't try to convince me I don't understand this argument. You can easily do exactly what you ask of others: Don't click on the headline (the reader equivalent of "vote with your wallet"). Nobody is trying to convince you of anything. You came to the thread all on your own, and there since nobody reads every single topic posted on HN you made a conscious decision and an effort to expose yourself to this article and this discussion. > Because if you do, but leave things of the table... That argument makes just as little sense. We cannot discuss something because we have not yet discussed something else? Since this can be applied to every single topic, nothing can ever be discussed. The argument only makes some sense, depending on context, if the topics are chained together and the one being discussed depends on some other, and we don't have a result yet, so discussing the dependent one is not possible without knowing more about the previous one.

jakupovic 5y ago
> Because if you do, but leave things of the table... [......] The point of the article is: "BTC POW bad because too much energy". So, author is allowed to discuss, bitcoin, energy, waste, other equivalent technologies, but I cannot bring up other industries which also waste energy and whose use is questionable? That's the sense or logic if you prefer.

koonsolo 5y ago

There is 1 difference. People are voting with their wallets, and it's paying off. So even though we are reaping the benefits now, they need to prove we are all "stupid and the whole ponzi scheme will collapse and you will cry and we will say told you so." Jealousy, plain and simple. HN hates crypto, but instead of ignoring it, articles such as these keep popping up, to comfort everyone that "we're not stupid but they are."

burnished 5y ago

Just to get this straight, your argument isnt that the author is wrong, but that they shouldnt write about crypto until they've.. gotten mad about other things first? They probably already did, so, you can relax on that count.