3 ms·

For the first 20+ years internet was relegated to a niche technology that will fail as we have faxes. I think your take on crypto is absurd and nonsensical in l

For the first 20+ years internet was relegated to a niche technology that will fail as we have faxes. I think your take on crypto is absurd and nonsensical in light of internet success. Here is the relevant quote: "By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet's impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine's." Maybe you don't remember that quote, but it was said by Nobel winner, Krugman.

ShamelessC 4y ago
Krugman responded to this: https://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-responds-to-internet-quote-2013-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-responds-to-int... > The reason people are dredging up this old quote is that Krugman jokingly said Bitcoin is Evil. He doesn't think it's evil, but he is skeptical that Bitcoin can be a real store of money, and actually work as a currency. [...] > We emailed Krugman for a comment on the quote and here's his explanation: Krugman: > Well, two things. > First, look at the whole piece. It was a thing for the Times magazine's 100th anniversary, written as if by someone looking back from 2098, so the point was to be fun and provocative, not to engage in careful forecasting; I mean, there are lines in there about St. Petersburg having more skyscrapers than New York, which was not a prediction, just a thought-provoker. > But the main point is that I don't claim any special expertise in technology -- I almost never make technological forecasts, and the only reason there was stuff like that in the 98 piece was because the assignment required that I do that sort of thing. The issues about Bitcoin, however, are not technological! Everyone agrees that it's technically very sweet. But does it work as money? That's a very different kind of question. > And the fact that people are throwing around my 98 quote actually shows that they don't get this point -- that they're confusing technology with monetary economics.
- jakupovic 4y ago
  Yes, Krugman responded after throwing something like that in ether. Doesn't make him right or more knowledgeable having to reassess his original thinking. Also, Krugman had to go back on his take of the internet, all I'm saying is that none can predict future and the "smartest" of us can be and often are wrong.
  - ShamelessC 4y ago
    Sure, I'm just suggesting your argument isn't terribly convincing. Maybe stick to the actual merits of the tech rather than appeal to the inability of humanity to accurately predict the future. That's not as much of a guarantee of success as you think, and indicates you are biased.
    - jakupovic 4y ago
      My argument, around knowing the future, which is 100% correct, as none can. What is your argument? Crypto doesn't work because you said so? My point is that people presumably smarter than you, have in the past said things which turned out to be wrong. So then what evidence do you have other than your words? At least I brought a quote to illustrate my point. You brought a subsequent explanation by the author why they were wrong. I'm expecting the same from you, in 8 years, saying how you were wrong. Thanks ahead of time.
      - ShamelessC 4y ago
        I just quoted an article and said you weren't very convincing. You're still pretty unconvincing however, seeing you react so defensively suggests a bit of cognitive dissonance. At some point, the line always goes down. Just try to cash out before it does, and don't fool anyone to do so. See you in 8 years.
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  So I hadn't seen Krugman's 98 quote before, but it reminds me of Cliff Stohl who wrote a whole book skeptical of the internet in 1995. The thing is that looking back a couple decades on, their criticisms land for me - they made good points but the Internet was so rapidly adopted that they looked like fools at the time, but I think that as things have worn on and I've gotten older, they look more prescient in retrospect.
giantrobot 4y ago
> For the first 20+ years internet was relegated to a niche technology that will fail as we have faxes. I think your take on crypto is absurd and nonsensical in light of internet success. This is in no way a historically accurate statement. Thirty years ago the utility of data networks was well demonstrated. Not just the IP-based Internet but X.25 networks before and parallel to it (Tymnet etc). Data networks were only a "niche" technology because they were expensive. They increased in size and utility in step with decreasing prices. Cryptocurrencies haven't brought anywhere close to that same utility. The only "problem" they have solved is separating rubes from real money in trade for Geoffrey dollars. Cryptocurrency has in fact trended the opposite direction from Internet technologies as they're more expensive to work with as time passes. If cryptocurrencies (and associated technologies) were actually meant to be useful their costs would be decreasing over time allowing wider access. The fact their very design increases costs as they scale should tell you they're naked rent extraction vehicles and nothing more.

ShamelessC 4y ago

Krugman responded to this: https://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-responds-to-internet-quote-2013-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-responds-to-int... > The reason people are dredging up this old quote is that Krugman jokingly said Bitcoin is Evil. He doesn't think it's evil, but he is skeptical that Bitcoin can be a real store of money, and actually work as a currency. [...] > We emailed Krugman for a comment on the quote and here's his explanation: Krugman: > Well, two things. > First, look at the whole piece. It was a thing for the Times magazine's 100th anniversary, written as if by someone looking back from 2098, so the point was to be fun and provocative, not to engage in careful forecasting; I mean, there are lines in there about St. Petersburg having more skyscrapers than New York, which was not a prediction, just a thought-provoker. > But the main point is that I don't claim any special expertise in technology -- I almost never make technological forecasts, and the only reason there was stuff like that in the 98 piece was because the assignment required that I do that sort of thing. The issues about Bitcoin, however, are not technological! Everyone agrees that it's technically very sweet. But does it work as money? That's a very different kind of question. > And the fact that people are throwing around my 98 quote actually shows that they don't get this point -- that they're confusing technology with monetary economics.

jakupovic 4y ago
Yes, Krugman responded after throwing something like that in ether. Doesn't make him right or more knowledgeable having to reassess his original thinking. Also, Krugman had to go back on his take of the internet, all I'm saying is that none can predict future and the "smartest" of us can be and often are wrong.
- ShamelessC 4y ago
  Sure, I'm just suggesting your argument isn't terribly convincing. Maybe stick to the actual merits of the tech rather than appeal to the inability of humanity to accurately predict the future. That's not as much of a guarantee of success as you think, and indicates you are biased.
  - jakupovic 4y ago
    My argument, around knowing the future, which is 100% correct, as none can. What is your argument? Crypto doesn't work because you said so? My point is that people presumably smarter than you, have in the past said things which turned out to be wrong. So then what evidence do you have other than your words? At least I brought a quote to illustrate my point. You brought a subsequent explanation by the author why they were wrong. I'm expecting the same from you, in 8 years, saying how you were wrong. Thanks ahead of time.
    - ShamelessC 4y ago
      I just quoted an article and said you weren't very convincing. You're still pretty unconvincing however, seeing you react so defensively suggests a bit of cognitive dissonance. At some point, the line always goes down. Just try to cash out before it does, and don't fool anyone to do so. See you in 8 years.
hotpotamus 4y ago
So I hadn't seen Krugman's 98 quote before, but it reminds me of Cliff Stohl who wrote a whole book skeptical of the internet in 1995. The thing is that looking back a couple decades on, their criticisms land for me - they made good points but the Internet was so rapidly adopted that they looked like fools at the time, but I think that as things have worn on and I've gotten older, they look more prescient in retrospect.

giantrobot 4y ago

> For the first 20+ years internet was relegated to a niche technology that will fail as we have faxes. I think your take on crypto is absurd and nonsensical in light of internet success. This is in no way a historically accurate statement. Thirty years ago the utility of data networks was well demonstrated. Not just the IP-based Internet but X.25 networks before and parallel to it (Tymnet etc). Data networks were only a "niche" technology because they were expensive. They increased in size and utility in step with decreasing prices. Cryptocurrencies haven't brought anywhere close to that same utility. The only "problem" they have solved is separating rubes from real money in trade for Geoffrey dollars. Cryptocurrency has in fact trended the opposite direction from Internet technologies as they're more expensive to work with as time passes. If cryptocurrencies (and associated technologies) were actually meant to be useful their costs would be decreasing over time allowing wider access. The fact their very design increases costs as they scale should tell you they're naked rent extraction vehicles and nothing more.