4 ms·

Even if I didn't already have well-formed opinions on this topic, reading the comments here would be enough to convince me that "tech" does not speak with any s

by cdata 4y ago

Even if I didn't already have well-formed opinions on this topic, reading the comments here would be enough to convince me that "tech" does not speak with any sort of unified voice on this topic. I wonder if we will start identifying factions of tech by the political orientations expressed by the technology in question.

mrpf1ster 4y ago
One of the (many) problems with cryptocurrency is that it’s holders are financially incentivized to generate hype and get people to buy in to it to drive the value of their coins up. Thus I am extremely skeptical of people with pro-cryptocurrency views on this website. If I had significant holdings in crypto, you can bet I would also be on hacker news trying to legitimize and defend anything to do with crypto to get people to buy in. This is also amplified by the sunken cost fallacy, and not wanting to admit someone convinced you to spend thousands of dollars on fake coins and an ape jpeg for your twitter profile.
- cdata 4y ago
  I consider myself a centrist in this debate. I don't think "crypto" technology is one giant scam (though there is a lot of scamming taking place), and I don't think it has delivered on most of its promises either (I suspect this will change in time). In your comment I read rhetoric that attempts to de-legitimize the other side by questioning if they are even authentic members of your community. Your comment is not "wrong" but it paints with a very broad brush (something I see a lot of crypto fans doing all the time). It certainly places you in one of two sincere-but-polarized political groups. I wish more people would foster nuanced attitudes about topics such as this. It makes for more interesting discussion.
  - mrpf1ster 4y ago
    I agree that I am definitely on one side of the fence regarding cryptocurrency. And perhaps my comment was a little too inflammatory. However, how do you approach a nuanced debate on this issue when one side has a financial incentive to promote their views and is liable to act in bad faith because of it? Not to mention the proliferation of bots online making it extremely hard to trust that any online discourse is genuine anymore. Not suggesting that half of hacker news is bots, but it only takes a few to seed an idea in a community.

by cdata 4y ago

mrpf1ster 4y ago

One of the (many) problems with cryptocurrency is that it’s holders are financially incentivized to generate hype and get people to buy in to it to drive the value of their coins up. Thus I am extremely skeptical of people with pro-cryptocurrency views on this website. If I had significant holdings in crypto, you can bet I would also be on hacker news trying to legitimize and defend anything to do with crypto to get people to buy in. This is also amplified by the sunken cost fallacy, and not wanting to admit someone convinced you to spend thousands of dollars on fake coins and an ape jpeg for your twitter profile.

cdata 4y ago
I consider myself a centrist in this debate. I don't think "crypto" technology is one giant scam (though there is a lot of scamming taking place), and I don't think it has delivered on most of its promises either (I suspect this will change in time). In your comment I read rhetoric that attempts to de-legitimize the other side by questioning if they are even authentic members of your community. Your comment is not "wrong" but it paints with a very broad brush (something I see a lot of crypto fans doing all the time). It certainly places you in one of two sincere-but-polarized political groups. I wish more people would foster nuanced attitudes about topics such as this. It makes for more interesting discussion.
- mrpf1ster 4y ago
  I agree that I am definitely on one side of the fence regarding cryptocurrency. And perhaps my comment was a little too inflammatory. However, how do you approach a nuanced debate on this issue when one side has a financial incentive to promote their views and is liable to act in bad faith because of it? Not to mention the proliferation of bots online making it extremely hard to trust that any online discourse is genuine anymore. Not suggesting that half of hacker news is bots, but it only takes a few to seed an idea in a community.