3 ms·

A shockingly one-sided article. Probably colored by their aversion to Libertarianism.

by VMG 12y ago

sillysaurus3 12y ago
Which sentences from the article do you disagree with?
- pseud0r 12y ago
  The following is presented as indisputable facts in the article: Bitcoin is a scam Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme There is zero chance that bitcoin will ever be mainstream Bitcoin does not have a single advantage over fiat currency Bitcoin will never be useful for online shopping None of the problems with bitcoin can be fixed All bitcoin users and developers are incompetent, does not know anything about economics, does not understand people at all and has no understanding on how to build reliable financial computing infrastructure Looks pretty one-sided to me.
  - sillysaurus3 12y ago
    The reason I asked "Which sentences from the article do you disagree with?" was to have you quote a sentence and then write a rebuttal. We strive to do better on HN than write strawman arguments, and we try to make our critique substantive and thorough. (A handy test: if I can't find a specific sentence to disagree with, I might be arguing a strawman position, so I try doubly hard to be thoughtful in that circumstance.) Also, on HN, a line in italics usually means "this is a direct quote," so it's generally taboo to put things in italics which you didn't copy-paste from some source. For example, the word "mainstream" never appears in the article, so it shouldn't be in an italicized line.
    - pseud0r 12y ago
      Actually most individual sentences aren't all that bad, it's more that the overall tone of the article seeks to portray bitcoin as something bad, though it does funnily enough seem to be somewhat pro-dogecoin. Thanks for letting me know about italics, it was meant as a list and not a quote. I'll make sure to remember for next time :)
- VMG 12y ago
  Despite what the domain name suggests, the article is not a well-reasoned argument that even has any concrete conclusions.

A shockingly one-sided article. Probably colored by their aversion to Libertarianism.

by VMG 12y ago

A shockingly one-sided article. Probably colored by their aversion to Libertarianism.

sillysaurus3 12y ago

Which sentences from the article do you disagree with?

pseud0r 12y ago
The following is presented as indisputable facts in the article: Bitcoin is a scam Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme There is zero chance that bitcoin will ever be mainstream Bitcoin does not have a single advantage over fiat currency Bitcoin will never be useful for online shopping None of the problems with bitcoin can be fixed All bitcoin users and developers are incompetent, does not know anything about economics, does not understand people at all and has no understanding on how to build reliable financial computing infrastructure Looks pretty one-sided to me.
- sillysaurus3 12y ago
  The reason I asked "Which sentences from the article do you disagree with?" was to have you quote a sentence and then write a rebuttal. We strive to do better on HN than write strawman arguments, and we try to make our critique substantive and thorough. (A handy test: if I can't find a specific sentence to disagree with, I might be arguing a strawman position, so I try doubly hard to be thoughtful in that circumstance.) Also, on HN, a line in italics usually means "this is a direct quote," so it's generally taboo to put things in italics which you didn't copy-paste from some source. For example, the word "mainstream" never appears in the article, so it shouldn't be in an italicized line.
  - pseud0r 12y ago
    Actually most individual sentences aren't all that bad, it's more that the overall tone of the article seeks to portray bitcoin as something bad, though it does funnily enough seem to be somewhat pro-dogecoin. Thanks for letting me know about italics, it was meant as a list and not a quote. I'll make sure to remember for next time :)
VMG 12y ago
Despite what the domain name suggests, the article is not a well-reasoned argument that even has any concrete conclusions.