Hacker news is holistically anti cryptocurrency. Which disappoints me.
It has virtues.
As someone who works in applied Cryptography and has also worked for the European Central Bank, we need “crypto”.
1) seigniorage is an abused privilege. Source: US debt ceiling at 27TRN.
2) permissionless money has value, I cannot send more than 5k a day using my bank. I can send any amount using crypto. I also don’t need two utility bills and an address to open an “account”
3) it’s censorship resistant. Govt’s can’t just stop payments or shutdown the network.
Use Monero.
EDIT: downvoted again. I’m not contributing here anymore.
> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.
I'll offer my two cents in case it gives another perspective you haven't considered. The meaning of voting on HN is far from obvious. Various people downvote for different reasons.
Maybe they are unimpressed by your comment, maybe they disagree with it, maybe they think it is inappropriate somehow, maybe they don't like that you plugged a particular cryptocurrency, or something else.
In any case, I recommend not worry about the votes, up or down. At times, it can be helpful to see if what you are writing is perceived as useful, if you can take the feedback in that manner without taking it personally.
Graffur, yes, I've read them. But I'd bet you know that; I think probably you are making another point. I'll write it out, and you can tell me if you agree. You are pointing out an inconsistency in what I wrote: you think it is unfair of me to suggest that someone else read the guidelines while at the same time not following them.
> Hacker news is holistically anti cryptocurrency.
First, your use of "holistically" doesn't make sense to me.
> ho·lis·ti·cal·ly | ˌhōˈlistik(ə)lē/ |
> adverb
> mainly Philosophy in a way that is characterized by comprehension of the parts of something as intimately interconnected and explicable only by reference to the whole: the damage caused by unethical behavior needs to be examined holistically.
> • Medicine in a way that treats the whole person, taking into account mental and social factors, rather than just the symptoms of a disease: he has been treated holistically for a heart murmur.
Second, are you characterizing the people on HN as being mostly or completely against cryptocurrency? This sounds like anecdotage. Remember, not everyone with an opinion broadcasts it.
You're not wrong, and you have some good points here, especially about the banking limits. I'm not sure where the cynicism comes from, but HN seems very hostile to this space.
I have sent large amounts all over the place. As for pretending to be anonymous and outside of society, I have no use for that. The issue of crypto currency, besides the resource impact, is the evil that comes from trying to destroy democratic government.
>The issue of crypto currency, besides the resource impact, is the evil that comes from trying to destroy democratic government.
The evil of democratic government (as opposed to a strong republic) is that that 51% can vote to rob the 49% of everything they own. Crypto prevents this.
> Yeah. I think these HN threads are either manipulated, or HN is full of idiots. Not sure which is more likely.
Or perhaps neither.
Some other simple explanations include:
1. People see it differently than you do.
2. People are not engaging in conversation as a way to learn from each other; rather they are talking past each other.
I'm inclined to think it is a mix of both.
Like I mentioned in a comment nearby, people on HN seem to vote based on different criteria. The lack of clarity can make it hard to extract clear meaning from votes.
Cryptocurrency is maybe the most important innovation is human history
Electricity? The wheel? Money? Sulfa drugs? Spoken language? Counting? Agriculture? Written language? There's a long, long list and to put cryptocurrency on it seems awfully hubristic.
Money that can't be monopolized is more important than those. The whole human history is about money and how someone monopolized it and started extracting value from it, to get more powerful, to fund wars and destruction. Bitcoin can't be monopolized and enables humanity to rise on a completely new level.
Unconvinced. Electricity definitely seems like a much bigger deal. Bitcoin is going to take humanity to a new stage of existence? Here comes peak hype, I guess.
In fact, you're so breathlessly ecstatic about the cult of bitcoin that I have to wonder if I'm being spoofed...
Individual freedom and sovereignty are more important to society than electricity. I'm pretty sure you haven't thought of Bitcoin in that way, or how Bitcoin might enable this. Importance is subjective, but I think most people would choose freedom over electricity. After that, we might argue whether Bitcoin would actually be helpful in enabling this.
It's not a simple concept to explain so here's a couple of videos which might help you to understand it better.
It has virtues.
As someone who works in applied Cryptography and has also worked for the European Central Bank, we need “crypto”.
1) seigniorage is an abused privilege. Source: US debt ceiling at 27TRN.
2) permissionless money has value, I cannot send more than 5k a day using my bank. I can send any amount using crypto. I also don’t need two utility bills and an address to open an “account”
3) it’s censorship resistant. Govt’s can’t just stop payments or shutdown the network.
Use Monero.
EDIT: downvoted again. I’m not contributing here anymore.