I thought @johnarb must arrive soon, at least with likes on anything against the post. I was not disappointed.
Why This Computer Scientist Says All Cryptocurrency Should “Die in a Fire”
- Thread starter Frederick Foresight
- Start date
I thought @johnarb must arrive soon, at least with likes on anything against the post. I was not disappointed.
You literally just did a ad hominem.
I'm still waiting for pro-crypto people to provide arguments. After all, if he's so stupid, it would be easy to decimate his points. But there's silence except for the "he so stoopid" stuff.
Even if cryptos were much more widely used, how would most of these points be untrue?
Well...in the end his arguments are pretty much at least 3 years old and they were brought up again and again and crypto is still there.
I wonder when people will realize why this stuff still exists if it's nothing but a retail gambling casino...perhaps it's time to introduce Stigums Money Market
So he has no credibility because he didn't call a market turn exactly? Maybe he should have read George Soros' work on reflexivity before calling a turn, but that doesn't make his conclusions fundamentally unsound. As a couple of other posters noted, neither you, nor any of the other cheerleaders here, have taken apart any element of his argument. Sorry, but you are being as half-assed in your response as you accuse crypto detractors of being. Just calling it as I see it.
By that standard alone and no other, a snake oil salesman would be an exemplar of entrepreneurship.
I checked his credentials before posting the thread. I saw the twitter thing you referred to. I think you're reaching.
Look, I will be the first to admit that I know nothing of consequence about the workings of cryptocurrencies. But how am I supposed to regard this "asset" when the stuff is made out of thin air essentially by solving puzzles? Commodities, I can comprehend. Stock indexes make sense to me. But this crypto/blockchain/nft shit is above my paygrade. I'll let you guys finesse your way to your respective crypto fortunes. But if you're looking to buy more dips and planning to hold long term, I think you'd do well to address the man's concerns. At least for yourself. Aren't sound arguments made stronger by being challenged? No one needs another yes man.
Last edited:
This logical fallacy is called "attacking the messenger". Nice job by the way.
I haven't even read the novella, but why don't you attack his ARGUMENTS??
Oh, in another news, BTC has just dropped 3.5K in 24 hours, but prolly nothing...
The curse of chat boards is ad hominem attacks
AD hominem attacking the authority is near the bottom when making a proper counterpoint. Refuting the central point is at the top.
Last edited:
Baron
ET Founder
If you read the first sentence of my response to VicBee, I explicitly said there's nothing to argue. I don't need to argue point-by-point and why is that? Because all the technologies he's criticizing as being weak, worthless, old, fragile, stupid, etc. all have had essentially the same level of super high uptake when you look at implementation and usage over the last several years. It's all right there in the numbers.
Hey, I get it. He thinks he's smarter than the crypto developers, the crypto adopters, and the crypto investors. He thinks that the folks over at BlackRock, Google, Andreesen Horowitz, Morgan Stanley and tons of other incredible companies are a bunch of idiots and they've got it all wrong. He thinks the entire crypto universe is going to implode and go to zero and everyone's gonna get burned, except for him of course.
It's like trying to argue with someone at a bar who tries to criticize every aspect of Tom Brady's performance over the years to come across like Brady can't throw a football worth a shit, but what would be the point of arguing with someone like that? Anybody with a third-grade education can look up Brady's performance data and see that it shows the exact opposite of what the idiot across the bar is trying to persuade people to believe.
I dont even need to read nor have time for that long ass article from someone calling themselves a "Computer Scientist"
Just the title alone is enough to make me not want to read the article. And even if i did, its nothing that i haven't already heard before. Just some loser that didnt get accepted for a job is now going to tell the world about how right he is and how everyone else is wrong...
Dont have time for that crap.
Just the title alone is enough to make me not want to read the article. And even if i did, its nothing that i haven't already heard before. Just some loser that didnt get accepted for a job is now going to tell the world about how right he is and how everyone else is wrong...
Dont have time for that crap.
Frightening if that's how impermeable your are to others point of view. Almost fanatic.I dont even need to read nor have time for that long ass article from someone calling themselves a "Computer Scientist"
Just the title alone is enough to make me not want to read the article. And even if i did, its nothing that i haven't already heard before. Just some loser that didnt get accepted for a job is now going to tell the world about how right he is and how everyone else is wrong...
Dont have time for that crap.
It is sad to see you being a cultist fan boy... This logical fallacy is called the appeal to authority.
They seldom are. LTCM was full of geniuses. So was Enron. Or 3AC if that matters.
In fucking 13 years crypto couldn't make some big improvement. One of the biggest improvement was done by Charlie Lee when he made Litecoin,(technically superior to BTC) and that was already 12 years ago. By the way he was smart enough to cash out selling all his LTC at 205 (ATH being 260 and currently at 55). This is what I call true genius, when you recognize that you just got LUCKY, and there was nothing to your invention, so you cash out on the top!!(a la Mark Cuban)
You are acting like big investment banks never make a bad decision and in market downturns they don't lose a shitload of money. The simple explanation is that there is too much capital available and everyone is looking for the next best thing, so they are spreading money left and right.
Crypto has been still looking for a usecase, beside blackmail and money laundering...
They seldom are. LTCM was full of geniuses. So was Enron. Or 3AC if that matters.
In fucking 13 years crypto couldn't make some big improvement. One of the biggest improvement was done by Charlie Lee when he made Litecoin,(technically superior to BTC) and that was already 12 years ago. By the way he was smart enough to cash out selling all his LTC at 205 (ATH being 260 and currently at 55). This is what I call true genius, when you recognize that you just got LUCKY, and there was nothing to your invention, so you cash out on the top!!(a la Mark Cuban)
You are acting like big investment banks never make a bad decision and in market downturns they don't lose a shitload of money. The simple explanation is that there is too much capital available and everyone is looking for the next best thing, so they are spreading money left and right.
Crypto has been still looking for a usecase, beside blackmail and money laundering...
Last edited: