A short history of internet booms and the creation of culture.
March 9, 2018 1:01 PM Subscribe
Bitcoin Is Ridiculous. Blockchain Is Dangerous You could even make a distributed magazine called Information of Vital Public Interest About Peter Thiel that would be awfully hard to sue into oblivion. It’s the marketplace of ideas. Literally.
Try another thought experiment. Remember that anonymously created list of men who worked in media and who were alleged sexual harassers? You could, by whispering the allegations from one wallet to the next, put that information on a blockchain. You could make a web browser plug-in so that whenever someone visited a sexual harasser’s LinkedIn page, that page could glow bright red. You could have a distributed, immutable record of sexual harassment allegations on the internet. (Is there an economy around such allegations? Well, people do pay for gossip. GossipCoin?)
Try another thought experiment. Remember that anonymously created list of men who worked in media and who were alleged sexual harassers? You could, by whispering the allegations from one wallet to the next, put that information on a blockchain. You could make a web browser plug-in so that whenever someone visited a sexual harasser’s LinkedIn page, that page could glow bright red. You could have a distributed, immutable record of sexual harassment allegations on the internet. (Is there an economy around such allegations? Well, people do pay for gossip. GossipCoin?)
I feel this article earns a 'meh' comment from me for the following reasons:
1) It's nothing I haven't read before
2) Bloomberg doesn't have any problem publishing breathless articles about cryptocurrency
3) It's rambling and mostly an excuse for the author to vent about some mildly unrelated things
posted by Dmenet at 1:28 PM on March 9, 2018 [5 favorites]
1) It's nothing I haven't read before
2) Bloomberg doesn't have any problem publishing breathless articles about cryptocurrency
3) It's rambling and mostly an excuse for the author to vent about some mildly unrelated things
posted by Dmenet at 1:28 PM on March 9, 2018 [5 favorites]
It's rambling and mostly an excuse for the author to vent about some mildly unrelated things
Wait, but that describes like everything I've ever written on the internet.
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 1:31 PM on March 9, 2018 [24 favorites]
Wait, but that describes like everything I've ever written on the internet.
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 1:31 PM on March 9, 2018 [24 favorites]
Mastercoin! Ethereum! Bancor! Tezos!
Flooz!
posted by slogger at 1:32 PM on March 9, 2018 [8 favorites]
Flooz!
posted by slogger at 1:32 PM on March 9, 2018 [8 favorites]
MetaFilter: rambling and mostly an excuse for the author to vent about some mildly unrelated things
posted by halation at 1:34 PM on March 9, 2018 [22 favorites]
posted by halation at 1:34 PM on March 9, 2018 [22 favorites]
Late Night with Seth Meyers - Bitcoin Commercial: What Is It and How Does It Work?
posted by obscure simpsons reference at 1:35 PM on March 9, 2018 [10 favorites]
posted by obscure simpsons reference at 1:35 PM on March 9, 2018 [10 favorites]
1) It's something that the vast majority of people haven't read before, including probably most Bloomberg readers, and I think that's the target audience. ftrain tends to write about tech for non-tech people. His magnum opus What is Code? is a perfect example. This is a minor work in the same vein.
2) The fact that Bloomberg publishes breathless articles about cryptocurrency is precisely why they should be encouraged, if not applauded, for finally publishing something that is well reasoned, separates out the concepts of cryptocurrency and blockchain (which most people don't realize are separate but connected things), and provides decent historical comparisons for what's happening right now.
3) It could be a lot more focused than it is, yeah, I'll totally grant you, and I wish he'd fleshed out possible implications more than he did, but it's not a mismash of unrelated stuff.
posted by middleclasstool at 1:42 PM on March 9, 2018 [11 favorites]
2) The fact that Bloomberg publishes breathless articles about cryptocurrency is precisely why they should be encouraged, if not applauded, for finally publishing something that is well reasoned, separates out the concepts of cryptocurrency and blockchain (which most people don't realize are separate but connected things), and provides decent historical comparisons for what's happening right now.
3) It could be a lot more focused than it is, yeah, I'll totally grant you, and I wish he'd fleshed out possible implications more than he did, but it's not a mismash of unrelated stuff.
posted by middleclasstool at 1:42 PM on March 9, 2018 [11 favorites]
Blockchain really needs a killer app that demonstrates the kinds of utility described in this rambling article independent of the gold rush on virtual currency.
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 1:46 PM on March 9, 2018
posted by GenderNullPointerException at 1:46 PM on March 9, 2018
Bitcoin Is Ridiculous.
Probably, but can it at least get back up to where the $50 I put into it is worth $50 again so I can get it all back?
posted by dnash at 1:54 PM on March 9, 2018
Probably, but can it at least get back up to where the $50 I put into it is worth $50 again so I can get it all back?
posted by dnash at 1:54 PM on March 9, 2018
There is now even a cryptocurrency index fund, which was inevitable. It comes with a nice series of gotchas. First, diversification, that great benefit of traditional index funds, goes out the window. This one has 4 currencies, the majority of the allocation is Bitcoin, and 2 of the other currencies are simply Bitcoin offshoots. What factors cause one to go up and another to go down, I'm waiting for someone to explain. Second, it uses one neat trick to avoid the fact that the supply of a cryptocurrency is always increasing and thus hurts long term investors by driving down the currency's value. It takes the supply of each currency at the beginning of the year, makes a one-time adjustment, and uses that supply number for all index calculations through the year. This overweights the bigger currencies and underweights the smaller faster growing ones.
But none of that matters because accredited investors everywhere just must buy into the frenzy (and pay a 2% fee to Coinbase for the privilege).
posted by hexaflexagon at 2:04 PM on March 9, 2018 [1 favorite]
But none of that matters because accredited investors everywhere just must buy into the frenzy (and pay a 2% fee to Coinbase for the privilege).
posted by hexaflexagon at 2:04 PM on March 9, 2018 [1 favorite]
the supply of a cryptocurrency is always increasing and thus hurts long term investors by driving down the currency's value
? Bitcoin has a fixed supply; it is designed to be deflationary. Its value goes up over time (at least, if that is the only factor involved, which of course will not be the case).
posted by praemunire at 2:36 PM on March 9, 2018 [2 favorites]
? Bitcoin has a fixed supply; it is designed to be deflationary. Its value goes up over time (at least, if that is the only factor involved, which of course will not be the case).
posted by praemunire at 2:36 PM on March 9, 2018 [2 favorites]
I felt it was a nice meditation on the nature of technology booms, and enjoyed this snippet (and the rambling):
After college, at night in Brooklyn, I made my own web pages. In the morning I’d wake up, check if anyone had visited my site, then head to my job in Manhattan making web pages for companies. Money poured in—a bit into my bank account and floods of it elsewhere. Options, percentages, deal flow. I worked for a 30-person company that was bought to seed a much larger firm. The new office was on Fifth Avenue, and the new boss was from Microsoft. She brought her small dog.
It was a world of wonder and comedy. The Super Bowl ads were all dot-coms; co-workers were sleeping together; and before pitch meetings, the dog pooped under the vast glass conference table.
I know it's not Joan Didion, but that felt Didion-esque to me.
posted by mecran01 at 2:39 PM on March 9, 2018 [12 favorites]
After college, at night in Brooklyn, I made my own web pages. In the morning I’d wake up, check if anyone had visited my site, then head to my job in Manhattan making web pages for companies. Money poured in—a bit into my bank account and floods of it elsewhere. Options, percentages, deal flow. I worked for a 30-person company that was bought to seed a much larger firm. The new office was on Fifth Avenue, and the new boss was from Microsoft. She brought her small dog.
It was a world of wonder and comedy. The Super Bowl ads were all dot-coms; co-workers were sleeping together; and before pitch meetings, the dog pooped under the vast glass conference table.
I know it's not Joan Didion, but that felt Didion-esque to me.
posted by mecran01 at 2:39 PM on March 9, 2018 [12 favorites]
? Bitcoin has a fixed supply; it is designed to be deflationary. Its value goes up over time (at least, if that is the only factor involved, which of course will not be the case).
I'm no expert but this is what I'm reading from Coinbase's Index Methodology:
"The supply of most digital assets increases on an ongoing basis, as defined by each asset’s blockchain protocol. These supply increases are usually referred to as block rewards or miner rewards — new units of the asset that are programmatically issued as a reward to network validators. These increases in supply have the potential to increase the market capitalization of the asset. CBI recognizes the effect of these increases by using the most recent supply figure for each asset in calculating the index level.
As discussed above , most digital assets have an ongoing, programmatic increase in supply built into their blockchain protocol. These supply increases are usually awarded to those who validate (e.g. mine or stake ), rather than to passive holders of the asset.
Investors who passively hold digital assets will notice that, over time, the USD value of their holdings actually decreases relative to the USD total market capitalization of the asset. This is a natural result of the ongoing supply increases. Because CBI is based on total market capitalization, a passive investment in its constituent assets will also fall short of the CBI level over time."
posted by hexaflexagon at 2:50 PM on March 9, 2018
I'm no expert but this is what I'm reading from Coinbase's Index Methodology:
"The supply of most digital assets increases on an ongoing basis, as defined by each asset’s blockchain protocol. These supply increases are usually referred to as block rewards or miner rewards — new units of the asset that are programmatically issued as a reward to network validators. These increases in supply have the potential to increase the market capitalization of the asset. CBI recognizes the effect of these increases by using the most recent supply figure for each asset in calculating the index level.
As discussed above , most digital assets have an ongoing, programmatic increase in supply built into their blockchain protocol. These supply increases are usually awarded to those who validate (e.g. mine or stake ), rather than to passive holders of the asset.
Investors who passively hold digital assets will notice that, over time, the USD value of their holdings actually decreases relative to the USD total market capitalization of the asset. This is a natural result of the ongoing supply increases. Because CBI is based on total market capitalization, a passive investment in its constituent assets will also fall short of the CBI level over time."
posted by hexaflexagon at 2:50 PM on March 9, 2018
Bitcoin does eventually stop providing new coins. It rewards miners then by charging transaction fees.
This is not a requirement of crypto currencies but is the case for bitcoin.
posted by edd at 2:53 PM on March 9, 2018 [1 favorite]
This is not a requirement of crypto currencies but is the case for bitcoin.
posted by edd at 2:53 PM on March 9, 2018 [1 favorite]
What edd said. If you google "bitcoin is deflationary" you will of course see the usual nonsense and mania, but you will also note that people tend not to challenge the idea that it is...just whether it will matter somehow.
posted by praemunire at 3:09 PM on March 9, 2018
posted by praemunire at 3:09 PM on March 9, 2018
Investors who passively hold digital assets will notice that, over time, the USD value of their holdings actually decreases relative to the USD total market capitalization of the asset.
I haven't read the whole prospectus, so take this with a grain of salt or three, but I don't think this is actually exactly the same as saying that the value of such asset will go down. Say you own a bitcoin worth $1. The total market cap is $5. If tomorrow the supply increases without other forces causing the value to change, your bitcoin remains worth $1 but the market cap might go to $10. The value remains the same, but the relative value of the bitcoin to the market cap goes from 1/5 to 1/10.
Now, ordinarily, yes, the expectation is that increasing the supply of a currency will also cause a decrease in its value. Because Bitcoin has a fixed ultimate supply (and increases in supply will occur at an increasingly slow rate as time goes on), it will by definition hit a point where the supply can't be increased and deflation will very likely have to occur if it hasn't already. And people already know that, so that is taken into account in the price. Short-term of course it's very hard to predict what will happen, especially with the wild speculation. But deflationary or not, if the fund's NAV is based on total market cap rather than on the value of a single bitcoin (or basket of cryptocurrencies), they do have to adjust for increasing supply, whether the value of a single coin in USD goes up or down.
posted by praemunire at 3:21 PM on March 9, 2018
I haven't read the whole prospectus, so take this with a grain of salt or three, but I don't think this is actually exactly the same as saying that the value of such asset will go down. Say you own a bitcoin worth $1. The total market cap is $5. If tomorrow the supply increases without other forces causing the value to change, your bitcoin remains worth $1 but the market cap might go to $10. The value remains the same, but the relative value of the bitcoin to the market cap goes from 1/5 to 1/10.
Now, ordinarily, yes, the expectation is that increasing the supply of a currency will also cause a decrease in its value. Because Bitcoin has a fixed ultimate supply (and increases in supply will occur at an increasingly slow rate as time goes on), it will by definition hit a point where the supply can't be increased and deflation will very likely have to occur if it hasn't already. And people already know that, so that is taken into account in the price. Short-term of course it's very hard to predict what will happen, especially with the wild speculation. But deflationary or not, if the fund's NAV is based on total market cap rather than on the value of a single bitcoin (or basket of cryptocurrencies), they do have to adjust for increasing supply, whether the value of a single coin in USD goes up or down.
posted by praemunire at 3:21 PM on March 9, 2018
However, in conclusion, I believe we are in agreement that this fund is for morons or people who have money to gamble.
posted by praemunire at 3:23 PM on March 9, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by praemunire at 3:23 PM on March 9, 2018 [1 favorite]
Best blockchain is still bondcliff blockchain: JimCoinTM, for the people!
posted by darkstar at 3:28 PM on March 9, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by darkstar at 3:28 PM on March 9, 2018 [4 favorites]
This is the best description of bitcoin.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 4:49 PM on March 9, 2018 [36 favorites]
Periodic reminder that Bitcoin mining is not "solving equations". It's thousands of GPUs and specially-built chips burning electricity to yell random 64 digit numbers at each other in the hope one of them is the secret word of the dayThat's Numberwang!
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 4:49 PM on March 9, 2018 [36 favorites]
The first law of Blockchain journalism: The responses to any essay that mentions bitcoin will eventually devolve into an attempt to explain Bitcoin.
posted by mecran01 at 5:15 PM on March 9, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by mecran01 at 5:15 PM on March 9, 2018 [2 favorites]
I've been harping on it for a while, but serverless, crypto-enabled client-to-client apps are here, now. Blockchain is one way of implementing them, and is being used as document stores by Lithuania and one of the Arabian states I can't recall at the moment, and no, you don't need the power output of a small M-class star to get a good blockchain going if you're not doing John Galt Money.
It's interesting, because at the same time interface-less computer systems, Alexa the most notable and powerful of them, are on the rise. The very definition of centralized computing is on the rise as the very definition of decentralized computing is on the rise.
The key here is, Alexa relies on processing power and data storage being a scarce resource for natural language processing, while the next gen Apple Bionic processor is all, "Hold my bitcoin and watch this!" And Apple, headed by an openly gay man who's old enough to have suffered severe consequences for it, will be pleased as punch to move natural language query local and encrypted.
posted by Slap*Happy at 5:39 PM on March 9, 2018 [1 favorite]
It's interesting, because at the same time interface-less computer systems, Alexa the most notable and powerful of them, are on the rise. The very definition of centralized computing is on the rise as the very definition of decentralized computing is on the rise.
The key here is, Alexa relies on processing power and data storage being a scarce resource for natural language processing, while the next gen Apple Bionic processor is all, "Hold my bitcoin and watch this!" And Apple, headed by an openly gay man who's old enough to have suffered severe consequences for it, will be pleased as punch to move natural language query local and encrypted.
posted by Slap*Happy at 5:39 PM on March 9, 2018 [1 favorite]
Ok but, like, back to the article:
The whole thing about a magazine that can’t be sued out of existence, where facts can be irrevocably published to the world isn’t any kind of new technology and you don’t need blockchain to do it. Suppose there is a git repo of Hulk Hogan slanders that *for some reason* is copied all over the place. The Blockchain does the same thing, but it doesn’t provide the *for some reason*. There are a lot of copies of the bitcoin blockchain cuz that’s what bitcoin is, but why is the Hulk Hogan slander blockchain widely distributed?
Also, I don’t see how this is so much scarier than print newspapers. When the New York Times loses a libel case, government thugs don’t bust into libraries to remove the offending material. Once it’s in print in a newspaper with some distribution, it can’t be disappeared easily.
posted by chrchr at 6:21 PM on March 9, 2018 [5 favorites]
The whole thing about a magazine that can’t be sued out of existence, where facts can be irrevocably published to the world isn’t any kind of new technology and you don’t need blockchain to do it. Suppose there is a git repo of Hulk Hogan slanders that *for some reason* is copied all over the place. The Blockchain does the same thing, but it doesn’t provide the *for some reason*. There are a lot of copies of the bitcoin blockchain cuz that’s what bitcoin is, but why is the Hulk Hogan slander blockchain widely distributed?
Also, I don’t see how this is so much scarier than print newspapers. When the New York Times loses a libel case, government thugs don’t bust into libraries to remove the offending material. Once it’s in print in a newspaper with some distribution, it can’t be disappeared easily.
posted by chrchr at 6:21 PM on March 9, 2018 [5 favorites]
Wanna know what's ridiculous? What the .coms have done to the internet, that's what.
We may need a new net. Call it OUR NET. No money-making tactics allowed ... no tracking, no ads, no organizations ... only people, sharing. The net we all knew and loved and actually looked forward to, before they tore down geocities and replaced it with Facehook and surveillance. To reflect the world we want, not the world they want.
Oh, and there will be guardians. Think Gort.
posted by Twang at 6:47 PM on March 9, 2018 [2 favorites]
We may need a new net. Call it OUR NET. No money-making tactics allowed ... no tracking, no ads, no organizations ... only people, sharing. The net we all knew and loved and actually looked forward to, before they tore down geocities and replaced it with Facehook and surveillance. To reflect the world we want, not the world they want.
Oh, and there will be guardians. Think Gort.
posted by Twang at 6:47 PM on March 9, 2018 [2 favorites]
We're just behind the curve here. We need to create MetaCoin. I think we can get cortex in on this if we let him design the MetaCoins as tiny Sierpiński triangles.
posted by zompist at 10:52 PM on March 9, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by zompist at 10:52 PM on March 9, 2018 [4 favorites]
Bitcoin has a fixed supply
Nah, people can just create a new coin to increase the money supply of cryptocurrency. Though instead of a central bank, you have price manipulators and established speculators effectively setting policy.
See also, Bitcoin Cash and the Ethereum rollback.
Cryptocurrency is built on ideological delusion, greedy scammers, and a devastating carbon footprint.
See also, Silicon Valley.
posted by AlSweigart at 1:19 AM on March 10, 2018 [2 favorites]
Nah, people can just create a new coin to increase the money supply of cryptocurrency. Though instead of a central bank, you have price manipulators and established speculators effectively setting policy.
See also, Bitcoin Cash and the Ethereum rollback.
Cryptocurrency is built on ideological delusion, greedy scammers, and a devastating carbon footprint.
See also, Silicon Valley.
posted by AlSweigart at 1:19 AM on March 10, 2018 [2 favorites]
We're just behind the curve here. We need to create MetaCoin. I think we can get cortex in on this if we let him design the MetaCoins as tiny Sierpiński triangles.
What, the favorite economy not good enough for you any more?
posted by Dr Dracator at 7:10 AM on March 10, 2018
What, the favorite economy not good enough for you any more?
posted by Dr Dracator at 7:10 AM on March 10, 2018
If you are a typical middle class American whose main retirement-investment is the bi-weekly deduction from your paycheck I wonder if you could not take all information about bitcoin and substitute the timeworn articles about how great it is to invest in gold and replace all occurrences of "gold" with "bitcoin" and just be done with all of it.
posted by bukvich at 7:18 AM on March 10, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by bukvich at 7:18 AM on March 10, 2018 [1 favorite]
We're just behind the curve here. We need to create MetaCoin. I think we can get cortex in on this if we let him design the MetaCoins as tiny Sierpiński triangles.
Beanz, dammit.
@stephendpalley has his amusing guppy thing.
posted by snuffleupagus at 7:27 AM on March 10, 2018
Beanz, dammit.
@stephendpalley has his amusing guppy thing.
posted by snuffleupagus at 7:27 AM on March 10, 2018
lol. dude's never heard of coins
and you've never heard of the Hall-Héroult electrolysis process apparently
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/us/politics/american-companies-still-make-aluminum-in-iceland.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1979/10/29/aluminum-industry-at-center-of-northwests-energy-fight/62fdb02f-ad72-4685-a450-490e12a58059/?utm_term=.ce6cc685f8df
Alcoa bought up the hydroelectric capacity of the entire Great Lakes region to protect its monopoly position in the US & Canada.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 9:16 AM on March 10, 2018 [1 favorite]
and you've never heard of the Hall-Héroult electrolysis process apparently
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/us/politics/american-companies-still-make-aluminum-in-iceland.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1979/10/29/aluminum-industry-at-center-of-northwests-energy-fight/62fdb02f-ad72-4685-a450-490e12a58059/?utm_term=.ce6cc685f8df
Alcoa bought up the hydroelectric capacity of the entire Great Lakes region to protect its monopoly position in the US & Canada.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 9:16 AM on March 10, 2018 [1 favorite]
Don’t Understand Bitcoin? This Man Will Mumble An Explanation At You
posted by benbenson at 12:13 PM on March 10, 2018
posted by benbenson at 12:13 PM on March 10, 2018
Blockchain really needs a killer app
The carbon footprint of all the fossil fuels consumed by blockchains seems pretty killer.
posted by straight at 2:02 PM on March 10, 2018 [3 favorites]
The carbon footprint of all the fossil fuels consumed by blockchains seems pretty killer.
posted by straight at 2:02 PM on March 10, 2018 [3 favorites]
…that's Numberwang!!
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:13 PM on March 11, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 3:13 PM on March 11, 2018 [1 favorite]
BI: "'HODLers' complaining about the 'special moron' handling the Mt Gox sale are really complaining about Bitcoin itself"
posted by snuffleupagus at 7:02 AM on March 12, 2018
Nobuaki Kobayashi, the trustee for the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange Mt Gox, has had a rough week. Here is a typical comment about him on Reddit's r/Bitcoin page:In which every HODLR think's they're James T. Kirk. :P
"Nobuaki Kobayashi is some kind of special moron selling the bottom of a correction pushing the price down even further."
Kobayashi is in charge of liquidating the assets of Mt Gox and repaying the exchange's thousands of users, many of whom thought they lost everything when Mt Gox collapsed in 2014. To make those creditors whole, Kobayashi is selling Mt Gox's remaining Bitcoin assets and handing them the cash equivalent of what they lost, or at least a percentage of it. The good news for Mt Gox customers is that so far he has generated $400 million — most of the value that was stolen.
..
The more he sells, the lower the price goes, the angrier the hodlers get.
That anger is misplaced, however. All they are complaining about is the fundamental condition of bitcoin itself. They are complaining about the clearing price of supply and demand. They are ridiculous.
posted by snuffleupagus at 7:02 AM on March 12, 2018
Bitconnect Sonata for Piano and Violin, Op. $1000000
posted by tonycpsu at 11:13 AM on March 12, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by tonycpsu at 11:13 AM on March 12, 2018 [1 favorite]
From the Department Of This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things:
Child abuse imagery found within bitcoin's blockchain (Samuel Gibbs, Guardian)
Child abuse imagery found within bitcoin's blockchain (Samuel Gibbs, Guardian)
German researchers have discovered unknown persons are using bitcoin’s blockchain to store and link to child abuse imagery, potentially putting the cryptocurrency in jeopardy.posted by Johnny Wallflower at 8:35 AM on March 23, 2018 [1 favorite]
The blockchain is the open-source, distributed ledger that records every bitcoin transaction, but can also store small bits of non-financial data. This data is typically notes about the trade of bitcoin, recording what it was for or other metadata. But it can also be used to store links and files.
Researchers from the RWTH Aachen University, Germany found that around 1,600 files were currently stored in bitcoin’s blockchain. Of the files least eight were of sexual content, including one thought to be an image of child abuse and two that contain 274 links to child abuse content, 142 of which link to dark web services.
“Our analysis shows that certain content, eg, illegal pornography, can render the mere possession of a blockchain illegal,” the researchers wrote. “Although court rulings do not yet exist, legislative texts from countries such as Germany, the UK, or the USA suggest that illegal content such as [child abuse imagery] can make the blockchain illegal to possess for all users.”
“This especially endangers the multi-billion dollar markets powering cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin.”
Medium article on blockchain's implied assumptions, which were rarely questioned during its bandwagon heyday.
Blockchain is not only crappy technology but a bad vision for the future. Its failure to achieve adoption to date is because systems built on trust, norms, and institutions inherently function better than the type of no-need-for-trusted-parties systems blockchain envisions. That’s permanent: no matter how much blockchain improves it is still headed in the wrong direction.
posted by Brian B. at 7:18 PM on April 6, 2018 [2 favorites]
Blockchain is not only crappy technology but a bad vision for the future. Its failure to achieve adoption to date is because systems built on trust, norms, and institutions inherently function better than the type of no-need-for-trusted-parties systems blockchain envisions. That’s permanent: no matter how much blockchain improves it is still headed in the wrong direction.
posted by Brian B. at 7:18 PM on April 6, 2018 [2 favorites]
« Older Vampire capital, undead labor, toxic assets, and... | America's junk epidemic Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
lol. dude's never heard of coins
posted by dudemanlives at 1:18 PM on March 9, 2018 [18 favorites]