Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> it's a little excessive to assign such heady altruistic qualities to Satoshi as if he/she/they knew ahead of time what bitcoin would become.

> It'd be a shame if we elevated the experimentation of one intelligent person to be elevated into religion...

Just giving credit where credit is due. If you invented a new open source technology that yielded a market that went from $0 ---> $19B+ in 8 years, then I'd think you'd deserve to be financially rewarded for it, and I may even have some nice things to say about you too.

> I really respect bitcoin's implementation as a thought experiment

Cool. But Bitcoin would still be a BFD even if no one used it. It's an elegant technological implementation of a decentralized immutable ledger and currency system that doesn't require you to trust someone else with your money when you want to spend it. It still puzzles me how many posters on HN (a forum of creators, engineers, and inventors) disregard its technological achievement. Perhaps the idea that "real money" doesn't have to come from some authority figure is simply too offensive?

> I think its use as a permanent basis for a real-world currency and/or a storage/execution platform for programs is misguided.

And therein lies one of its best advantages over traditional currency: it's opt-in only, so you don't have to use it if you prefer not to.




>It still puzzles me how many posters on HN (a forum of creators, engineers, and inventors) disregard its technological achievement. Perhaps the idea that "real money" doesn't have to come from some authority figure is simply too offensive?

It's not a novel concept. Bitcoin is a linear web of trust, applied to transactions instead of identities. Webs of trust are as old as PGP. Block C is valid against Block B is valid against Block A, which we both trust.

Bitcoin is respectable primarily for its ambition, the way it applied existing technology to accomplish a goal that its creators cared about and which many people would've thought was too daunting to undertake.

Believing that people only criticize bitcoin because their minds are too small to accept the concept of decentralized money is blatantly closed-minded.


> It's not a novel concept. Bitcoin is a linear web of trust, applied to transactions instead of identities. Webs of trust are as old as PGP. Block C is valid against Block B is valid against Block A, which we both trust.

It's more than just a basic "web of trust". It wouldn't work if it was. Primarily, Bitcoin was the first system to implement proof-of-work to prevent double spending, establish consensus, and distribute the units of account fairly.

EDIT: PGP's web of trust is kind of a poor comparison here, because it requires trusting people, whereas blockchains require trusting math/algos.

> Believing that people only criticize bitcoin because their minds are too small to accept the concept of decentralized money is blatantly closed-minded.

I'm just trying to understand the reasons behind HN's vitriol, always open to hearing other suggestions. (Though there seems to be far less vitriol lately.)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: