←back to thread

I wasted years of my life in crypto

(twitter.com)
681 points Anon84 | 4 comments | 07 Dec 25 12:57 UTC | HN request time: 0.384s | source
Show context
spicyusername ◴[07 Dec 25 13:28 UTC] No.46181533[source]▶
I've never understood the initial arguments about Bitcoin, no matter how many times they've been explained to me.

The block chain is, and always was, an extremely inconvenient database. How anyone, especially many intelligent people, thought it was realistic to graft a currency on top of such a unwieldy piece of technology is beyond me. Maybe it goes to show how few people understand economics and anthropology and how dunning-krueger can happen to anyone.

Now the uninformed gambling on futuristic sounding hokum? THAT is easy to understand.

That being said, I'm sorry the author had to go through this experience, the road of life is often filled with unexpected twists and turns.

replies(48): >>46181550 #>>46181552 #>>46181565 #>>46181570 #>>46181587 #>>46181592 #>>46181595 #>>46181598 #>>46181626 #>>46181627 #>>46181644 #>>46181650 #>>46181665 #>>46181684 #>>46181692 #>>46181705 #>>46181710 #>>46181747 #>>46181851 #>>46182086 #>>46182181 #>>46183207 #>>46183326 #>>46184155 #>>46188845 #>>46188916 #>>46189281 #>>46189390 #>>46189635 #>>46189752 #>>46190184 #>>46190277 #>>46190352 #>>46190438 #>>46190551 #>>46190980 #>>46192357 #>>46192629 #>>46192718 #>>46192829 #>>46193037 #>>46193082 #>>46193531 #>>46193609 #>>46194845 #>>46194934 #>>46195115 #>>46203155 #
panzi ◴[07 Dec 25 13:35 UTC] No.46181570[source]▶
Yeah and even more crazy: all other applications of blockchains are even more stupid. Haven't seen another application that wouldn't have been better, faster, cheaper implemented in a "classical" way.
replies(5): >>46181906 #>>46181933 #>>46191094 #>>46193391 #>>46194670 #
shuntress ◴[07 Dec 25 14:33 UTC] No.46181933[source]▶
Git
replies(3): >>46186091 #>>46188271 #>>46194698 #
hobs ◴[08 Dec 25 04:22 UTC] No.46188271[source]▶
Am I misinterpreting you or are you saying Bitcoin would make a better, faster, cheaper Git?

If you are, I am already laughing.

replies(1): >>46188420 #
1. squeaky-clean ◴[08 Dec 25 04:43 UTC] No.46188420[source]▶
They're saying git would not have been better or faster or cheaper if implemented in a classical centralized way.
replies(3): >>46188847 #>>46189047 #>>46189987 #
2. bawolff ◴[08 Dec 25 05:53 UTC] No.46188847[source]▶
That's the thing about blockchain/"distributed". They are such vauge terms they can apply or not apply to anything depending on what point you need to make in your argument.
3. hobs ◴[08 Dec 25 06:25 UTC] No.46189047[source]▶
If we compare the traffic of Github vs Bitcoin, Github is likely doing 1,000+ writes per second and Bitcoin is doing what, 5-7 maybe higher with specialized stuff?

Github is nowhere near the world's "central and only" service for Git, so what am I missing to not laugh about?

The downside of a global distributed database (no matter what) is the speed of light, if you need ordering in any transaction you are in trouble, and no classic service requires that for all transactions in its scope, we figured out partitions, row locks, and shards a long time ago.

4. Ekaros ◴[08 Dec 25 08:56 UTC] No.46189987[source]▶
Isn't git most of the time used centralized? And that offers better user experience than doing it some decentralized way? It seems to me like most prefer centralized use of git. Be it private server or some large server.