So, there is a camp of people who think that cryptocurrencies are inherently bad. For these people the interesting discussions left are moot, because they do not address their main problems.
At the same time, nuanced discussion / curious discussion requires talking about downsides. Any mention of downsides also draws in the people who think its a bad idea. Moreover, it is my sense that a lot of discussions are filled with people trying to hype up their investment. These people will try to play down any downsides mentioned. The people who dislike cryptocurrency notice the people trying to downplay the downsides, and that overpowers any other discussion.
Edit: A point made by ThalesX also seems quite on point to me: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29295405
In summary, people are tired of the over-hype that existed. Making them suspicious of any new discussion.
I can really see how the constant hype and downplaying of downsides has fatigued a lot of technically minded people. If most of the discussions about a topic are over-hyped and on shaky ground, it makes sense to be skeptical about any new discussion. Especially if that new discussion is actually quite technical, and needs either niche mathematics or deep knowledge of existing blockchain.
I think the larger problem is that most anyone talking about cryptocurrencies has a financial interest in them, and indeed, people without a financial interest are considered biased against them and not worth listening to.
well if you think about it, there aren't very many people who are fully on-board with any given cryptocurrency, conceptually, who don't also have literally vested interests in said cryptocurrency. when you have literally vested interests in something, you're going to be defensive about your investment, possibly to the point of emotional irrationality. this makes conversation between the invested and the skeptics pretty useless most of the time—if a skeptic were to convince an investor that their cryptocurrency is bad, then they would pull out of investing in it. if an investor were to convince a skeptic that their cryptocurrency is good, then they would likely also become an investor.
put another way, there are broadly four possible types of people who would discuss cryptocurrencies on a website like this:
A) crypto fans who have invested in crypto
B) crypto fans who have not invested in crypto
C) crypto skeptics who have invested in crypto
D) crypto skeptics who have not invested in crypto
for obvious reasons, you aren't going to find many—if any—people in categories B and C, so that leaves categories A and D arguing with each other, and largely unlikely to change each others' minds—especially category A, because, again, they are literally invested in the thing they're a fan of.
Appeals to "curious discussion" sound an awful lot like a request to omit any reference to any of the many downsides and known problems and failures of crypto in general, and instead just focus on convenient cheerful angles that pump it up.
It's not possible to have serious, informative, and insightful discussions on a topic like crypto while turning a blind eye to the elephants in the room.
There are people who don't want to use cryptocurrencies because of their downsides (one of which is the speculative nature of it or, depending on whom you ask, downright ponzi scheme).
Don't fall into the trap of thinking people disagree with you because they are ignorant. That never works, usually because it's wrong. Consider the possibility that most people who are into cryptocurrency are as aware of the many down sides as they would need to be, but have come to a different conclusion than you about them.
you're right but what I find even more jarring in crypto-threads is that usually the only argument (or at least the most prolific one) from the pro-crypto side is that the argument of the anti-crypto side is off-based. But that is not an argument pro-crypto that's at most an argument that's crypto-neutral. But maybe that's enough for the pro-crypto crowd because neutrality means that the show goes on. Nevertheless, it's seldom good enough for great discussions.
A thing I've noticed about cryptocurrency news. The people that are pro cryptocurrency are often far too optimistic and sometimes are not the most academic people. However I've also noticed that those that constantly critique cryptocurrency are often so wrong about their assumptions it's just pointless reading on. It's so hard to actually get a reasonable discussion about cryptocurrency.
There is a lot of cryptocurrency negativity on this forum.
Some of it is genuine skepticism which I appreciate. It is helpful for me to consider all angles of a new technology.
But I suspect that some of it is just sour grapes. Here is a board full of intelligent technologists. And some of them just missed the boat. Those people either have to admit that they were wrong. Or if they can't do that, the only other option is that cryptocurrencies are drastically overvalued by the market. For some people the second option is the only acceptable choice.
The community here has a heavy prejudice on a few subjects, cryptocurrencies are one of them. I wouldn't take a discussion here as something that should inform your opinion, more as an entertaining pastime.
It's not because of aversion to cryptocurrency per se, it's because the crypto space is absolutely full of blatant shills and they are extremely annoying people. A comment like 'I think cryptocurrencies help to mitigate this, but the flip side is that it can lead to money laundering' is insightful. Personal testimonials are basically just ads.
Interesting; I'm fascinated by the extent to which people HERE seem to want to stick their head in the ground on cryptocurrency. Which is to say, it's obvious that a lot of people here hate it -- which strikes me as reasonable -- but aren't willing much to think about about the fact that (like e.g. science) cryptocurrency doesn't much care whether you like it or not, it IS a thing, and it will continue to be a thing.
And if it is a thing, one has to be serious about understanding what one can and cannot do about it, love or hate.
I believe it comes down to signal-to-noise ratio here. It seems to me that almost every post about crypto drowns in "crypto bad" comments which aren't useful and hinders any legit criticism that may be.
At the same time, nuanced discussion / curious discussion requires talking about downsides. Any mention of downsides also draws in the people who think its a bad idea. Moreover, it is my sense that a lot of discussions are filled with people trying to hype up their investment. These people will try to play down any downsides mentioned. The people who dislike cryptocurrency notice the people trying to downplay the downsides, and that overpowers any other discussion.
Edit: A point made by ThalesX also seems quite on point to me: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29295405 In summary, people are tired of the over-hype that existed. Making them suspicious of any new discussion.
reply