I am not suing the state of California because their failure to use bcrypt is costing me money. In fact, I make more money when people don't do what I say on HN. My attachment to crypto discussions is not comparable to what Greenspan is doing with HN.
First, I won't stop; certainly not because you and your colleague say I should.
Second, I didn't post an advertisement, or a job offer, or a discussion about a random topic. I posted a federal lawsuit about money transmission that is directly related to Bitcoin's purported goals and the title of this article.
Enough people have contacted me, some of whom read Hacker News, and some of whom do not, who fully support what I am doing, that I believe your viewpoint to be both in the minority and in this particular case, incorrect besides.
Calling me names is definitely not something that gets your point across. Pretty sure as we stand you have zero proff for your anti-crypto statements and are resorting to name calling. Definitely something frowned upon by HN.
You are misconstruing what I wrote, which is that it's not my problem. I don't care what happens to their money, just as I don't think anyone should care what happens to mine. Although, sure, I wish ill on anyone who is using crypto to scam others.
Were you planning on sharing your gains with me? No, right?
You just keep acting like the “caveman lawyer” from Saturday Night Live and refusing to learn or acknowledge anything. You are being obnoxious and just continuing the HN trope of “blockchain is totally worthless despite it being worth hundreds of billions - the whole world is wrong not me!”
I'm literally not a cryptobro. I've never owned cryptocurrency, and I've never lost or made any money in speculating on any of it. Rather, I find the data structures and algorithms interesting and relevant to this use case. Promoting cryptocurrencies is not a personal crusade of mine, and I hope shutting down conversations about a data structure is not a personal crusade of anyone on HN.
There's a reason no-one else is discussing this angle; this thread isn't about you.
The tactic you're employing here and on every other money thread is so common that Wikipedia has a name for it: "coat-rack arguments".
You're using HN threads about money transactions as coat-racks for comments that are nominally germane (ie, "Bitcoin allows low-cost and regulation-free &c and ...") but really about your personal drama ("... and that's what I'm trying to do with my [totally unrelated scheme]").
I hope you're starting to notice that HN people aren't going to let you keep doing this without calling you on it, and that off-topic comments are therefore a poor promotional vehicle for your pet controversies. Either way, please stop.
It's not a problem anymore for those that are using crypto.
Why is it so hard for you to accept that you don't have a valid argument? Do you think that playing dumb and taking cheap jabs at what other people do gives you any moral superiority?
You suffer from the misapprehension that your opinion matters. I'm sorry it doesn't. HN does little for the real-world contrary to what many in Silicon Valley culture seem to think.
A large reason for the creation of bitcoin stems from the promise of micropayments. Therefore Google and Facebook collapsed into the shit show that they are, they couldn't solve it. Your belief is not needed nor warranted. I'm not seeking money or investment from you and nor do I really care about you or even know you. We have companies coming to use my technology, and I'm not talking about ICO pumpers or other scammers seeking to replicate the frauds of the 90s. I'm also not talking about the bucket shops that pose as pink sheet scam markets under a new name.
We have companies such as Nike now getting into blockchain. Basically, the idea being to save data. Interestingly, the focused concept in the Nike patent is covered by my 2016 filings placing me two years ahead of them. Which is fine, they now have a choice. They can use BSV freely or they can pay my company royalties.
So why is it you think that I need to convince you?
Why do you think that it matters that I have you believe me or come on board as my disciple?
I hate to tell you that you're a little bit deluded if you believe that. You see, people will build on my platform whether you like me or not. I have a technical solution that works, I have solutions that scale, and mostly I've had the time to patent every aspect of how bitcoin works. You see, while other people have been trying to understand my protocol, I found that the best way of stopping people hijacking it further was to start building what some people call a patent fortress. You can't scale without SPV. Unfortunately, people didn't understand what it was. So much of bitcoin was not understood even though was common.
It is interesting how people think that I invented the concept of blockchain. It was published in the mid-90s. However, it was a set theoretic mathematical construct and not as simple as it was resented in the paper.
Your last statement is exactly what's always bothered me about your attitude, and how it contradicts directly with the sentence prior.
I'm not going to give you a break so long as you don't give folks who are trying to create things a break. Bad crypto gets people killed, but no crypto does too, and perhaps your elitist attitude (and it's not just you, it's the community at large) is why we have only TrueCrypt and nothing else.
Then exercise some personal responsibility and caution. Keep your passwords carefully and don't trust certain crypto insitutions. The crypto world is indeed loaded with cases of fraud, but underneath that, here is a system of systems that lets people who do indeed get locked out of conventional financial systems send and receive funds without the permission of a central regulatory authority or some dysfunctional, corrupt political control mechanism, It doesn't always work at that, but it offers one strong further alternative. Also, how is it upending the lives of billions of people? The two things you compare at the end are not directly related and definitely not in a causative way. Wanting a further means of avoiding being a victim of dumb banking accidents doesn't make you culpable in whatever defects crypto has.
It's not just the rampantly emotional and repetivie crypto hate on HN that's absurd, it's also the sheer narrow follishness of so many of the arguments that's rather galling.
Again, I'm not going to apologize for my explicit rudeness when I'm faced with the implicit rudeness of the extreme arrogance of most BitCoin supporters.
You people think you have it aaaaaall figured out and that no one has a right to interfere with 'the due process of nature'...
I pick my battles. I'm constantly trying to educate people about monetary policy injustice and I worked in crypto and try to push that in a better direction.
reply