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

I don't really get it. Are the people commenting about how useless and stupid Bitcoin and Ethereum are, really putting themselves above Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz and Peter Thiel's predictions? I mean. At most, you could be skeptical.

Thinking that it's a joke when even those kinda guys (First successful browser, first cloud computing, first online payment service) are all-in it's mind blowing.

I remember reading the same comments on HF when I was a kid. And even before, about LR.

Guess who found (and will find) himself on the wrong side of history?

It doesn't require comparing one's own intelligence to those guys. One can pick any number of Warren Buffetts who think cryptocurrencies are not good investments. Even though I think Buffett's at least partially wrong on this subject, in a vacuum I'd trust him over all the guys you named combined. But that's just personal preference.

(I have no idea what 'HR' or 'LF' are.)

Buffett has always preferred businesses that he can understand, so on that one alone I can see why he doesn't like crypto.

Secondly, I don't think crypto is good as an investment (as opposed to a vehicle for speculation) but I see all sort of opportunities in killing the middle men of banks. No more boom and bust because the fed won't read Hayek; No more having to beg and scrape to be allowed to send a transaction through the archaic inter-bank transfer system; No more inflation forcing people to put savings in riskier and riskier businesses to keep up with the printing; No more dirt poor refugees who have to leave every thing behind; No more hyperinflation because dictators needs to be the sole source of food.

It's HF and LR, not HR and LF, that alone, shows your efforts. LR stands for Liberty Reserve, HF for HackerForum.

Buffet didn't create or invest successfully in anything software-related. If you put the opinion of a guy who made his fortune with Coca Cola and Insurance above the ones who made it with tech -when evaluating the future- that's fine. To each their own I guess?

You found yourself on the wrong side of history, and sounds like it'll happen again.

So that's basically an appeal to authority. If 90% of all startups fail, that means VCs like those you listed are only right 10% of the time.

There are many objective reasons to take the other side of the bet:

Bitcoin will not succeed as a mainstream payment processing system because:

* The fees are unpredictable and average tx fees have been as high as $55 in the past, during it's most popular time.

* Apropos to the above, Bitcoin doesn't scale and it is clear there is no effective governance method in order to mitigate the problem. Cf. block size wars.

* The risk to the consumer is higher as there is no included fraud protection or chargebacks allowed.

* The difficulty of use is higher for the consumer, who now has to deal with purchasing fees and speculative volatility.

* It is accepted at an extremely low amount of vendors and even that is falling.

* Loss of private key, or password, or security exploit can lead to total loss of funds.

Blockchains will not succeed as a mainstream technological solution because:

* The use cases where you actually need a public, proof of work mined chain are actually very niche outside of cryptocurrencies themselves.

* Even if you have a use case that fits, you must reach a critical mass of mining hash rate or you open yourself to trivially exploitable 51% attacks.

* Corporations will still want to have permission based access, but if you have trusted users then you don't need a blockchain.

* Even if you go with a private blockchain anyway, the scalability isn't there, it is harder to use, the tooling is worse, the technology is less mature, and the upside for the increased difficulty and cost is marginal.

No. No. No. You didn't do your homework. Both A16Z and Peter Thiel see Bitcoin as a store of value and Ethereum as a computing platform. Ethereum is a new paradigm only useful in applications where trust is paramount and/or there's generally lack of it between parties.

Mobile brought Instagram and Uber - simply because phones have a GPS and they're always with you. Not because they're a more powerful computing platform or smth.

TUSD and GUSD might be used for payments infra (they're stable).

I realize that many people still think of Bitcoin as a payment method and Ethereum as a place where it makes sense to build anything on (e.g social networks). But we're talking about A16Z's and PT's views (Which imo, are correct)

Registration is open for Startup School 2019. Classes start July 22nd.

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