Always has been.
Thus, met with the screeching bile of the chattering classes, Bitcoiners went from utopian tinkerers to dissidents in short order — even as the movement was still in its infancy. Check the financial pages of your newspaper of record; you will find nothing but derision and mockery (and the very occasional nod of grudging acceptance). This is for an asset class which went from 0 to $200 billion in a decade, with no venture backing, no IPO, no corporate entity, an absent founder, and a purely open-source body of maintainers. In the U.S., the government saw fit to give Ross Ulbricht two non-parole-eligible life sentences plus 40 years for the crime of creating a free market denominated in Bitcoin. China has banned the formal exchange of bitcoins; India is mulling over legislation to make mere ownership illegal.
(from A Most Peaceful Revolution by Nic Carter, 2-minute version here)
reply
It is telling, for example, that much of the general public has ignored Bitcoin’s core innovation over the past decade: instead, buzzwords like “blockchain” have been cherry-picked and declared hype. he actual innovation of the Bitcoin system, which is all of its components working together, has been left behind and mangled
This was particularly striking in the early days of public consciousness of Bitcoin (say 2013-15), though of course the same cognitive errors are repeating nearly ad infinitum.
This article is really excellent. It does remind me of a point I've often dwelled on, which is why so many people actually hate this thing, which is completely nonviolent, open and free.
reply
I liked the War and Peace reference. I notice it with bitcoin, covid, and politics in general. I've been guilty of it myself. It's not easy to abandon long held convictions
reply
That is no secret, starting from the day Satoshi published the whitepaper on the Day of Reformation (31 Oct), the day when Luther posted his 95 theses on a church door.
reply
сколько много текста... с таким языком не возможно это сжать до малой мысли... если сжать эту информацию с помощью русского языка то выходит совсем мало слов) но очень точно описывающих это произведение.
1000000 человек записали 1000000 подкастов за один день... логично что это может обработать только ИИ. мы же способны лишь 5-15 подкастов изучить... Кто будет обладать большей частью новой информации?? только ИИ и самое интересное что верная информация будет только у тех ИИ кто говорить правду в новостях и подкастах. подумай чучуть дольше и ты все поймешь!
reply