There's something about Bitcoin that stirs strong emotions in people. Libertarians love it. Anarchists adore it. Cypherpunks yearn for it. But not all emotions stirred by Bitcoin are positive. Bankers fear it, politicians distrust it, environmentalists resent it, and some people genuinely hate it, as shown in an article published by Bitcoin.com.
People who love to hate Bitcoin
When people develop an aversion to something, their immediate instinct is usually to avoid it. Some claim they are merely trying to protect innocent investors from succumbing to its risks. However, their inability to leave Bitcoin in peace reveals a deeper fear: that the cryptocurrency might achieve global dominance, rendering their life's work redundant. In this context, Bitcoin's adversaries seem to possess an existential dread. Here are three figures who have openly expressed disdain for the leading cryptocurrency in the market.
David Gerard
David Gerard's hatred for Bitcoin is biblical. If the writer were on his deathbed and Satoshi Nakamoto handed him the cure, Gerard would likely refuse to accept the principle. He fills his days screaming about everything related to cryptocurrencies but reserves particular disdain for Bitcoin, the "demon" that spawned them all. Best known for his blog "Attack of the 50 Foot Blockchain," Gerard's work can also be found on sites like Foreign Policy, where he crafts articles such as "Forget Bitcoin, Try Your Mattress – Cryptocurrency is as safe as keeping your money in someone else's sock under their bed."
"There will be something called 'Bitcoin,' descendant from the current software and blockchain, for decades. After all, it takes just two interested people. How much it will interact with the rest of the world is an open question. Technologies really don't go anywhere, after all."
Nouriel Roubini
"Dr. Doom" is the poster child for Bitcoin, and his proclamations need not be repeated ad nauseam. Like a broken clock, Roubini is occasionally correct – just like David Gerard – in exposing fraudulent ICOs and things that need not be on the blockchain. Both "doom merchants" have been extreme at times, however, giving Bitcoiners reason to dismiss all their speeches.
"Whatever happens to central bank digital currencies, they will never replace decentralized cryptocurrencies, just as Roubini will never get over the pain that he says he should have bought Bitcoin in 2013."
Paul Krugman
Nouriel Roubini is not the only economist struggling to understand Bitcoin's economy. The man who famously wrote, "By 2005, it will become clear that the impact of the Internet on the economy is no greater than the fax machine," is equally skeptical of Bitcoin. In 2013, he penned a NYT editorial titled "Bitcoin Is Evil" and has sporadically spied on it since. "BitCoin," as he calls it, is backed by nothing, has no intrinsic value, and its price increase was driven only by speculation – what Robert Shiller calls a natural Ponzi scheme. Proving he's not a complete technophobe, Krugman has a warm note to share: he believes Bitcoin's underlying blockchain is interesting.
Constructive criticism of Bitcoin is healthy. In fact, some of Bitcoin's biggest critics are also its biggest proponents because they recognize that only by separating the cryptocurrency and scrutinizing it can it be improved. Wherever Bitcoin goes and whatever kind of financial system it produces, it will never be good enough for the Roubinis and Gerards of the world who will continue to hate one of the most disruptive technologies to emerge in recent years.