[KirinDave]

Plenty of people are doing legitimate things in this space. One need only look. Legitimate NON-currency (token or integrity) applications abound.

In a very real sense, github was an early blockchain startup. Do you type "sigh" on an internet forum when people talk about github?

[theoh]

The "hub" aspect of GitHub takes a decentralised protocol and adds a trusted third party (github). The whole point of blockchain is to avoid creating trusted third parties, something people like Nick Szabo identified a long time ago as a problem for protocol design.

[KirinDave]

> The whole point of blockchain is to avoid creating trusted third parties

Nonsense. The "point" of "blockchain" is to commit blocks to merkel trees with an agreed upon protocol. Your value judgement are just as unwelcome as the previous post's.

You're also wrong about github, as its only a point of centralization for specific UI services. It need not be canonical, it's simply privileged.

Please stop policing the direction blockchain conversations go with religious anecdotes.

[kbenson]

But all this is irrelevant to his original point, and how blockchain was referenced within it. People are reacting to the word and their preconceptions and ignoring the point, which is a real shame because those same preconceptions actually strengthen the point being made.

[theoh]

There's no need to police the direction the conversation takes. I was responding only to the GP, as a matter of fact.

[kbenson]

You're right, my comment was better aimed farther up-thread than yours. I wasn't attempting to police the direction, just note that the tangent started with little explanation and possibly some misinterpretation.

[KirinDave]

Theoh is trying to derail because he has religious objections to the idea that github uses "blockchain technology." You're not "policing", you're resisting someone trying to take an offtopic turn to an existing conversation. Please be proud of this, I thank you for it.