[jcranmer]

I wasn't originally planning on reading the article itself, but I had to skim it as a result of your comment just to see how bad it was for myself.

In fact, I saw none of your suggested horribleness. Okay, I immediately don't like its rhetoric (the first paragraph basically implies the only reason not to like Bitcoin is sour grapes), but that's not bad writing. The only bad habit I see is the tendency to put a comma-separated clause one or two words into the sentence instead of at the beginning, e.g.: "That, like creating the existing credit-based monetary system, is of course a type of alchemy," but even that isn't a particularly frequent occurrence.

[bshimmin]

Obviously my comment wasn't at all substantive (and thus richly deserves the downvotes it has received!), and clearly my opinion on this piece of writing isn't a popular one either, but surely it's hard to argue that...

"In fact I assume that better ones will come along and displace this one because that is the way the evolution of everything works—i.e., new ways of doing things and new things always have and always will replace old ways of doing things and old things."

...is not exactly vintage writing!