[zelag]

The author has a huge conflict of interest whenever he writes about cryptocurrency, seeing as he's the founder of Adjoint, Inc, a company which digitizes cash and settlement processes for multinational corporates.

The site in question: http://www.adjoint.io/

this was originally brought up by robot_no_419 in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27121532 all props go to him.

[jazzyjackson]

I don’t understand the use of “conflict of interest” here, the author is expressing an opinion, plainly explaining which “side” they are on, no other context required.

It’s not as if the author is trying to pass legislation or close a business deal without disclosing how they’ll benefit. Like my sibling says, that the author puts their money where their mouth is by placing bets against crypto only makes their opinion more credible.

[yannoninator]

Wouldn't a media interview or someone debating Diehl be even more credible?

The public can make their minds up when presented with both sides of the argument rather than one side on Twitter.

[jazzyjackson]

I dont know that convincing the public was the intention of the blog, the author seems resigned that they are preaching to their choir. Not everything has to be about winning people over, I enjoyed the piece as a rant that resonates with me, puts my vague impressions into prose.

[triactual]

This is an opinion piece. Write a rebuttal and post it.

[yannoninator]

What rebuttal? I agree with the post?

I just want the common man to see crypto for what it really is with a balanced debate or interview, not just a blog post that only 'nerds' reads as Diehl states.

> It’s almost only nerds who read my blog...

After all, it would be more credible coming from him than me.

[leifg]

> I just want the common man to see crypto for what it really is with a balanced debate or interview, not just a blog post that only 'nerds' reads as Diehl states.

I've been following this space for a while and honestly I don't see how a counterpart would actually look like. We had blockchains/crypto for almost 13 years and the only thing that came out of it is a speculative semi-unregulated asset market. Still Forbes, NYT etc... always write articles like "Cryptocurrencies are volatile asset that is doomed to crash, but the underlying blockchain technology is here to say". Without offering any kind of proof for the second part of the statement.

Show me one blockchain application that has nothing to do with virtual assets that not only turns a profit but is provably more efficient than a database based solution.

Whenever I bring this up, the response is usually: "We're just at the beginning, this will take a while". For a space that is claiming the disruption of everything it's moving pretty slow.

[mattdesl]

Considering BTC's network uptime has been about 99.9% for over a decade, I'd say the "here to stay" articles may have been relatively accurate? (I don't care much for BTC, though I do feel a narrow scope of its usage will probably persist in some fashion for many more years.)

> Show me one blockchain application that has nothing to do with virtual assets that not only turns a profit but is provably more efficient than a database based solution.

The only thing ledger specifies is virtual state and virtual assets (ie: tokens). A simple example of an application that is easier with a smart contract than traditional financial services and a plain old database is an escrow agent for handling a significant sum across hundreds or thousands of global participants (and thus potentially currencies). In practice; a smart contract application built on this may look like a time-constrained Kickstarter campaign, but using a trustless/ownerless escrow contract to accept and manage payments.

[KarlKemp]

People are free to post opposing arguments wherever they want, including this thread. So far, they have come up with a few ad hominems, three invocations of “socialism” none of which come close to the concept, and complaints that their side isn’t being given a chance to respond.

[okareaman]

This makes him more qualified in my eyes to write about crypto currency. He's bearish on it. I'd be a fool not to listen to all sides of the argument.

[SandB0x]

I think you mean: "Has relevant industry knowledge