[kkielhofner]

All you need to know is right there in the heading - "Visa Crypto Thought Leadership".

You can go back years finding all kinds of research papers, press releases, broad statements from you-name-it Fortune 500 talking about some crypto project.

It means absolutely nothing for these big corps to take a tiny portion out of their income-offsetting R&D departments to put a few people on moonshot/fluff/PR campaigns for papers like this. It makes them look cool, relevant, whatever and in the event it somehow goes somewhere they look like geniuses (and some exec gets a promotion). If it doesn't work out they never mention it again -OR- release a statement announcing termination of the project because of environmental concerns, etc (like Tesla).

[jakupovic]

Because you say so? Is that why it doesn't mean anything. At least the parent poster posted some links, you didn't and are still drawing baseless conclusions. Next time please do provide something more.

[kkielhofner]

Conversely, I'd love to see examples of successful blockchain/crypto projects in production in large enterprise/Fortune 500 or anywhere else. Or anything pointing to mainstream blockchain/crypto adoption outside of gambling on exchanges. Bitcoin is almost 14 years old and Ethereum is coming up on eight...

For starters:

https://www.maersk.com/news/articles/2022/11/29/maersk-and-i...

https://www.reuters.com/markets/australian-stock-exchanges-b...

Nice overview and summary (including Walmart):

https://www.wsj.com/articles/blockchain-fails-to-gain-tracti...

Tesla accepted payments, stopped, then hinted over a year ago they might resume them. Still hasn't happened:

https://www.yahoo.com/now/tesla-hints-may-accept-crypto-1043...

Another example of a splashy announcement that went nowhere:

https://www.ledgerinsights.com/walgreens-walmart-mediledger-...

It's getting tired to debate but I've been very active in blockchain since 2017, with two startups in the space. After more than a decade and tens of billions of dollars in spending and funding by everyone from enterprise to VC blockchain and crypto penetration and adoption is abysmal. If you want some sources and background on that conclusion I wrote this nearly a year ago and if anything usage and adoption is lower:

https://blog.cryptostars.is/blockchain-the-most-poorly-adopt...

[jakupovic]

https://www.ibm.com/blockchain/services Big Blue didn't stop using blockchain.

Let me guess you lost a bunch of money or didn't make enough and are ready to give up? Or did you lose a lot and now think it's bad? Fact remains that blockchain is around and not going anywhere. While HN is super negative about blockchain, not sure why as this is a tech. innovation but still super negative, like this place is being run by big banks who stand to lose the most?

[kkielhofner]

If you had read the article I wrote I started it by explaining that I divested of all crypto holdings in 2021. Even with those (very) positive returns I can't look away from what I've experienced and seen in the space.

My change in thinking comes from five years very deep in this and realizing:

1. It's been five years waiting and we've yet to see any meaningful adoption. Bitcoiners (as one example) still post videos on social media of them doing Lightning transactions at some random one-off retail location like it's worthy of a post... The pro-crypto/blockchain community is like a cult following a doomsday preacher that keeps predicting dates for the apocalypse that come and go - only to believe yet another future date. If after a decade it's still a big deal to buy a sandwich with crypto it's really time to reconsider your position. If after a decade you're still celebrating things like a Visa press release of some blockchain research project it's really time to reconsider your position. Wouldn't we all laugh at someone getting excited to send an e-mail, shop online, or have $CORP setup a website in 2000?

2. Living blockchain and crypto everyday for five years has only served to reinforce and demonstrate first hand the attitude you see on HN - even with the incredible amount of time and resources thrown at the space it's still nowhere near ready for prime-time. I've written plenty of comments describing the horror that is even the most fundamental layers - node implementations, etc. See point #1 - I've been waiting for it to grow up and as a rational person I can't keep falling for lofty promises that never materialize. HN (for the most part) thinks the tech sucks because it does.

3. Being active in the space has only exposed me directly to the incredible sleaziness that is crypto and blockchain. I've had founders of large and well-known startups show up to meetings obviously high on drugs, saying things like "I'm just trying to get made, paid, and laid" repeatedly. I've had meetings with large blue chip VC firms active in crypto that essentially describe the position of SBF - "We're in the ponzi business and it's going well". My latest startup is an anti-fraud solution for blockchain and I've been repeatedly told things like "Why would we want this? We make our money on fraud." Needless to say details of SBF unfolding - drug usage, criminality, etc are not surprising to me in the least. HN (for the most part) thinks crypto and blockchain is a cesspool of bad actors because it is.

Five years ago I was convinced blockchain was the next big thing - akin to the internet/web. After five years of these personal experiences, all of the available data on adoption, headlines of people in crypto getting indicted, faking their own deaths, rugpulling, exchanges collapsing, Defi and wallets getting hacked left and right, failed project after failed project, dealing with people I want nothing to do with, etc, etc I see it for what it obviously is - even though I've personally come out ahead financially (largely due to timing and luck).

How much of your personal self-interest/stake is driving your position on all of this?