I’m glad to see someone dare to call out all of the BS.

People are credibly allowed to question your idols even if you don’t like it or disagree. ;)

well, the ETH project has many sides, one is technology, another is coin distribution (especially with a proof of stake model). That does not imply a scam, but also is a problem for long-term stability

see e.g. here https://cointelegraph.com/news/64-of-staked-eth-controlled-b....

or https://www.bitcoin.com/get-started/how-was-eth-initially-di...

ETH had an unfair issuance and is (by design!) centralized with a CEO. It couldnt be further from Bitcoin at this point.

Powell has the wheel now. I'm afraid crypto might be 100% ponzi, compared to people saying it's 99% (1% being BTC,ETH,etc).

BTC can survive any interest rate/money supply maneuvering just like Gold has.

We'll se how miners react to falling prices and increasing energy costs.

His attempts in 2013 to get funding for Bitcoin mining using quantum computers (and claims they could get similar benefits by simulating those computers on classical machines) could at best be described as naive and ill informed, less charitably described as idiotic, and reasonably described as a scam.

The problem is that all the proponents of blockchain have conflated technical arguments for decentralisation with lofty political ideas for radical social reengineering and have been working to pump the blockchain assets to give themselves the capital to fight their social agendas. It’s all buried in plain sight. But the credible ideas are running out and the flagrant lack of accountability this time around is kind of no different to Socialism 1.0 or Communism 1.0. I look forward to being cancelled for having such a viewpoint.

The movement was corrupted years ago. The goal of founders has been self-enrichment since.

Mostly agreed, but not every blockchain allows its creators to enrich themselves.

Not sure why the "Socialism 1.0" reference when the books these kids read -- and what inspires the thing they're doing -- is primarily Ayn Rand / Jordan Peterson (or if they're really going upmarket, Milton Friedman etc), not Marx or Trotsky or Prouhdon.

You should read his blog

Anybody in Bitcoin at this point has low credibility. The innovation space has mostly moved to other chains and projects. What is left are non technical people trying to pump the value of the coin.

You have it backwards. Bitcoin (and related pure decentralized coins) is probably the only thing retaining credibility right now. Everything with a CEO, premine, ICO, web3, defi, is in question.

No, I think you just fit my definition of non-technical about blockchains in general

I understand your point but you're off-topic.

The question is what retains credibility in this climate, not where the technical innovation is. You mentioned Mina elsewhere. You think Mina has more credibility than Bitcoin right now? Absolutely not.

Strongly disagree.

Anybody in any crypto token other than Bitcoin at this point has low credibility. Every other chain and project is sacrificing decentralization for short term gain. They’re at best naive and at worst scammers.

Bitcoin is dumb, but it’s honest about its dumbness. The dumb bits are largely forward looking. Web3 is dumb but also fraudulent, because it lies about what it is.

Bitcoin is boring. It’s a decentralized ledger. It’s effectively the missing protocol for money on IP.

Everything else is a security, by definition.

Everything else is an altcoin, by definition.

Some of which distribute their coins more fairly than bitcoin, and are thus definitely not securities.

You should check Mina

Do you have a tldr? I see its stated technical goal of maintaining a small blockchain, but what’s it for? It has a token so is it meant to be money? Is it a web3 app chain?

The fact that there was an initial presale makes it sound like a private company. Which is a lot different than Bitcoin so I’m not sure the comparison.

Vitalik and Ethereum Foundation have siphoned hundreds of millions (billions?) out of the (pre-mined) Ethereum blockchain, which is probably an unregistered security if it weren't for high-roller lobbying agains the SEC, and to what end? Largely a platform for ICO/NFT/web3 failing Ponzi schemes.

If you know of real-world apps on top of Ethereum, that I could use right now on my phone, and is a real thing outside of "wallet thing", "mostly-broken web3 version of existing thing", "earn 30% interest with defi scam", let me know.

True. They've been suppressing innovation intentionally. I know because I worked in the space and watched them pull the plug on promising projects.

Why do you specify "on your phone"?

I'm reminded of the "prettiest lady of all those ... in this room ... currently eating a kebab" bit.

I don't think the most common use of something being "to make scams or other worthless things" is enough to make that thing "a scam".

I don't know what you mean by "siphoned out of". If you just mean "they sold the tokens", then... that seems like a deliberately misleading way of phrasing it?

> on my phone

To emphasize a generally useful thing. The vast majority of people I know use their phones, not desktops. But ok, my desktop is fine too.

> siphoned

When you become ultra-wealthy from tokens/stock from a product or platform that brings no or very little value to the world, I would call that siphoning to emphasize the hugely lopsided ratio of "wealth I got" / "value the world got". You got rich on hype, not value. You siphoned wealth before there was value, without even knowing if there will ever be value (or knowing there won't be).

> I don't think the most common use of something being "to make scams or other worthless things" is enough to make that thing "a scam".

This is a doozie for me. If you make "tools for scammers" somehow that brings value to the world?

Just because something is overall not good, that doesn't make it a scam. The person doing it has to have some amount of intent to deceive in order for them to be perpetrating a scam, I think.

I'm convinced that Vitalik's intentions are good, even if the net results might not be.

I definitely don't think Vitalik is a scammer, but I find it not-so-ethical to take large amounts of money off the table before you've created value. Vitalik's wealth comes from hype, not from value in the world. He's not centrally responsible for generating the hype, and he's even spoken against it, but then he takes a ton of hype money off the table...

They have managed to concoct a system where people have locked billions in staking while keeping only a tiny fraction of their own Eth staked. Vitalik’s addresses have sold tens of millions while all these users have staked with no way out until the overlords decide to implement it.

These are not the actions of a true believer.