My perspective on that might not be what you expect.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/nfts-weren...

[flagged]

One of the best quotes by Thomas Sowell: "One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results."

[flagged]

He even got hansmayer's original comment flagged. Truly a champion of the open web we should all be backing!

I didn't flag it.

Correction: the champion of Web 2.0 2.0 - * whatever that means* :)

Not sure how many national magazines you’ve written for, but it is in fact fairly standard practice to write first-person essays in the first person. You did make up a whole bunch of people you don’t like in your example there, but literally none of them nap to what I did here, so I’m not sure what your enumerating except your lack of comprehension of the situation here. Hope that helps.

My man, if I ever pushed or worked on something as pointless as NFTs, I'd be careful to keep my mouth shut and not imply it's others who have a "lack of comprehension". So you somehow got a clueless editor at a "national magazine" to publish your opinion piece (which does not actually translate into "writing for"), good for you and your ego! Only that this fact is completely irrelevant to the main issue at hand - promoting worthless tech either out of pure incompetence, or desire for profit or both. I am not sure which is worse.

Yeah, did they just forget "Web 3.0" died in a garbage fire? Now the latest object of hype is "Web 2.0 2.0"? I want to get off this ride.

The author is incorrect. Semantic web (what the author wrongly calls Web 2.0) was called Web 3.0 since 2006, when Berners-Lee coined it. It was only recently that the crypto grifters appropriated that name for their scams.