Comment by EGreg | Hacker News Reader

Comment by EGreg | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

The same people who say they can’t take Signal seriously as a canary for anything because they did something with crypto are total cheerleaders for OpenAI even after it disbanded its ethics and alignment boards and did a lot of shady stuf. “Because crypto sucks in every way possible” and “because AI is awesome”. What about nuance and substance? This is HN.

If you ask the average person, they’d say that people on HN and their snarky attitudes are far more unlikable than the people building decentralized networks that empower people.

Vitalik Buterin. Tim Berners-Lee. Ian Clarke. The teams at IPFS, MaidSAFE, Freenet. I have interviewed many of them and spoken w them. They are humble, good people trying to make the world a better place. You just enjoy shitting on anything that has the word “web3”. Actually that keyword attracts automatic downvotes on HN since 2021, as in 3 seconds after you post.

Try visiting, say, https://forum.autonomi.community/ or https://ethereum-magicians.org/ and see now nice, courteous and constructive nearly every participant and post is. They are solving hard problems. Not shooting down snarkily anything in a cargo-cult fashion.

Here is an interview I made with Ian Clarke for instance. Unlikeable? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrRqUkJpMQ

> If you ask the average person

I don’t know Europe’s polling. But in America, the majority is against [1][2]. (The only ones showing marginal favour ability are industry polls [3] by low-quality pollsters [4].)

> You just enjoy shitting on anything that has the word “web3”

I’ve made a lot of money from investing in companies that do things around crypto. Its users are a population willing to pay high fees for nebulous ideological points, almost uniquely so outside religion and politics.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/07/just-8percent-of-americans-h...

[2] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/10/majority-...

[3] https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/ Harris

[4] https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240507551232/en/DCG...

Now show me what the majority thinks of “tech bros” commodifying everything and taking away everyone’s jobs, including and especially with OpenAI.

Oh wait that part is awesome and people should just atop worrying and learn to love the bomb…

I just don’t like the selective double standard of these arguments. Far less people are worried about blockchain than about AI, and the public is CORRECT. Because with Web3 even with the shittiest of shitcoins people only stand to risk what they voluntarily put at risk. While AI can harm millions of people who never opted in, and wanted nothing to do with it, across the entire world, their lives are going to change kicking and screaming, and you say “they should get used to it”.

It is the politicians and banks looking to ban things because they are worried about competition to, say, CBDCs. And if you cheer them on then don’t get upset when they ban end to end encryption by the same reasoning. People actually want the freedom to choose their own digital assets. They aren’t sneaking around, they just want choice and the Republican party has come around to supporting crypto for instance. Even DT.

> Now show me what the majority thinks of “tech bros”

Declining but better than crypto, though the recency of the polling leaves much to be desired [1][2].

> taking away everyone’s jobs, including and especially with OpenAI

Honestly, an AI that writes and launches web3 projects would be hilarious.

Also, I’d single out AI—and Altman, specifically—as demonstrating that same unlikeability. The two industries currently clamouring for harsh regulation are AI and crypto.

> politicians and banks looking to ban things because they are worried about competition to, say, CBDCs

Banks lobby for crypto. It’s insanely profitable compared to regulated fare.

Who do you think has been pushing the ETF and custody rules?

> While AI can harm millions of people who never opted in

The entire thread is about crypto trashing everyone’s privacy.

[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/329666/views-big-tech-worsen-pu...

[2] https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-americans-confidence-...

Agreed about Altman, and once again I am trying to point out the key difference: AI can impose massive negative externalities on billions of people who have never opted in, whether they like it or not — while even the shittiest of shitcoins in crypto can only lose you what you voluntarily chose to put at risk. For many people that was under $1000, and for even more it was $0.

To me that is why I consider AI far more dangerous than cryptocurrnecies of any kind. And smart contracts can do far more than cryptocurrencies… while decentralized byzantine-fault-tolerant networks can do even more.

The public fears AI far more than they fear Web3. As for the banks, they couldn’t have exposure to these assets until the ETFs came about, because of laws. And these assets only became interesting because millions of regular people around the world bought into that ecosystem and started using it. The innovation in DeFi was far greater than in regulated FinTech, and without all the arcane needs for interoperability with legacy stuff that still uses fax machines and COBOL. Similarly to how packed switched decentralized VoIP completely eclipsed switchboard operators and legacy telephone networks and trusting the operators like Ma Bell! The costs dropped nearlh overnight to zero and the quality increased, while decades of government antitrust couldn’t achieve anything close to that!

Thank you for articulating this and fighting the good fight.

>> AI can harm millions of people who never opted in

has harmed

I support (some forms of) cryptocurrencies and I support end-to-end encrypted messaging, but combining both in the same app is so obviously unintelligent that questioning the motives is inevitable.

Cryptocurrencies are taxable assets. While private communication enjoys some legal protections in many countries, trading taxable assets does not.

If an app allows you to trade taxable financial assets, it means that tax authorities have every right to demand access, even if it's just to confirm your claim that you didn't use the feature.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com