Hacker News Reader

Comment by VMG | Hacker News Reader

Beware of cynics.

Despite this being on hacker news, Krugman's incorrect prediction actually doesn't harm his reputation significantly. Pessimism and pointing out of flaws elevates your status, while optimism can be construed as being naive.

View on HN

Doesn't harm his reputation? It shows, clearly, that the man, while being an expert in one field, and while being objectively smart, can be a complete moron in another field and make very very very wrong "predictions".

>can be a complete moron in another field

A complete moron? In the field of monetary economics? Yeah, okay. You may think Bitcoin is major internet monies, but the economists are interested in studying it from aspect of a medium of exchange.

Discussing economics on HackerNews is like discussing medicine on Reddit: everyone is an expert, whether they know anything about the subject or not.

Read the post before jumping to your reply button.

> while being an expert in one field, and while being objectively smart, can be a complete moron in another field

ye said that Krugman is an expert in his field, but has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to computers and the impact thereof.

>Read the post before jumping to your reply button.

Maybe you should do the same.

Krugman isn't looking at Bitcoin as a technology, but as a currency. Just because he doesn't understand "computers and the imnpact thereof", doesn't mean he doesn't understand Bitcoin as money.

The article we're commenting on has nothing to do with bitcoins. So again we get back to the issue of reading comprehension.

Unlike HN commentors, whose ability to parse the Bitcoin white paper suddenly turns them into macroeconomic experts.

Believe it or not, it is quite conceivable that many people on HN actually took enough time to read lots of books on economics and made up their mind about which school of thought is closer to the truth.

I don't believe anyone fully understands macroeconomics, and there is no direct incentive for anyone to do so. Certain powerful interests have an incentive to promote some schools of thought over others, because of political implications that directly impact their business.

Bitcoin promoters will typically promote ideologies that help bitcoin, because they've invested in bitcoin. I doubt anyone has a truly unbiased perspective on any of it.

I agree with you and this is why Austrian economics disregards macroeconomics completely.

Doesn't Austrian economics also disregard reality?

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm

I've read this article sometime ago and what struck me while I was reading it, is that the author actually describes WHY Austrian economics is superior and explains it quite good. I couldn't find an actual reason why he decided to not be an Austrian anymore. tl;dr: of that article is like "So this is what Austrian economics is all about, but I don't subscribe to that point of view anymore".

I definitely read it differently. The author cited too many examples of how Austrian economic theory doesn't actually jive with empirical evidence.

He is still a writer for the NYT and taken seriously by the mainstream audience. Proof that talk is cheap, especially dismissiveness is not punished if it turns out that it was unwarranted.

Just something to keep in mind when reading dismissive opinions.

Predictions are irrelevant. What truly harms Krugman's reputation is his open support of the violent state system, quote: "USD is backed by people with guns while Bitcoin is not". I think he quite clearly understands what Bitcoin stands for and I think he correctly identified that it has more to offer to those who lean libertarian. What he either doesn't say or doesn't believe in is that states and central bankers are a violent group of thugs who exploit other people by either fooling them or threatening them. I know many people on HN do not share this point of view. Fine. Problem is, Bitcoin will bring this fact to light so that no one would be able to obscure it with meaningless words and lies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com