RE: LIVE 7pm EST: My First Talk 'Post-Release' Live Streamed by BitcoinUncensored: Steem and the Blockchain Future

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

LIVE 7pm EST: My First Talk 'Post-Release' Live Streamed by BitcoinUncensored: Steem and the Blockchain Future

in steem •  8 years ago  (edited)

I guess I should never be surprised, but the total lack of objectivity by the two hosts was pretty ridiculous. As a computer scientist and critical thinker, I find their blind worship of POW just a bit sad. To me if feels a lot like someone who was raised in a religion and just can't break that early indoctrination. Anyways, just to set one point straight: they claimed that Satoshi said Dan Larimer was an idiot. If so, I suppose they must have secretly spoken with Satoshi, as I've never seen any such statement in Satoshi's published writings. Here's a link to a post that does cover the interactions between them that I'm aware of (I didn't write the post, just found it in a search): https://steemit.com/steem/@steempower/genesis-of-dan-a

Dan's a pretty smart guy, as pretty much anyone who's met him or even looked at the software he's created can attest, so this kind of particularly off-base comment really hurts their credibility in my eyes (although I guess it was far from the only thing that did so).

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Yeh I was jumping into the lions den on that one but as you saw I was able to respond to anything negative they said about steem

I really doubt that there's anything you could have said that would have had any impact on these guys. One of the guys was perpetually smirking whenever anything related to blockchain technology outside of bitcoin was discussed. I've run into this kind of this mentality before (more in religious areas than in technical areas, ofc) and generally any reasoned argument you try to make will just be ignored or derided.

I'm not saying it's impossible to change someone with this kind of attitude, but it's pretty much impossible to do it in one session, and it's usually going to take arguments from a lot of people they know, since they don't generally have the technical abilities to understand the underlying issues and have to rely on the statements of authorities they trust. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this is totally crazy: I don't bother to educate myself in every area of study either and I rely on other people's opinions to some extent in lots of things. But I try to keep in mind when I'm doing that, and keep an objective view when I hear opposition to such opinions (as you suggested at the end there).

The only way someone would react like this is if Steem was a threat to their ecosystem.

Chris DeRose is an idiot, look at this piece he just wrote up in CoinDesk: http://www.coindesk.com/why-you-should-beware-the-altcoin-rebrand/

Nice work trying to keep an open mind and rebut their comments.
They are big guys with big voices and i feel like sometimes you had to fight pretty hard just to get a word in. I hope everything calmed down at the dinner and you were able to relax and enjoy the night. I will shoot you an email about the next BeyondBitcoin hangout (i was waiting for you to do this as it was advertised as your First Talk).
I can promise you a much more relaxed and open environment with some smart and passionate people open to hearing about the news, advancements and goals of all projects including Bitcoin.

It's worth noting that Steem is not a direct competitor to Bitcoin, and actually helps it by introducing new people to crypto.

Completely agree +5%

And steals their money and time, when they could just be using medium.com with less risk and complication

You could say PayPal has less risk and complication than bitcoin, but that's comparing apples to oranges.

great comment. upvoted. The "stupid" exchange starts at 1:28:36 and I loved how Charlie diplomatically responded to them.

As a computer scientist you should probably know what Godel's incompleteness theorem is too, the laws of thermodynamics, byzantine fault tolerance, and sybil attacks - which invalidates the idea of proof-of-stake.

You're a pretty funny guy. No doubt most computer scientiests keep track of Godel's incompleteness and the laws of thermodynamics in their daily work where you work. Presumably these are the same guys who never write any actual code, but just draw nice pictures of their software architecture designs. As an engineer (not because of my computer scientist training) I do happen to be aware of the laws of thermodynamics (primary from a course in thermo I took about 30 years ago), but even in my day-to-day work as an electrical engineer they weren't laws I needed to think about much. Of course, I'm pretty aware of sybil attacks and I have a reasonable familiarity with BFT after working in crypto for a few years (it wasn't something I studied before that, even though I've been programming for over 30 years). Anyways, none of those concepts have been utilized to show that the delegated-proof-of-stake method used by graphene doesn't work in practice, and a lot of actual monetary value is sitting out there for the "armchair computer scientist" who thinks he can show differently.

filip is a troll

We should get Dan on the show. Want to make that happen?