Blockchain Remains, and Will Forever be, a Dire Grift [...]

[legiteum]

"Blockchain Remains, and Will Forever be, a Dire Grift, a Perilous Scam and a Nasty Scourge"

John Reed Stark has some, um, opinions...

https://x.com/JohnReedStark/status/1845160201667981566

[BlackHatCoiner]

*opens the link*

*checks that blockchain is being called a spreadsheet*

*immediately closes the tab*

[Ambatman]

"Blockchain Remains, and Will Forever be, a Dire Grift, a Perilous Scam and a Nasty Scourge"

John Reed Stark has some, um, opinions...

https://x.com/JohnReedStark/status/1845160201667981566

is his opinion supposed to matter
Wrote almost 12K words and all is on how Blockchain is slow,Insecure, spreadsheet, non scalable and offer limited utility.
Definitely someone who sees Blockchain as only recording data publicly and nothing more.
Disadvantage of been lost in your own world and not realising it.

[Orpichukwu]

Another place where I see the author confused is where he made mention that crypto currency and blockchain are trying to solve a problem that no one has. There's  no real-life problem here; instead, the enthusiasts are deceiving the people to believe that bitcoin and it's a magical money that can save them from whatever they believe is the problem.

[legiteum]

What he gets right:

• Blockchain, as an architecture, has had zero non-crypto design wins, and it's a stupid thing to use for the "enterprise" or whatever.
• Blockchain performs a lot of "reputation washing" for what is ultimately grift: "it's perfectly secure because it's blockchain", you will hear people say all of the time.
• Blockchain will never scale to anything approaching a mainstream everyday transaction load, and thus will never "take over" existing currencies and payment methods.
• Because of Bitcoin's rise in market value, investors and venture capitalists invest in a lot of stupid things because they say "blockchain" on them.
• All of the non-cryptocurrency applications for blockchain are simply retarded and pointless.

What he gets wrong:

• Blockchain is not a "scam" anymore than TCP/IP is a "scam". It's an architecture, and it has specific uses. If you tell me that TCP/IP will cure cancer, then yes, that is false and likely a scam. But that doesn't mean that the architecture itself is a scam.
• He uses the terms for blockchain-based cryptocurrency and Bitcoin specifically interchangeably. In particular, he implies that Bitcoin is used for cyber-extortion even though it hasn't been the choice for criminals and terrorists for a long time since there is chain analysis. Today, the preferred currency for criminals these days is Monero et. al., or they use Bitcoin with a mixer product.
• He seems to imply that all of these scams and this misinformation is Bitcoin's fault when it's not. Yes, there's a ton of grifters out there doing grifting and saying false things in order to fool people, but this isn't the fault of Bitcoin itself. The NSA employ that invented Bitcoin and called himself Satoshi (my new favorite conspiracy theory ) never meant for any of this to happen, nor could they have reasonably predicted it. Bitcoin was designed to solve a single narrow problem, which it still partially does. But it tapped into something that made people billionaires so the hype went crazy--but that was all an accident.
• Very generally, he doesn't understand the use case that probably 99% of Bitcoin users use it for, i.e. as a speculation instrument. Yes, a scant few use it for criminality, and there is a lot of hype around it's usage to do a bunch of things it cannot do, but most people use Bitcoin in a very innocuous way i.e. to simply make a profit from an investment in Bitcoin.
  

[AOL]

"Blockchain Remains, and Will Forever be, a Dire Grift, a Perilous Scam and a Nasty Scourge"

John Reed Stark has some, um, opinions...

https://x.com/JohnReedStark/status/1845160201667981566

This is 2024. If it was 2014, we could have spent some time to explain this gentleman. In 2024, despite having so many resources around, if you do not get blockchain, you'll be left behind. Simple...

[Text]

I think it’s essential to differentiate between the technology itself and how it’s been utilized or misused in various contexts. To label blockchain as a scam seems overly simplistic. Just like TCP/IP, blockchain is an architectural framework with specific use cases. It has its shortcomings, particularly in terms of scalability and mainstream applicability, but that doesn’t inherently make it fraudulent.

Stark's equating of Bitcoin with all blockchain-related issues misses the nuance of its adoption. Many users engage with Bitcoin not for illicit activities but as an investment vehicle, an asset class in its own right. It’s important to acknowledge that while the environment may attract grifters, that doesn’t reflect the intentions behind Bitcoin's design or the legitimate use cases that some individuals have found.

[SickDayIn]

He does make some good points, there are a lot of people who have become "Blockchain Experts" overnight, specialising their careers, but really it's only for profit. I feel like the industry has drifted too far. We shouldn't be focusing on how we can make existing businesses be replaced by "blockchainification" as he puts it, or what the latest jpeg NFT release is. Really we need to focus on how Bitcoin is a storage of wealth.

[Reatim]

"Blockchain Remains, and Will Forever be, a Dire Grift, a Perilous Scam and a Nasty Scourge"

John Reed Stark has some, um, opinions...

It seems like he is concerned about blockchains threatening the stability of global financial markets. In his very long paragraph, he repeatedly says that he believes blockchain is glorified for marketing purpose and not because of its actual usefulness and value.

I know some people will believe him as his name has been synonymous with cybersecurity but some of what he claims are untrue. I don’t want to fight with people like these. They have made their research and still refuse to accept how valuable blockchain technology can be not only to financial aspects but also to other sectors of the world. Just let blockchain be adopted worldwide and watch people like John Reed Stark eat their own words.

[betswift]

"Blockchain Remains, and Will Forever be, a Dire Grift, a Perilous Scam and a Nasty Scourge"

John Reed Stark has some, um, opinions...

https://x.com/JohnReedStark/status/1845160201667981566

This is 2024. If it was 2014, we could have spent some time to explain this gentleman. In 2024, despite having so many resources around, if you do not get blockchain, you'll be left behind. Simple...

I would agree, there are many points of his that are just laughable or arguably not true. Nevertheless, I hope for this gent to get it in the future, doing more analysis

[Dunamisx]

I don't even know who is getting it wrong over here, is it the OP who is not giving the right interpretation of what is being said from the link he provided, or the one that is telling us on how blockchain has come and to remain while all he could point out are challenges and loopholes not proven from the said decentralized network, i don't know what else some may needed when a network is said to be an open distributed ledger like blockchain, what is not secure here.

[legiteum]

I don't even know who is getting it wrong over here, is it the OP who is not giving the right interpretation of what is being said from the link he provided, or the one that is telling us on how blockchain has come and to remain while all he could point out are challenges and loopholes not proven from the said decentralized network, i don't know what else some may needed when a network is said to be an open distributed ledger like blockchain, what is not secure here.

I don't remember "interpreting" anything in the OP . All I did was post a link.

And just because something is distributed doesn't mean it's secure. Lots of and lots of distributed networks have been hacked.

Bitcoin is secure because it's central governance is secure: the code base is carefully locked down and the people in charge of releasing the new cores are very careful. After that hurdle, there is the security of the nodes themselves, which depends on both the core software and the administration of the nodes. After that, it's the redundancy built in to the network that will mitigate a partial failure of the second factor here.

Net-net, Bitcoin itself is very very secure, but that has nothing to do with the blockchain architecture per se.

[pooya87]

John Reed Stark

The real questions is why you thought that the opinion of a random person on the internet that nobody even knows matters enough to start a dedicated topic about!

[EluguHcman]

"Blockchain Remains, and Will Forever be, a Dire Grift, a Perilous Scam and a Nasty Scourge"

John Reed Stark has some, um, opinions...

https://x.com/JohnReedStark/status/1845160201667981566

And John Reed  said... "I can’t say it any plainer" and that simply means he has got nothing genuine and convinceable to say about his claim on Bitcoin being a deception.

After all being said, he has also been aware that Bitcoin enthusiasts would be blasting on him why? Because he knows he is the deception trying to divert the worlds visions after foreseeing that the potentials and utilizations of Bitcoin is a shield of economy infrastructures against the future.

So obvious that he is an anti-bitcoineers centered on self interest with his accomplice.

[FortuneFollower]

John Reed Stark

The real questions is why you thought that the opinion of a random person on the internet that nobody even knows matters enough to start a dedicated topic about!

Just to discuss it, I think. At least it was an interesting read, if we can call it that

[avikz]

"Blockchain Remains, and Will Forever be, a Dire Grift, a Perilous Scam and a Nasty Scourge"

John Reed Stark has some, um, opinions...

https://x.com/JohnReedStark/status/1845160201667981566

Lol! It's a free world where everyone's freedom of speech is protected by law. So such kind of opinions will keep on coming. We can't sensor them anyway! But we can surely ignore them! We have successfully ignored Jemie Dimon, Warren Buffet etc. One more name to add to the ignore list!

Seriously, when someone says that Blockchain is a spreadsheet, it shows the level of understanding that person has on this technology. It's like proclaiming to the world - see, I am a stupid!
 

[FortuneFollower]

"Blockchain Remains, and Will Forever be, a Dire Grift, a Perilous Scam and a Nasty Scourge"

John Reed Stark has some, um, opinions...

https://x.com/JohnReedStark/status/1845160201667981566

Lol! It's a free world where everyone's freedom of speech is protected by law. So such kind of opinions will keep on coming. We can't sensor them anyway! But we can surely ignore them! We have successfully ignored Jemie Dimon, Warren Buffet etc. One more name to add to the ignore list!

Seriously, when someone says that Blockchain is a spreadsheet, it shows the level of understanding that person has on this technology. It's like proclaiming to the world - see, I am a stupid!

Yeah, if only others would have the ignore list like there..
I do agree with you, everybody can say what they want or believe in, however, it wouldn't make things different regarding the cold and proven facts.

[ActiveDuck]

I completely agree with your point. It's definitely crucial to separate the technology from how it's applied. Blockchain, like any innovation, is neutral at its core—it’s how people use it that matters. While there have been some negative examples, dismissing the whole technology as a scam overlooks the legitimate use cases and potential it has to revolutionize industries.

Bitcoin, in particular, often gets unfairly criticized because of a few bad actors, but that doesn’t erase the fact that many people see it as a valid investment or even a way to take control of their own financial future. Like any tool, it's all about the context in which it's used. Direct2HR

[DenBlad]

he meant to say a dire gift. English might be a second language to him

[pooya87]

John Reed Stark

The real questions is why you thought that the opinion of a random person on the internet that nobody even knows matters enough to start a dedicated topic about!

Just to discuss it, I think. At least it was an interesting read, if we can call it that

Well posting a random link to a wall of text is not the same as discussing it

Besides, that wall of text doesn't really have anything new or interesting in my opinion. It is using an old technique to use a known fact (Blockchain's limitations) to build up a case against it and by extension bash Bitcoin covertly.

I'd say reading that wall of text is a complete waste of time. I skimmed through it and as I said it is just using a fact to build up a fake case.
And when you reach the part where he is basically comparing SWIFT with Bitcoin and concludes that the shittiest and most centralized IOU payment processor on the planet that the world is already abandoning because the centralized authority (US regime) is abusing it by stealing other countries' money is better than Bitcoin, you know how little he understands what a "decentralized payment system that is resistant to censorship" means.