Oh, they might occasionally work. Or be necessary. Or you might make money out of them.
But are these technologies presented fairly? So those interested in the truth can make an assessment? Are they really transformative?
If these offerings are not transparent, we should just presume there’s something dodgy going on.
If they were really, in fact, legitimate or as high-scoped and revolutionary as implied?
Then why do they present so . . misleadingly?
Don’t let them dumb us down.
Demand the facts.
Take ‘green’ hydrogen.
Or dietary supplements.
Bitcoin. Hybrid cars. Biofuels in general. ‘Organic’ foods. VR.
It’s not that these things don’t have some utility.
But unlike, e.g. AI or FSD or personalized medicine which have undeniably vast and revolutionary benefits – and are here already or definitely coming soon – these other technologies are likely all, literally, around 95% hype and highly misleadingly promoted.
Blockchain technology is definitely interesting and has legitimate applications. And may one day soon replace our currencies even.
But the manner in which Bitcoin (and others) were presented to us?
In a very ugly manner.
Essentially as pyramid schemes?
Yuk.
Double yuk.
Unlike legitimate startups where the benefit and niche and caveats of a technology are clearly presented, Bitcoin never answered any of my day-one first 5 questions.
- Are you serious? Mining already uses the energy of a small country?
- What is this mining proportional to? Transaction count? Buyers? Sellers? What??!!
- Why don’t you care it’s using so much energy? And not just from a climate change perspective. From a pure efficiency POV, who wants to waste all that energy?
