Find Everything About Anti-Crypto Toxicity
Many of the questions raised by some of the more ideologues supporting cryptocurrencies and blockchain-based technologies are excellent ones. Regardless of prevalence, we still need to address and embrace that there is anti-crypto toxicity.
Despite crypto's undeniably right-libertarian roots and the continued dominance of those views in the industry today, we nevertheless notice that some people are asking:
- How can a society that has so many members in precarious financial situations be fixed?
- How do we increase everyone's access to the information?
- How can we make the financial system somewhat private?
- How can we ensure that people have control over their personal information while enhancing data privacy?
- How can we lessen the influence a few now have on the internet?
- How can we build a more fair financial system where everyone can use banks?
Many more people are posing very similar versions of these questions outside of this group of individuals with ideological hopes for cryptocurrency and what they view as its ability to build a more fair society to alter their circumstances.
COPYRIGHT_WI: Published on https://washingtonindependent.com/ebv/anti-crypto-toxicity/ by Luke Evans on 2022-08-11T02:56:41.934Z
How can we obtain the necessary financial services? How can we make my dire financial condition better? How can we use my art to earn a decent living? How can we make use of financial opportunities that we are unable to take advantage of because of our place of birth and residence?
Where we stand on cryptocurrencies and blockchain-based technologies as a potential answer to some or all of these concerns should be evident to most people who are familiar with my work, in my opinion.
But we also believe these ideas are quite appealing to those who view them as a real alternative in a world where these issues are not being resolved, and our political structures have failed us in many ways.
They are being marketed as the solution that people desperately need, even though we don't think they are a workable solution and believe they will make many of the problems they purport to fix worse.
And we really cannot hold it against anyone if they decide to support crypto and web in the vain hope that those salesmen might be onto something.
We can disagree with them, we can articulate our position, and we can believe that their participation is indirectly supporting an issue that I fundamentally oppose and consider to be harmful, but I cannot accept the notion that merely owning cryptocurrency, amassing NFTs, or participating in a DAO automatically makes someone a bad person.
Of course, other individuals are also engaged in cryptocurrency projects and have further inquiries. Is it possible for me to become extremely wealthy even at the expense of others? or "How can I benefit from crypto's anonymity?"
We've previously discussed how toxic the pro-crypto community is.
People swarm Twitter with answers when someone expresses displeasure with their chosen enterprise, telling them to "have fun staying poor" either "not going to make it," or frequently much worse things. They mercilessly attack everyone who criticizes crypto, including those who simply dared to raise some doubts or questions.
Nico ZM stated on stage at Bitcoin Miami 2021 that "Not only do I think bitcoin toxicity is vital, I think it's absolutely required." Many people have actively welcomed this poison.
Nobody should be compelled to be kind to wicked people. But in our opinion, the notion that anyone involved in cryptocurrency is evil has spread widely and has been used as justification for hatred of those who don't deserve it.
There are certainly a lot of bad people in crypto, but if you look closer, you'll find that there are also many people there who may share your objectives.
Some would contend that "cyberbullying" crypto or NFT holders serve to deter potential players from joining in by showing them the value of exclusion. This might be the situation.
But we are aware that the toxicity and cult-like atmosphere of crypto turn off rational individuals who might otherwise be inclined to use it, and we don't see any reason why the anti-crypto movement's new conduct shouldn't have a similar effect.
We also seriously doubt the value of such actions. It seems like a waste of effort to target those who use cryptocurrency casually if the larger objective is to lessen its detrimental effects on society.
Bitcoin and Why Cryptocurrencies Will Fail | Wiktor Jaszczuk | TEDxYouth@2SLO
If you want to "cyberbully" someone in the cryptocurrency world, target the wealthy individuals who are actively taking advantage of the weak by funding projects.
Or, more logically, target the influential tech CEOs, VCs, legislators, and lobbyists who have aided in creating the precarious scenario we find ourselves in.
Or the decision-makers and governmental organizations that have neglected their responsibility in regulating cryptocurrencies and implementing current regulations that would shield individuals from widespread fraud.
But not the artist who planned to make a few dollars selling their digital art in a field that is otherwise very challenging or the individual who hoped that perhaps a lucky cryptocurrency purchase could help them escape crushing debt for a little while.
Although not all crypto's detractors are as callous as Stoller, almost all concur that the technology is worthless.
Cryptocurrency opponents regard it as sand-based money, in contrast to supporters who claim it is a component of a new world order that is still shaking off the dust. Journalists, software developers, decision-makers, and academics make up this group of critics.
While some want more proactive regulation, others want the whole thing to "die in a fire." Even when bitcoin was worth more than $68,000, many people expressed their doubts about cryptocurrencies.
But even as crypto supporters criticize them for propagating false information, they haven't stopped now during the industry's long, bleak winter (fear, uncertainty, and doubt).
Crypto critics like White, software engineer Stephen Diehl, Google engineer Kelsey Hightower, and journalist Jacob Silverman are unwavering in their concerns, which range from the viability of blockchains to the growing political clout of crypto moguls to the potential social and economic effects of the great experiment in digital currencies.
About their crypto holdings, "there are people in the cryptocurrency sector who care about this stuff and who are making a lot of money—or at least are very rich on paper," Silverman added. They may adhere to certain ideologies, yet these are individuals who could be involved with millions or perhaps billions of dollars.
Stoller recognized that cryptography might lead to a "real leap in technical capability," but he hasn't personally experienced it. The widespread and growing quantity of cryptocurrency fraud is another sign of Stoller's purpose.
"I don't see that occurring," he added. It's not like someone looked at blockchain and said, "Oh, my God, we finally have a better database for storing transactions!" as Kelsey Hightower claims. Rather, money is the goal. Instead, tales of people making a tiny amount of money were what made blockchain's great promises so alluring.
Hightower has engaged in discussion with other computer specialists about the technical benefits of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology.
Through his interactions, including DMs with ardent blockchain supporters, he realized something. Referring to the ideological investment in the blockchain, he stated, "This is hope." I have no other option, even if I can prove them wrong.
He explained that because "a lot of those things have failed individuals," he cannot advise them to work hard and save money for college. He makes an effort to bring this point up in conversations concerning cryptocurrency.
One common topic among cryptocurrency detractors is Hightower's belief that the rise of cryptocurrency results from various systemic flaws.
While critics might be inclined to reply to randos shouting "NGMI," White said in a blog post titled "On anti-crypto toxicity" that they should direct their ire instead towards "powerful tech executives, venture capitalists, elected representatives, and lobbyists," who are actually to blame.
Investors in cryptocurrencies should be ready for a long, chilly winter as the value of cryptocurrencies is continuously declining.
For cryptocurrency investors who have already lost millions of dollars, there is currently little immediate hope beyond the conventional recommendation to HODL.
More detailed solutions were provided by Stoller. He would "want the Fed to push asset prices down from inflated levels" in the long run. His immediate fix is considerably more straightforward: "I'd want to see a lot of handcuffs for the vast fraud going on in the space," he said.
The simplest method is to monitor your CPU utilization. Right-click the taskbar in Windows and choose Task Manager. Navigate to the Performance tab. Open Activity Monitor in Mac OS by typing "Activity Monitor" into Spotlight (by pressing Command + Spacebar), or by heading to Applications > Utilities.
Check to check if your CPU usage is at 99 percent or more by opening the Task Manager (Windows: ctrl+alt+del) or the Activity Monitor (Mac: Finder > Applications > Utilities > Activity Monitor).
Opportunistic miners have been stealing power to run their mining operations, making enormous profits with comparatively little overhead. Bitcoin mining requires a considerable amount of power.
At this point, toxicity from the anti-crypto crowd is essentially unavoidable. The pro-crypto movement has made a lot of stupid statements and ludicrous assertions during the past ten years. All of their claims have failed to materially materialize. Some areas of ETH show potential, especially in the nerdiest areas, but these are still just predictions.