If I posted an article about Linux 4.1 or something, I wouldn't expect to see comments saying 'meanwhile, I used Windows yesterday, and played GTA5, and it was good'.
What gives? Are there forums in which people have this sort of reaction to, I dunno, HTML5?
From some of the posts here you would think that it's IED control software.
I'll offer a controversial explanation: bitcoin enthusiasts have exhausted most of the oxygen in the room with regard to rational bitcoin discussion.
The never-ending adulation of bitcoin as the greatest invention since the internet, the hyperbolic claims that bitcoin will do things like revolutionize payments, end global war, eliminate the need for banks, liberate the people from bondage, the litany of bitcoin and blockchain companies making extraordinary claims while consistently under-delivering or outright scamming customers, the warped world-view where communities of impoverished people who can barely meet their daily needs and have markedly poor computer literacy and limited access to computers and internet will be lifted out of poverty by banking with bitcoin, the constant dismissal of bitcoin skeptics as "not understanding" bitcoin, the self-aggrandizing elevation of satoshi and bitcoin programmers as programming prodigies, the condescendingly absurd notion that detractors, the banks and the governments are afraid of bitcoin or afraid of the bitcoin money revolution, the tone-deaf advocacy of bitcoin as a safer method of payment than credit cards, the general refusal to acknowledge bitcoin's practical challenges as real problems (non-technical people being scammed or permanently losing their money due to data-loss, theft, misconfiguration of software, sending bitcoin to the wrong address, downloading a scam wallet), the oversaturation of the underwhelming "x but with bitcoin" formula that pops up every couple weeks... and much more.
As heated, vitriolic and personal as linux discussions can get, its taken for granted that everyone is at least operating in the same objective reality (systemd vs upstart, gnome vs unity, mir vs wayland, even windows vs linux), but a large swath of bitcoin enthusiasts look at bitcoin as something that eclipses every other technical topic in importance to the point where it comes off as quasi-religious.
Actually, I'd suggest you do sometimes see people saying that about Linux, especially when Linux "on the desktop" comes up. And the reason is that neither project is simply a neutral software development project, but are politically charged. Linux at this point really just has a political "tinge" to it with the free software stuff, but Bitcoin is drenched in politics. So people are responding with their political brains rather than their raw technical brains.
I am not trying to imply this is bad. The politics are intrinsically worthy of thought and discussion. I could wish for a higher level of discourse on political matters, but humans have been doing that for lo these many thousands of years and I doubt this is the year that's going to change. Our "political brains" are complicated, messy things, tied into tribal instincts, personal identity, and all sorts of other messy things that make it difficult.
I've run into the sentiment you're talking about both online and IRL. It puzzles me as well.
Three factors come to mind:
1. There's a deep-rooted idea today that money comes from the government and that everything else is a scam. Bitcoin challenges that idea.
2. Bitcoin refuses to die despite the predictions of just about everyone who first learns about it.
3. The technical underpinnings of Bitcoin are counterintuitive to say the least. That makes Bitcoin hard to understand even for the technically-oriented.
The combination of longevity, casual disregard for convention, and counterintuitive nature gets annoying after awhile.
Nor are these factors restricted to those who can't stand Bitcoin, its users, or the idea of private money. Many of the most vocal Bitcoin advocates today went through a period of disbelief or outright hostility toward the idea.
For me, I have "bitcoin fatigue" regarding all the usual topics pro-bitcoin evangelist start spewing whenever the topic comes up. The usual "bitcoin is the second-coming of christ" crap.
There is a complete lack of acknowledgement of bitcoin's ineptitude as a replacement for current payment methods, what with its 2TX/s limit (on a good day) and the ridiculous size of the block-chain which effectively negates all the advantages of it being a distributed system since you have to rely on third-parties to use it on you phone or embedded devices for example. Not to mention the monopoly that chinese miners have on the network...it's a joke.
IMHO bitcoin is an interesting experiment, but that's all it is. It will be replaced by something better some day, another fact that evangelists refuse to concede.
It's really polarizing because it forces us to question what we think of as currency. Is it sufficient for it to be scarce, durable, verifyable and fungible or should it have some independent utility or backing?
Some of the vitriol is backlash against the zealots who feel that Bitcoin can/should enable elements of anarchy.
I have no stake or interest in Bitcoin, and I wrote it off some years ago. I find it kind of annoying when there are stories about it or altcoins in my news feed (in lieu of other things). It's noise in my signal. This is just my own personal feeling; I wouldn't go as far as to describe my feeling towards Bitcoin as hate.
I can't explain the feelings or motivations of those who actively detract from the technology. It's probably similar to Apple "hate". Or inverse "fanboyism".
It's a technology for allowing money to bypass the rule of law. By design it concentrates power in the hands of property owners, and allows them to undercut democratic rules against activities with negative externalities - and since it's more expensive than currency, those are the only use cases that make sense; prime use cases would be things like drugs, smuggling, tax evasion, child porn, terrorism. I think IED control software is a pretty fair comparison actually, except that IEDs are somewhat more democratic.
> If I posted an article about Linux 4.1 or something, I wouldn't expect to see comments saying 'meanwhile, I used Windows yesterday, and played GTA5, and it was good'.
Back in the 90's when there was more of a religious fervor around Linux the way there is around Bitcoin right now, yeah you would have.
The vitriol is no mystery, it's an obvious reaction to the way so many people have rapturously talked about Bitcoin as if it's going to make governments irrelevant.
We're at the beginning of Bitcoin being treated more like the novelty that it is, and possibly finding a niche where it can be useful over the long term. As it enters this phase where the hype around it dies down, the vitriol will as well.
I was really surprised that the announcement that Steam may support Bitcoin made waves a while ago, yet the announcement that it actually does did not.
I used it to buy a (horrible) game last night, and it worked beautifully. Contrast with PayPal, with which Steam is always confused about where I am and whether it should charge me in GBP or EUR. I'm never not using Bitcoin again.
1. worldwide - which gives them large customer base without access to other methods of payments (unlike US where it's really hard to convince customers to use BTC instead of Credit Cards);
2. Digital goods with licenses that can be revoked - so the merchant doesn't have to worry (too much) about confirmations/double spends and is able to "ship the goods" instantly. They obv have to factor the potential case of tx not going through into their flow to catch these but it can be done without impacting their users whose txs do get confirmed.
Does steam have to worry about transaction confirmation? I would've assumed that bitpay guarantees the funds to their partners regardless of any potential bitcoin shenanigans.
I could see this as Steam testing the Bitcoin waters. Steam games created an entirely new market of digital items changing hands for real world money, and this is done globally across all currencies--bitcoin would be an ideal fit. I could also see value in using bitcoin to reward content creators (modders). Obviously this is crazy speculation, but seem to be solid use cases.
I don't think this was done for any political or idealistic reason. I imagine bitcoin makes it a lot easier for purchases in countries with unreliable banking, high levels of fraud, etc. Try transfering a non-trivial amount of money to Eastern Europe, Africa, Russia, Brazil, etc. Steam deals with this millions of times a day with fraud credit attempts, legitimate credit cards being turned down, etc. Legitimate buyers can just use bitcoin and not worry about credit card shenanigans.
The "omg futurist" brownie points are just a side-effect. Steam/Valve isn't terribly progressive. Heck, its only recently that they put in a refund policy and started putting in common sense limitations on trading to stop fraud. Someone did a cost/benefit analysis here and it simply worked out. I guessing this is part of a larger anti-fraud initiative at Valve.
Oh wonderful, now the world's two most popular all-digital currencies can be used in the same place -- Bitcoin and TF2 hats. Russian criminals and Chinese investors looking to get money out of the country can work together in a new age of unity and togetherness.
That's incredible! No one would ever spray their PayPal address, Venmo or ACH details. The next logical step is to create a medic bot automates the process ;)
I thought Bitcoin had run into a fundamental problem that transactions were now taking hours co complete. And that an internal battle among developers on the fix remained unresolved. Did I miss something?
In other news, I live in Pakistan, and I used a debit card to buy a steam game 3 days ago and it worked instantly + frictionlessly, without having to worry about confirmation times + exchange rates + getting scammed + getting on a government list.
Steam/bitpay don't wait for transaction for put money into your steam wallet. Also, no exchange rates are involved in any meaningful way. This offer is for people who can handle few percent exposure on their 100USD "investment" into BTC.
A lot of people don't have debit cards. A lot of kids can't own debit cards legally. For them Bitcoin might be the only option.
Plus, uh, actual value for people who want to pay with Bitcoin.
> Valve reached out to us because they were looking for a fast, international payment method for Steam users in emerging gaming markets in countries like India, China, and Brazil. While more users are coming online in in these countries, traditional payment options like credit cards often aren't available.
Might be able to use this to buy games at massive discount on Russian VPN too. Bitcoin doesn't demand I upload a passport to make a Russian account. This may help drive down prices on RU/CIS versions of games on secondary markets like G2A too.
How would the DRM zone controls Steam currently have work with this? Before, you needed to have a credit card of the country you're buying the game from.
Sorry I don't have time to dig into their choice of implementation but one way would be for Bitcoin to be a secondary payment option for those who have already registered a credit card.
Splendid! Been doing game purchases for Bitcoin through Humble Bundle, and Kindle Books through Gyft, I hope more providers of electronic resources will get onboard. It even works out better financially, as credit cards charge such a high "foreign currency conversion fee" here in Taiwan.
Does Valve cash out the bitcoins immediately because of it's volatile nature, or is Valve large enough (or bitcoin purchases small enough) that they can safely bear the changes?
[+] [-] stegosaurus|10 years ago|reply
If I posted an article about Linux 4.1 or something, I wouldn't expect to see comments saying 'meanwhile, I used Windows yesterday, and played GTA5, and it was good'.
What gives? Are there forums in which people have this sort of reaction to, I dunno, HTML5?
From some of the posts here you would think that it's IED control software.
[+] [-] vectorpush|10 years ago|reply
The never-ending adulation of bitcoin as the greatest invention since the internet, the hyperbolic claims that bitcoin will do things like revolutionize payments, end global war, eliminate the need for banks, liberate the people from bondage, the litany of bitcoin and blockchain companies making extraordinary claims while consistently under-delivering or outright scamming customers, the warped world-view where communities of impoverished people who can barely meet their daily needs and have markedly poor computer literacy and limited access to computers and internet will be lifted out of poverty by banking with bitcoin, the constant dismissal of bitcoin skeptics as "not understanding" bitcoin, the self-aggrandizing elevation of satoshi and bitcoin programmers as programming prodigies, the condescendingly absurd notion that detractors, the banks and the governments are afraid of bitcoin or afraid of the bitcoin money revolution, the tone-deaf advocacy of bitcoin as a safer method of payment than credit cards, the general refusal to acknowledge bitcoin's practical challenges as real problems (non-technical people being scammed or permanently losing their money due to data-loss, theft, misconfiguration of software, sending bitcoin to the wrong address, downloading a scam wallet), the oversaturation of the underwhelming "x but with bitcoin" formula that pops up every couple weeks... and much more.
As heated, vitriolic and personal as linux discussions can get, its taken for granted that everyone is at least operating in the same objective reality (systemd vs upstart, gnome vs unity, mir vs wayland, even windows vs linux), but a large swath of bitcoin enthusiasts look at bitcoin as something that eclipses every other technical topic in importance to the point where it comes off as quasi-religious.
[+] [-] jerf|10 years ago|reply
I am not trying to imply this is bad. The politics are intrinsically worthy of thought and discussion. I could wish for a higher level of discourse on political matters, but humans have been doing that for lo these many thousands of years and I doubt this is the year that's going to change. Our "political brains" are complicated, messy things, tied into tribal instincts, personal identity, and all sorts of other messy things that make it difficult.
[+] [-] apo|10 years ago|reply
Three factors come to mind:
1. There's a deep-rooted idea today that money comes from the government and that everything else is a scam. Bitcoin challenges that idea.
2. Bitcoin refuses to die despite the predictions of just about everyone who first learns about it.
3. The technical underpinnings of Bitcoin are counterintuitive to say the least. That makes Bitcoin hard to understand even for the technically-oriented.
The combination of longevity, casual disregard for convention, and counterintuitive nature gets annoying after awhile.
Nor are these factors restricted to those who can't stand Bitcoin, its users, or the idea of private money. Many of the most vocal Bitcoin advocates today went through a period of disbelief or outright hostility toward the idea.
[+] [-] easuter|10 years ago|reply
There is a complete lack of acknowledgement of bitcoin's ineptitude as a replacement for current payment methods, what with its 2TX/s limit (on a good day) and the ridiculous size of the block-chain which effectively negates all the advantages of it being a distributed system since you have to rely on third-parties to use it on you phone or embedded devices for example. Not to mention the monopoly that chinese miners have on the network...it's a joke.
IMHO bitcoin is an interesting experiment, but that's all it is. It will be replaced by something better some day, another fact that evangelists refuse to concede.
[+] [-] wyldfire|10 years ago|reply
Some of the vitriol is backlash against the zealots who feel that Bitcoin can/should enable elements of anarchy.
[+] [-] echelon|10 years ago|reply
I can't explain the feelings or motivations of those who actively detract from the technology. It's probably similar to Apple "hate". Or inverse "fanboyism".
[+] [-] lmm|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ebbv|10 years ago|reply
Back in the 90's when there was more of a religious fervor around Linux the way there is around Bitcoin right now, yeah you would have.
The vitriol is no mystery, it's an obvious reaction to the way so many people have rapturously talked about Bitcoin as if it's going to make governments irrelevant.
We're at the beginning of Bitcoin being treated more like the novelty that it is, and possibly finding a niche where it can be useful over the long term. As it enters this phase where the hype around it dies down, the vitriol will as well.
[+] [-] Kinnard|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] draw_down|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brighton36|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] StavrosK|10 years ago|reply
I used it to buy a (horrible) game last night, and it worked beautifully. Contrast with PayPal, with which Steam is always confused about where I am and whether it should charge me in GBP or EUR. I'm never not using Bitcoin again.
[+] [-] ChemicalWarfare|10 years ago|reply
1. worldwide - which gives them large customer base without access to other methods of payments (unlike US where it's really hard to convince customers to use BTC instead of Credit Cards);
2. Digital goods with licenses that can be revoked - so the merchant doesn't have to worry (too much) about confirmations/double spends and is able to "ship the goods" instantly. They obv have to factor the potential case of tx not going through into their flow to catch these but it can be done without impacting their users whose txs do get confirmed.
[+] [-] seanalltogether|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mbmott|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drzaiusapelord|10 years ago|reply
The "omg futurist" brownie points are just a side-effect. Steam/Valve isn't terribly progressive. Heck, its only recently that they put in a refund policy and started putting in common sense limitations on trading to stop fraud. Someone did a cost/benefit analysis here and it simply worked out. I guessing this is part of a larger anti-fraud initiative at Valve.
[+] [-] clemensley|10 years ago|reply
Me too. That's basically the mission of yours.network btw. Best way to keep in touch is the slack channel https://yours-slackin.herokuapp.com/
[+] [-] afterburner|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hypron|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] clemensley|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] overcast|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cwyers|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] johndevor|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] abrkn|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] StavrosK|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] VMG|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] taberiand|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Shorel|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] transfire|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aliakhtar|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] exo762|10 years ago|reply
A lot of people don't have debit cards. A lot of kids can't own debit cards legally. For them Bitcoin might be the only option.
[+] [-] ryanlol|10 years ago|reply
Card payments take far longer to process than bitcoin payments
> exchange rates
Just as much as with bitcoin.
> getting scammed
Why?
[+] [-] joosters|10 years ago|reply
And this is meant to be a good thing?
[+] [-] taesu|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] coldtea|10 years ago|reply
Translation: cheap publicity in tech media and goodwill from some geek sites with no impact whatsoever on its actual revenues and 99.999% of payments.
[+] [-] mbrock|10 years ago|reply
> Valve reached out to us because they were looking for a fast, international payment method for Steam users in emerging gaming markets in countries like India, China, and Brazil. While more users are coming online in in these countries, traditional payment options like credit cards often aren't available.
[+] [-] ultramancool|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] justaman|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] KON_Air|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bdz|10 years ago|reply
But there are 3rd party sites where you can sell your items for real money.
Tho you should only bother if you have valuable items.
[+] [-] magicfractal|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] j_s|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pointsphere|10 years ago|reply
I can only assume that the number of buyers using both Bitcoin and a VPN to buy cheaper games is too small to worry about.
[+] [-] imrehg|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shmerl|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sergiotapia|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hannes2000|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Shorel|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] homero|10 years ago|reply