12
points
wslh
Joined 35,032 karma
Bootstrapped <https://www.coinfabrik.com> in 2014 and https://www.nektra.com in 2003.
- CoinFabrik: Web3, R&D in decentralization, and security audits. Blockchain (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Algorand, etc) and language agnostic (Solidity, Rust, etc)
- Nektra: security, application virtualization, reverse engineering, Windows system internals
- BitVMX <https://bitvmx.org/>: BitVMX framework provides the foundations to run any CPU on Bitcoin, with a focus to run a fully-compliant RISC-V processor programmable using a standard compilation toolchain.
Blogging at https://blog.coinfabrik.com @coinfabrik, https://blog.nektra.com @nektra, and https://blog.databigbang.com @databigbang
meet.hn/city/ar-Buenos-Aires
- wslhSometimes we only need concentration (and free time).
- 5 points
- 1 point
- I don't think it makes any sense except for fun, Bitcoin scripts are pretty limited and there are a lot of previous work [1][2][3][4][5].
[1] https://bitcoin.sipa.be/miniscript/
[2] https://min.sc/
- Crypto, as an economic and innovation ecosystem, is largely dead, with the partial exception of stablecoins (which are not inherently “crypto” in the ideological/decentralized sense).
The core issue is structural: most cryptocurrencies depend on foundations that fund development, marketing, and operations through large token holdings. When prices fall, these entities eventually become forced sellers. At some point, their “whale power” is not optional but necessary to survive, creating persistent sell pressure and undermining long-term trust.
Bitcoin likely has a longer lifespan than most alternatives due to its lack of a foundation, fixed monetary policy, and social inertia. Over time, it may absorb whatever residual trust exists in the broader crypto space. However, that does not imply indefinite relevance: Bitcoin could survive while gradually becoming economically marginal, not dead, but increasingly negligible outside niche use cases.
- They learn really fast. I will not take the past as a prediction of the future.
- 6 points
- Would it be a successful business? That is what matters in the market.
- I see a fallacy in their arguments, even at that level of understanding: you can't be sure you are measuring all the variables when comparing/diffing "both brains". I am not tired of mentioning the book "Biophysics of Computation: Information Processing in Single Neurons"[1]. There is a parallel HN thread about fMRI issues that adds more food for thought [2].
Not saying than other topics he is talking about are not fascinating, just saying that making arguments about AGI is a stretch. Super intelligent people such as Newton also worked on alchemy, and he thought it was possible at that time.
It is also odd, even for basic computer scientists, when he talks about Turing machines limitations and putting too much faith in their thinking capabilities. It's impossible to not mention the halting problem there. Happy he mention later the possibility of quantum effects in the brain though.
- 4 points
- But we know that there are few winners and past competitors like eBay faded out. It is more extreme with Microsoft: they have survived more market shifts than anybody else, there is no doubt they have something special and at that business level it is difficult to argue that competitors have not tried everything, and the idea of good and bad behaviors is naive at that level. For example, a "good" company such as Sun Microsystems was involved in bribes to gain markets.
- > In my experience, great execution (of mundane things in my case) can lead to others noticing you, which you can then use to create connections.
Following the OP's point, nothing beats having the right and close WhatsApp contacts. Everyone else has to spend months or years building the network for traction to reach those same direct connections. Everybody knows[1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everybody_Knows_(Leonard_Cohen...
- This is a two-edged discussion. On one extreme, there’s an interesting Marxist idea that value creation is largely the product of historical and social forces, not just individual effort. However, I don’t think it’s fair to single out AI, or any billionaire to fit that narrative while ignoring other factors, such as the idea that nations should not exist since they can be thought in the same terms.
On the other side, Jeff Bezos is clearly an outlier. Even if we agree that ecommerce would have existed without him, we don’t know whether someone else would have created the same scale of value.
- 7 points
- 18 points
- 15 points