Summary
Argentine President Javier Milei faces impeachment calls and fraud accusations after promoting the $LIBRA cryptocurrency on social media.
His endorsement caused a price surge, but after he deleted the post, the coin crashed, wiping out investor funds.
Critics accuse him of a “rug pull” scheme, while the government denies wrongdoing and announced an anti-corruption probe.
Argentina’s main opposition coalition calls the incident an “unprecedented scandal” and preparing to seek his impeachment.
It wasn’t supposed to be the revolution, it was sold like it was.
As a revolution, it relies on infinite applicability of Moore’s law to storage medium. In other words, it relies on infinite growth. It never left the square one.
Storage medium? What are you on about? You can prune blockchains and do things like demurrage to reduce bloat.
But either way it’s a weird critique. Bitcoin getting bigger makes it harder to sync clients but it’s not gonna consume all the worlds storage that doesn’t make sense.
Sold like it was? Crypto wasn’t hawked on late-night infomercials; it emerged from cypherpunk manifestos and whitepapers. It was the revolution—at least until greed and human nature dragged it into the mud. Dismissing it as a sales pitch is reductive and lazy.
Moore’s law? Storage medium? You’re just throwing tech buzzwords into a blender. Crypto’s scalability issues aren’t about transistor density or storage capacity—they’re about consensus mechanisms, energy efficiency, and adoption. Infinite growth isn’t intrinsic to crypto; it’s intrinsic to capitalism, which crypto ironically sought to escape.
And “never left square one”? That’s just willful ignorance. From smart contracts to decentralized finance, crypto has evolved. The problem isn’t stagnation—it’s co-optation. Your critique is as hollow as the systems you claim to deride.
Yeah, I’ll throw my voice into the downvote chain and say you’re absolutely right. Saying crypto is tied to Moore’s law is hot garbage. I really, really don’t want to defend crypto here since 98% of its use now is for scamming people, but there are a lot of clever consensus algorithms now that escape scalability issues. Computational waste is still a problem across the board, but that trend is shrinking in some of the newer coins, not growing.
Like I said, I wouldn’t touch crypto with a ten-foot pole, but everything you said here is completely correct, right down to the co-optation of what started as a set of impressive enthusiast projects.
Appreciate your input, honestly. The downvotes are hilarious, though—like some kind of reflexive mob reaction. It’s wild how people can’t handle nuance without reaching for the pitchforks. Keep speaking your mind; it’s refreshing in a sea of parrots.