<story><title>Decentralized Woo Hoo</title><url>https://www.stephendiehl.com/blog/decentralized-woo.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>capableweb</author><text>Maybe the title should be updated. It doesn&amp;#x27;t have anything to do with decentralization per se, but about cryptocurrencies, which is just a technology that happens to use decentralization as a technology.&lt;p&gt;I actually thought the article was gonna be about decentralization (as in P2P technology, like BitTorrent), but instead it&amp;#x27;s about the authors distaste for cryptocurrencies.&lt;p&gt;Edit: Maybe it&amp;#x27;s just me, but the article feels less and less honest the more I look into it. &amp;quot;Stephen Diehl&amp;quot; (the author) apparently founded a company that has the following tagline on GitHub &amp;quot;Adjoint digitises cash and settlement processes for multinational corporates.&amp;quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;adjoint-io&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;adjoint-io&lt;/a&gt;) but I didn&amp;#x27;t find this disclosed in the post. There is a clear conflict of interest, but it&amp;#x27;s not highlighted for some reason.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>woodruffw</author><text>Normally when we use the phrase &amp;quot;conflict of interest,&amp;quot; we use it to imply a conflict between &lt;i&gt;parties.&lt;/i&gt; One of the parties in your account is the blog author and&amp;#x2F;or their company; who is the other? The cryptocurrency &lt;i&gt;community&lt;/i&gt;? They aren&amp;#x27;t a &lt;i&gt;party&lt;/i&gt; in the traditional sense, and the concept weakens further when we consider the press campaign among cryptocurrency fans to rebrand their schemes as transaction substrates.&lt;p&gt;Framed as such, this seems more like an impassioned technical rebuke from an informed individual than a &amp;quot;conflict of interest.&amp;quot;</text></comment>
<story><title>Decentralized Woo Hoo</title><url>https://www.stephendiehl.com/blog/decentralized-woo.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>capableweb</author><text>Maybe the title should be updated. It doesn&amp;#x27;t have anything to do with decentralization per se, but about cryptocurrencies, which is just a technology that happens to use decentralization as a technology.&lt;p&gt;I actually thought the article was gonna be about decentralization (as in P2P technology, like BitTorrent), but instead it&amp;#x27;s about the authors distaste for cryptocurrencies.&lt;p&gt;Edit: Maybe it&amp;#x27;s just me, but the article feels less and less honest the more I look into it. &amp;quot;Stephen Diehl&amp;quot; (the author) apparently founded a company that has the following tagline on GitHub &amp;quot;Adjoint digitises cash and settlement processes for multinational corporates.&amp;quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;adjoint-io&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;github.com&amp;#x2F;adjoint-io&lt;/a&gt;) but I didn&amp;#x27;t find this disclosed in the post. There is a clear conflict of interest, but it&amp;#x27;s not highlighted for some reason.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kethinov</author><text>The article is about how the term decentralization has become a generic buzzword for good and in fact could describe a range of technologies that are either good or bad, hence we should be immediately skeptical whenever we see the term decentralized used to describe something as good and innovative and look more closely at the details.</text></comment>