from Hacker News

The Wikimedia Foundation's acceptance of cryptocurrency donations

by hesk on 1/30/22, 11:32 PM with 33 comments

• by foobank on 1/31/22, 5:52 AM

  Disclaimer: I have no assets or vested interest in cryotocurrency.

  The author doesn't like cryptocurrencies and is articulate in describing why.

  The author is free to support and use alternate payment methods.

  Others seem to like cryptocurrencies. There are harms in its use, as with many actions. Does the author refuse to use airplanes too?

• by Mindwipe on 1/31/22, 9:28 AM

  What an odd article. The value of most state fiat currencies has many of the problems cited - the value of the US dollar and GB pound is non-trivially based upon slavery and unquestionably significantly driven by environmental damage, but there is no mention of those in the article. That isn't whataboutism, the consequences of not accepting Bitcoin would be to take either not take anything at all, or to take those currencies with the problem that it entails.

  I am no Bitcoin evangelist, it has many issues. But it's censorship resistance is important for an encyclopedia. We've seen in recently weeks discussions by the UK government of "regulating" (i.e. censorship) of websites via blocking and payment removal, with Wikipedia specifically brought up as an example by legislators. This is not a hypothetical risk. MasterCard's BRAM rules frequently cause censorship to sexual topics.

  Poor stuff.

• by rvz on 1/31/22, 12:39 AM

  Yes. We all get that Bitcoin has failed in payments and is a complete disaster to the environment. Its characteristics alone make it extremely easy to make an argument against using it.

  But once again, not every cryptocurrency has the same properties as Bitcoin. The author continues to yet again create a sweeping generalization on this. I would only agree with that if Bitcoin was the ONLY cryptocurrency or if PoW was the only system used. It is not.

  It’s like making an argument against driving anything with a wheel for environmental reasons, because most vehicles are still running on either petrol or diesel. (And willfully ignoring alternatives like electric cars)

  Instead of continuing to generalize all cryptocurrencies as Bitcoin (and PoW), criticize the others that are either PoS, or use their own consensus algorithm and assess them if they are environmentally unfriendly or are unsuitable for payments.

  Since clearly the author keeps recycling the same known predictable critiques on Bitcoin which does not apply to all cryptocurrencies.