Quote from: DaRude on January 15, 2016, 10:28:55 AM

Quote from: flagpara on January 15, 2016, 10:12:48 AM

Quote from: Lauda on January 15, 2016, 10:05:04 AM

Quote from: flagpara on January 15, 2016, 09:55:41 AM

Can't he say what he thinks?
I don't see anything wrong in what he's saying. BTC is really shady he's right on that. Users don't have any correct informations you can't deny that.

So after spending countless years of his life working with Bitcoin, a few months after his departure Bitcoin is dead? Please. Roll Eyes

If you defend such a person you are not any better than him. Bitcoin is not that shady, especially not since there's no Silk Road equivalent. Stop your gibberish.

Quote from: flagpara on January 15, 2016, 09:55:41 AM

I don't understand the hate, he's someone who worked on btc and thinks it's a failure and warned people about it, is it a reason to hate him?

Because he's a paid bulldog who backstabbed the community with this article. Should we love him for it? Roll Eyes

Quote from: marcus_of_augustus on January 15, 2016, 09:50:12 AM

not really news ... we already knew hearn is a bitcoin hater and saboteur, except for the NYTimes readers who will no doubt lap up Hucksters Hearn's soundbites for the sheeple

That is the problem of this story, NYTimes and the sheep that are going to believe this nonsense or defend him. It has already reflected itself on the price (incl. news about Cryptsy).

Seems we won't be able to discuss. You don't seem to understand the position of someone who is not informed. Most people don't have the time to spend hundreds of hours to understand exactly how everything works and who's in charge of what.

"You're not better than him if you defend Hearn" You don't understand. I don't know who he is, he just doesn't seem like somebody bad.

Bitcoin IS incredibly shady in the sense that normal people have no idea of what's happening, what's currently developped, who's in charge of what, what can or can't be done etc...
I'm not talking about drugs or anything that something else. I'm talking about how btc works and will evolve. You're all talking about "bitcoin core" "bitcoin XT" "forks" and things like that. I've no idea of what it is, and I'm an engineer which means i got some basis in science... So btc IS shady in the sense that a small percentage of users actually understand it.

He shouldn't have declared bitcoin as dead. And should NOT have said that he's selling all his bitcoins. There are good reasons why people in control are not allowed to do that on exchanges. Everything else he can vent as much as he wants

Do you guys see a possibility (even a small one) that core developers got corrupted by the banking lobby or some other party that wants Bitcoin to fail? I'm thinking millions of dollars or tens of millions. Maybe some of them were bought to stick around but hinder progress and slow development. Others were paid to do just what he did right now.

I know what open source means, I'm a developer / IT guy myself. Others can take over. But the current core devs voices are heard and they can slow things down while "acting normal".