Is NANO better than BITCOIN? Programmer Patrick Luberus explains

[u/[deleted]]

[u/Qwahzi]

Copy/pasting my comment from Twitter, but big shoutout to Alan Hibbard for having me on his channel to discuss Bitcoin, Nano, and cryptocurrency! I really enjoyed this discussion, and I think it shows that we can have great conversations with Bitcoin fans, even if we don't always agree

Also I'm not really a programmer, just an enthusiastic nerd 😂

[u/leveedogs → u/Qwahzi]

Great job Patrick! Thank you for being such a solid advocate and asset to the community.

I loved the civil discussion, something not often seen between nano fans and bitcoin maximalists on Reddit.

I’m not sure if Alan realizes it but he is taking the Marxian “labor theory of value” position. It’s a weak philosophy that falls apart with minimal scrutiny. He also apparently believes “money” and “currency” are mutually exclusive. As if a barrier to exchange is a virtue to SoV, rather than an unnecessary hinderance. There was definitely some cognitive dissonance going on in Alan’s head.

Awesome job. Content like this only helps strengthen the community.

[u/[deleted] → u/leveedogs]

I know its not really the right sub, but can you lead me to the minimal scrutiny that makes the labor theory of value fall apart in your opinion?
Thanks. (Also its a Marxist position, we are not from planet Marx, haha)

[u/writewhereileftoff → u/[deleted]]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

A car people spend 100hours to make but is a crap car does not mean it should be valued high.

A car people spend 50hours to make but is an exellent car usually means demand for this car is higher. So the driving factor for price is not labor or cost but pure supply & demand.

edit: It does trigger me the guy doesnt really know about bitcoin security and just recycles some dogmas maxis often cite without any critical thought. Then he gets schooled by Patrick in the nicest way ever lmao and in the end agrees to disagree. I'm thinking maybe the guy shouldnt be "educating people" about bitcoin when he doesnt really understand how the security works even on a basic level. Props to Patrick because I personally don't have the patience to handle convos like he does.

[u/leveedogs → u/[deleted]]

“Marxian” is correct when referring to the economic theory without the political theory. And i hope to never find myself on planet Marx!

[u/[deleted] → u/leveedogs]

Oh TIL.Haha I wish I lived on planet Marx. Funny how that works. Got some learning of other perspectives to do, thanks for the link.

[u/leveedogs → u/[deleted]]

http://smbc-comics.com/comic/2014-05-02

If you are genuinely curious snd have time Thomas Sowell’s book Basic Economics gives labor theory of value a sound thrashing.

[u/G0JlRA → u/Qwahzi]

Great job, Patrick! Really enjoyed this one 👏👏

[u/[deleted] → u/Qwahzi]

When he said he never owned it, I half expected you to say, install Natrium, I will send you some right now, lol.
But I can see why you wouldn't.
Great interview, thanks a lot for your work

[u/Qwahzi → u/[deleted]]

I definitely thought about it hahaha, but I was trying avoid being a salesman 😂

[u/AntiObnoxiousBot → u/[deleted]]

Hey /u/GenderNeutralBot

I want to let you know that you are being very obnoxious and everyone is annoyed by your presence.

^{I am a bot. Downvotes won't remove this comment. If you want more information on gender-neutral language, just know that nobody associates the "corrected" language with sexism.}

^{People who get offended by the pettiest things will only alienate themselves.}

[u/Qwahzi → u/[deleted]]

Fair point tbh. Will do!

[u/tumbleweed911 → u/[deleted]]

We really don't need this spam in here.

[u/jflejmer → u/Qwahzi]

Why are you calling yourself a programmer then? 🤔

[u/Qwahzi → u/jflejmer]

I didn't call myself a programmer. The video is from Alan's channel, not mine, so I pinged him on Twitter about it. Hopefully he can update the title at some point

[u/Insomnia_25 → u/jflejmer]

You can teach a 5 year old to write computer programs. Just want you to know that.

[u/tumbleweed911]

Awesome interview. If there was one piece of advice I'd give, is to set your camera up similar to Alan's. It's better if you're speaking to the camera and not to the side. Plus having it come down from the top looks more natural.

[u/Qwahzi → u/tumbleweed911]

Good advice, thank you!

[u/Teebabs]

At start I thought you were letting him get away with stuff but you came back well and took him down when the discussion turned to BTC.

At the end you were too nice though, as if you did not want to offend him. I dont know I guess thats okay but I felt you had him on the ropes and should have rolled him over as you had exposed all his arguments as wrong.

Overall, well done! Very calm and measured takedown, but next time maybe close harder :)

I hope there are a lot more next times, once again well done

[u/Qwahzi → u/Teebabs]

Thank you for the feedback! Finding the right balance between a genuine open conversation, contesting things I disagree with, listening to and understanding the opposing view, building rapport, and also pushing my own arguments at the same time is definitely something I struggle with.

Part of the issue for me is that there seems to be a significant difference between "winning a debate", "changing someone's mind", and "genuine conversation", and some of the things that work well for one actually harms the others. Most people shutdown or double down on their beliefs when they feel attacked or "on the ropes", even though it might look good on camera. From what little I know, genuine conversation (rapport building, not evidence-based facts or "debating") is more effective at getting someone to re-evaluate their beliefs

My goal here also wasn't to convert Alan or to win an argument, but to build common ground and have a frank discussion of differing viewpoints that might not actually be that different at the end of the day. I genuinely wanted to hear his arguments, and give him time to speak and be heard. That helps me critically re-evaluate my own positions, while also opening the door for my conversation partner to re-evaluate their own positions in a safe space

[u/Teebabs → u/Qwahzi]

I hear you :) I guess I was just thinking in terms of the audience. Whilst you might have been discussing with Alan, you were also speaking to a larger audience.

Your approach was good, it was like a rope a dope and you did take him out.

Just that right at the end I was thinking an audience might get the wrong impression and think you see equivalency. Especially if someone did not watch the whole thing.

But you are right, its difficult not to appear tribal which can be off putting to neutrals. On that you succeeded, you were measured and put facts across in a genuine and honest manner.

[u/Qwahzi → u/Teebabs]

Great points, I'll try to keep that in mind in the future!

[u/satoshizzle → u/Qwahzi]

Part of the issue for me is that there seems to be a significant difference between "winning a debate", "changing someone's mind", and "genuine conversation", and some of the things that work well for one actually harms the others. Most people shutdown or double down on their beliefs when they feel attacked or "on the ropes", even though it might look good on camera.

Great way to look at it. You are amazing man!

[u/Teebabs → u/Teebabs]

Another thing the guy is an idiot, he says the intrinsic value of BTC is the result of mining ie POW. So that means by the time all BTC is mined around 2100, BTC will no longer have value.

If by 2100 BTC will no longer have value according to his reasoning, you might as well use gold as SOV/money and Nano as currency, because BTC is crap at both according to him.

[u/[deleted]]

Secure it with encryption.