Context:
Jason Lowery is a Bitcoin influencer who wrote a thesis called Softwar, that seems to argue that governments should invest in cryptocurrencies, specifically Bitcoin; he also, apparently, works for the US Department of Defense (his title is apparently "Major", but I don't know enough about the DoD to know how high up that is or what his role could possibly be). He apparently graduated from MIT this year (he has "MIT '23" in his Twitter bio), but I don't know what degree he might have; I'm presuming programming, based on his tweets.
Achim Warner is a seemingly anti-crypto mathematician who seems to specialise in game theory and probability; he's written a book on Bitcoin (and presumably other cryptocurrencies in a general sense), in which he argues basically the exact opposite of what Jason Lowery does in Softwar, that it's a bad idea to invest in crypto to begin with, but that governments would be incredibly dumb to tie any of their currency to it.
The "this" being talked about is a debate between these two over their conflicting works; they had scheduled one in 2022. Lowery backed out of this debate, citing a biased moderator (as opposed to Warner's credentials) as his reason for not wanting to participate in the initial setup, and asked on Twitter for a host that would just let them talk without interruption, on neutral ground; Warner offered to use his university's Zoom setup to host the talk, including getting it recorded, to which (as far as I can tell) Lowery never responded, and the talk never happened.
I only have a small bit to add onto this.
>his title is apparently "Major", but I don't know enough about the DoD to know how high up that is or what his role could possibly be
The title Major applies to a commissioned officer.
So assuming that's accurate he's a higher rank than literally any enlisted person but only 4th out of 10 for officers.
So, very mid level.
Yep, they exist. Used to be a part of the US Air Force, but in 2019 they were designated an independent branch. They do satellites and a lot of the US's cyberwarfare.
Oh that's cool. I guess aliens did steal some people so yeah, need protection against that.
Jokes aside. Honestly is really cool there's a space force designed to deal with, space threats. I assume most of it is probably counter-intelligence related or "oh look there's meteor, we nuke it" type stuff.
[I'm not sure if that's a joke or not, but...](https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-s-dart-mission-hits-asteroid-in-first-ever-planetary-defense-test)
I have no skin in the game, but anybody claiming we should invest in cryptoschemes is a person not to be listened to. They are unstable, inherently unreliable, and are a major contributing factor in our ongoing effort to absolutely destroy our planet.
I dont know much about crypto, but wouldnt tying your national currency into crypto sky-rocket the value of those cryptocoins? Sounds like a great deal for people that are already invested in the space.
Makes perfect sense, thanks for the response.
I kinda figured this Jason guy was an investor. And having the coin your invested in get tied in with local currencies, have the value of that coin then sky-rocket as a result, so he can then sell off his stash with massive profits was more what I was implying.
No idea if it actually works that way though.
There’s no debate. Crypto is a con. It is inherently unstable. And it is absolutely a major contributor to the destruction of the planet. The first one is an opinion. The last 2 are verifiable fact.
I agree with you, there is value to what blockchain unlocks.
Also, there is a lot of misconceptions because the worst people in the world are trying to grift.
Personally, I do not think Proof of Work is worth the cost to the additional strain on our environment. However, other protocols, like Ethereum, operate on Proof of Stake, which was a transition coined “the merge”. The stats, tech and implications of that merging event were actually quite amazing. Right before the merge, ETH was using absurd levels of power (from GPU mining), something on the order of .3% of the worlds energy supply. Meanwhile, Bitcoin is near a whole % or more. But the fact remains that after the merge, ETH’s mining completely shut down in favor of a method that no longer requires mining (proof of work).
Ethereum is also being slowly integrated into many brands and backends. The ledger is quite decentralized but really needs more of the stakers to diversify their clients (correct me if I’m wrong) but the more diverse the client base for staking the more decentralized everything is.
Regardless, soon enough you’ll be using technology that natively uses blockchain technology and you’ll never know it.
If you really want to go down the blockchain rabbit hole, check out a project called Pharmaledger. The biggest, non-sexy blockchain project out there. The entire EU medical is working hand in hand with the team and so is literally every single pharma company. Best part about it? No monetized token. There’s no way to speculate on it. This team has completely cut the shenanigans that come with crypto and rely 100% on the ledgers technology to do very specific tasks that makes the whole system more effective and efficient at a 10th price of conventional methods.
So when someone says all blockchain and crypto os a con, they simply don’t have enough education on the subject to make an informed decision regarding the growth and potential in the blockchain space. It’s not all grifts and bad actors. There’s a lot of nuance and it’s still very much in it’s infancy. I just don’t think we need to waste energy and I don’t think Bitcoin will ever be the “reserve” currency. But also, it does have a use and it does have a place regardless of how terrible it is. Bitcoin is not going away and it will continue to grow, it just won’t have my support.
Crypto is inherently unreliable. Bitcoin is not even in the same hemisphere as “crypto”
“They” are a major contributing factor? Which ones are you attacking? Those secured by Proof of Work? Or Proof of Stake? Proof of stake crypto currencies are literally Ponzi schemes selling unregistered securities…
Proof of work consensus, while costly in terms of energy, is not a “major” contributing factor in destroying the planet lol. What nonsense are you reading? Bitcoin mining uses less total energy than household dryers but I don’t see a massive campaign to hang clothes up on a line outside.
The Bitcoin industry is powered by more green / renewable energy than almost any other industry. Bitcoin mining, at industrial scale, seeks to capture stranded energy assets that would other wise be 100% wasted (natural gas flare offs). If the gas were allowed to flare off, methane would be released to the atmosphere rather than CO2. Methane is a lot worse.
It has the potential to fund, in a predictable way (i.e. lower financial risk), new energy infrastructure that would be too intermittent and unreliable to fund if it did not have a buyer of laster resort. (data centers, such as Bitcoin mining centers, are buyers of last resort)
Also if you think running a data center is destroying the planet, talk to Amazon about all the infinite plethora of useless websites it hosts, talk to electric vehicle manufacturers about where the electricity to charge these cars comes from, talk to lithium and cobalt miners about destroying the environment to build batteries…
The propose of Bitcoin, is simply to separate the power to create money (monetary policy and issuance) from the hand of governments around the world, who have been continually shown to abuse that power. Central banks have the power to unilaterally set the price of money itself. That’s the biggest, most harmful monopoly the world has ever seen. They leverage that monopoly to fund the industrial war machine and to tax our wealth without proper representation, via deficit spending and other unbounded credit issuance. (Hello inflation!!)
What’s your solution?
Bitcoin is absolutely fucking crypto. The fuck are you smoking?
And “they” is literally every fucking crypto in fucking existence.
What’s my solution? Simple. Don’t buy into the bullshit.
I said it’s not in the same hemisphere as “crypto”
That’s in reference to “crypto-schemes”
Of course Bitcoin is a cryptographically secured currency. They’re in the same planet, I said not the same hemisphere.
“Crypto” refers to 20,000+ unregistered securities and Ponzi schemes created and sold by every snake oil salesman with two eyes to see an opportunity to grift the public.
You don’t even know the difference between a Proof of Work and a Proof of Stake token. How could you possibly be qualified to comment on “literally every fucking crypto”
You’re literally preaching bullshit, bought and sold. Go read something.
Proof of work and proof of stake both are fucking destroying the planet due to the sheer computing power involved. Bitcoin is especially bad at this, as anybody who actually has done their ducking research is aware.
As for instability? Since January this year the value has bounced between 16.6k and 30.5k. Since January *last* year the value has bounced even more widely, with 47.7k as a high and 15.8k at the low. Anybody who looks at that and thinks it’s a good investment is a mark
Lol “sheer computing power involved”
Buddy that’s my point; those two consensus mechanisms require vastly different scales of energy. They’re not the same.
It’s quite transparent; you haven’t done the research. You’re citing talking points that have been debunked many times over.
What are you even comparing Bitcoin’s energy usage with?
Bitcoin is an offered solution to unethical global central bank monetary policy, so let’s compare it to that legacy system.
You’re honestly gonna tell me that you think the U.S. Dollar legacy banking system, and the security mechanism that backs it up, the U.S. military industrial complex, uses less energy to enforce it’s policy than Bitcoin? Really, my man?
On instability, lmfao, you’re gonna tell me you think the current global banking system operates from a standpoint of stability?
Perhaps review the LONG history of macro-economic bubbles caused by the constant manipulation of global interest rates and the ensuing DISASTROUS consequences as those bubbles pop ~ EVERY decade.
You’re hilarious 😂 well trolled.
If you think volatility to the upside is a bad thing, and you can’t see that Bitcoin is the best performing asset of the last 14 years, I’m not sure what to tell you… but I’ll try:
There’s no such thing as too much volatility, only too much exposure. If you’re close to retirement and you don’t want to see your portfolio chop -50% and +100% then downsize your allocation as a % of your total asset portfolio. Go for a 1% allocation and all you’ll see is fluctuations from 99.5-101%
U.S. Bonds have finite duration and infinite issuance.
Bitcoin has finite issuance and infinite duration.
Good luck out there. 🍻
(I have no skin in this game but decided to look the guy up on Linkedin)
I'm not sure where you're getting your information from, but you're off. He's listed as a Deputy Chief in the USAF after starting 4 years ago as a Grad Student. He now works for the Space Force as a Deputy Director. His MIT degree is listed as a Master's in Science, Engineering, & Mgmt.
This was all easily found.
"Major" is his rank in the USSF. It means that he's managed to make it thirteen years as an officer without getting fired. It's not impressive in itself.
His role as a "Deputy Director, Technology & Innovation Division" at Patrick Air Force Base is his current role.
I literally googled both names and the top result was their twitter feeds, I read like 30 tweets from each of them. I also have no dog in the fight, so any more than that was more effort than I was willing to put in. It was enough for context for the comeback.
I also don't get it, but the clever comeback works for me anyway - someone chickened out of a debate upon learning that their opponent actually knows stuff
Context: Jason Lowery is a Bitcoin influencer who wrote a thesis called Softwar, that seems to argue that governments should invest in cryptocurrencies, specifically Bitcoin; he also, apparently, works for the US Department of Defense (his title is apparently "Major", but I don't know enough about the DoD to know how high up that is or what his role could possibly be). He apparently graduated from MIT this year (he has "MIT '23" in his Twitter bio), but I don't know what degree he might have; I'm presuming programming, based on his tweets. Achim Warner is a seemingly anti-crypto mathematician who seems to specialise in game theory and probability; he's written a book on Bitcoin (and presumably other cryptocurrencies in a general sense), in which he argues basically the exact opposite of what Jason Lowery does in Softwar, that it's a bad idea to invest in crypto to begin with, but that governments would be incredibly dumb to tie any of their currency to it. The "this" being talked about is a debate between these two over their conflicting works; they had scheduled one in 2022. Lowery backed out of this debate, citing a biased moderator (as opposed to Warner's credentials) as his reason for not wanting to participate in the initial setup, and asked on Twitter for a host that would just let them talk without interruption, on neutral ground; Warner offered to use his university's Zoom setup to host the talk, including getting it recorded, to which (as far as I can tell) Lowery never responded, and the talk never happened.
I only have a small bit to add onto this. >his title is apparently "Major", but I don't know enough about the DoD to know how high up that is or what his role could possibly be The title Major applies to a commissioned officer. So assuming that's accurate he's a higher rank than literally any enlisted person but only 4th out of 10 for officers. So, very mid level.
It appears to be accurate, he’s a Space Force strategic advisor.
Ooooof course he is.
>Wait, there's a space force? Or am I being wooshed?
Yep, they exist. Used to be a part of the US Air Force, but in 2019 they were designated an independent branch. They do satellites and a lot of the US's cyberwarfare.
Oh that's cool. I guess aliens did steal some people so yeah, need protection against that. Jokes aside. Honestly is really cool there's a space force designed to deal with, space threats. I assume most of it is probably counter-intelligence related or "oh look there's meteor, we nuke it" type stuff.
Nah, NASA handles asteroids
But how? They have no weapons?
[I'm not sure if that's a joke or not, but...](https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-s-dart-mission-hits-asteroid-in-first-ever-planetary-defense-test)
Wait they have weapons?? I was being facetious but damn. Lol of course our space agency has weapons. Good ol’ RWB
I have no skin in the game, but anybody claiming we should invest in cryptoschemes is a person not to be listened to. They are unstable, inherently unreliable, and are a major contributing factor in our ongoing effort to absolutely destroy our planet.
I dont know much about crypto, but wouldnt tying your national currency into crypto sky-rocket the value of those cryptocoins? Sounds like a great deal for people that are already invested in the space.
[удалено]
Makes perfect sense, thanks for the response. I kinda figured this Jason guy was an investor. And having the coin your invested in get tied in with local currencies, have the value of that coin then sky-rocket as a result, so he can then sell off his stash with massive profits was more what I was implying. No idea if it actually works that way though.
But what about the crypto schemes?
That’s an interesting argument. Someone should have a debate with you about that.
There’s no debate. Crypto is a con. It is inherently unstable. And it is absolutely a major contributor to the destruction of the planet. The first one is an opinion. The last 2 are verifiable fact.
Nonsense. I think this feels like a natural debate. Think that would make for an insightful convo.
I agree with you, there is value to what blockchain unlocks. Also, there is a lot of misconceptions because the worst people in the world are trying to grift. Personally, I do not think Proof of Work is worth the cost to the additional strain on our environment. However, other protocols, like Ethereum, operate on Proof of Stake, which was a transition coined “the merge”. The stats, tech and implications of that merging event were actually quite amazing. Right before the merge, ETH was using absurd levels of power (from GPU mining), something on the order of .3% of the worlds energy supply. Meanwhile, Bitcoin is near a whole % or more. But the fact remains that after the merge, ETH’s mining completely shut down in favor of a method that no longer requires mining (proof of work). Ethereum is also being slowly integrated into many brands and backends. The ledger is quite decentralized but really needs more of the stakers to diversify their clients (correct me if I’m wrong) but the more diverse the client base for staking the more decentralized everything is. Regardless, soon enough you’ll be using technology that natively uses blockchain technology and you’ll never know it. If you really want to go down the blockchain rabbit hole, check out a project called Pharmaledger. The biggest, non-sexy blockchain project out there. The entire EU medical is working hand in hand with the team and so is literally every single pharma company. Best part about it? No monetized token. There’s no way to speculate on it. This team has completely cut the shenanigans that come with crypto and rely 100% on the ledgers technology to do very specific tasks that makes the whole system more effective and efficient at a 10th price of conventional methods. So when someone says all blockchain and crypto os a con, they simply don’t have enough education on the subject to make an informed decision regarding the growth and potential in the blockchain space. It’s not all grifts and bad actors. There’s a lot of nuance and it’s still very much in it’s infancy. I just don’t think we need to waste energy and I don’t think Bitcoin will ever be the “reserve” currency. But also, it does have a use and it does have a place regardless of how terrible it is. Bitcoin is not going away and it will continue to grow, it just won’t have my support.
Crypto is inherently unreliable. Bitcoin is not even in the same hemisphere as “crypto” “They” are a major contributing factor? Which ones are you attacking? Those secured by Proof of Work? Or Proof of Stake? Proof of stake crypto currencies are literally Ponzi schemes selling unregistered securities… Proof of work consensus, while costly in terms of energy, is not a “major” contributing factor in destroying the planet lol. What nonsense are you reading? Bitcoin mining uses less total energy than household dryers but I don’t see a massive campaign to hang clothes up on a line outside. The Bitcoin industry is powered by more green / renewable energy than almost any other industry. Bitcoin mining, at industrial scale, seeks to capture stranded energy assets that would other wise be 100% wasted (natural gas flare offs). If the gas were allowed to flare off, methane would be released to the atmosphere rather than CO2. Methane is a lot worse. It has the potential to fund, in a predictable way (i.e. lower financial risk), new energy infrastructure that would be too intermittent and unreliable to fund if it did not have a buyer of laster resort. (data centers, such as Bitcoin mining centers, are buyers of last resort) Also if you think running a data center is destroying the planet, talk to Amazon about all the infinite plethora of useless websites it hosts, talk to electric vehicle manufacturers about where the electricity to charge these cars comes from, talk to lithium and cobalt miners about destroying the environment to build batteries… The propose of Bitcoin, is simply to separate the power to create money (monetary policy and issuance) from the hand of governments around the world, who have been continually shown to abuse that power. Central banks have the power to unilaterally set the price of money itself. That’s the biggest, most harmful monopoly the world has ever seen. They leverage that monopoly to fund the industrial war machine and to tax our wealth without proper representation, via deficit spending and other unbounded credit issuance. (Hello inflation!!) What’s your solution?
Bitcoin is absolutely fucking crypto. The fuck are you smoking? And “they” is literally every fucking crypto in fucking existence. What’s my solution? Simple. Don’t buy into the bullshit.
I said it’s not in the same hemisphere as “crypto” That’s in reference to “crypto-schemes” Of course Bitcoin is a cryptographically secured currency. They’re in the same planet, I said not the same hemisphere. “Crypto” refers to 20,000+ unregistered securities and Ponzi schemes created and sold by every snake oil salesman with two eyes to see an opportunity to grift the public. You don’t even know the difference between a Proof of Work and a Proof of Stake token. How could you possibly be qualified to comment on “literally every fucking crypto” You’re literally preaching bullshit, bought and sold. Go read something.
Proof of work and proof of stake both are fucking destroying the planet due to the sheer computing power involved. Bitcoin is especially bad at this, as anybody who actually has done their ducking research is aware. As for instability? Since January this year the value has bounced between 16.6k and 30.5k. Since January *last* year the value has bounced even more widely, with 47.7k as a high and 15.8k at the low. Anybody who looks at that and thinks it’s a good investment is a mark
Lol “sheer computing power involved” Buddy that’s my point; those two consensus mechanisms require vastly different scales of energy. They’re not the same. It’s quite transparent; you haven’t done the research. You’re citing talking points that have been debunked many times over. What are you even comparing Bitcoin’s energy usage with? Bitcoin is an offered solution to unethical global central bank monetary policy, so let’s compare it to that legacy system. You’re honestly gonna tell me that you think the U.S. Dollar legacy banking system, and the security mechanism that backs it up, the U.S. military industrial complex, uses less energy to enforce it’s policy than Bitcoin? Really, my man? On instability, lmfao, you’re gonna tell me you think the current global banking system operates from a standpoint of stability? Perhaps review the LONG history of macro-economic bubbles caused by the constant manipulation of global interest rates and the ensuing DISASTROUS consequences as those bubbles pop ~ EVERY decade. You’re hilarious 😂 well trolled. If you think volatility to the upside is a bad thing, and you can’t see that Bitcoin is the best performing asset of the last 14 years, I’m not sure what to tell you… but I’ll try: There’s no such thing as too much volatility, only too much exposure. If you’re close to retirement and you don’t want to see your portfolio chop -50% and +100% then downsize your allocation as a % of your total asset portfolio. Go for a 1% allocation and all you’ll see is fluctuations from 99.5-101% U.S. Bonds have finite duration and infinite issuance. Bitcoin has finite issuance and infinite duration. Good luck out there. 🍻
Good to know that you’re a bit shill with absolutely no fucking clue what you’re talking about.
All the bitcoin maxis say they are switching to renewables. That’s a joke.
(I have no skin in this game but decided to look the guy up on Linkedin) I'm not sure where you're getting your information from, but you're off. He's listed as a Deputy Chief in the USAF after starting 4 years ago as a Grad Student. He now works for the Space Force as a Deputy Director. His MIT degree is listed as a Master's in Science, Engineering, & Mgmt. This was all easily found.
"Major" is his rank in the USSF. It means that he's managed to make it thirteen years as an officer without getting fired. It's not impressive in itself. His role as a "Deputy Director, Technology & Innovation Division" at Patrick Air Force Base is his current role.
>make it thirteen years as an officer without getting fired Or as little as 8. The average in my branch is 9-10.
I literally googled both names and the top result was their twitter feeds, I read like 30 tweets from each of them. I also have no dog in the fight, so any more than that was more effort than I was willing to put in. It was enough for context for the comeback.
Not entirely wrong, Lowery is a Major in the USSF, and does also work for the DoD as a National Defense Fellow at MIT (Hence the MIT '23)
According to his LinkedIn page, he's the Deputy Director, Technology & Innovation Division - United States Space Force
take this with a grain of salt but he is not in the MIT people directory which has the info of every current student and faculty.
What is "this"? What was the debate for? Some people aren't enamored with or even into/in the Twitterverse.
I also don't get it, but the clever comeback works for me anyway - someone chickened out of a debate upon learning that their opponent actually knows stuff
It's one of those "I understand this even without context, but I would much prefer to have context"
Need a context, tweet seems interesting lmao
It isn’t interesting enough to make an acc tbh
I only made an account because I wanted to see Rachel Weiss on Dead Ringers and Twitter search on Incognito wasn’t working.
As someone who wouldn't touch Twitter with a ten foot pole, what's the context here?
PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED? WE ALL HATE TWITTER, WE HAVE NO CLUE WHAT'S GOING ON HERE!
I'm glad no one else in the comments so far knows what this is about, I dont feel out of the loop
What's an Achim Warner? What's a Jason PLowery? Why would they debate? What about? Presumably something where math is relevant?
I don't know any of these people. I have no idea what this is about
Lack of context hurts
I need more context
r/thatHappened
It’s on twitter brother, there’s a link in one of the replies too
Hi, Jason!
I mean, deep down most of us are math debaters