Charles Hoskinson on Virgin Media talking about Cryptocurrencies

[Riverhead]

IMHO this is more about marketing than adherence to academic standards. While I'd like to believe CH didn't mention BTS for academic or even emotional reasons I don't think either is the case.

Bitshares got a somewhat deserved  image of being anti bitcoin in the early days. This caused it to fall out of favor with many in the crypto space and even became somewhat of a pariah.

Therefore CH's choice to omit BTS from his talk is more about protecting himself as a brand than any sense of academic or licencing concerns.

Further he has expressed interest in a show featuring himself and DL on the single condition that it be marketed as virsus rather than collaborative.

As always when in doubt follow the money.

[Stan]

ELI5:  Academic reviews, like statistics, can be made to prove anything.

To misquote President Teddy Roosevelt

It is not the academic reviewer who counts; nor the pundit who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

[Stan]

Similarly, there are three kinds of false credentials: celebrity endorsements, government studies, and rigorous academic reviews."

You cannot honestly believe that rigorous academic review sits in the same category as a cursory mention by Kim Dot Com?

I gave academic reviews top billing -  right up there beside statistics! 

[fuzzy]

I met both of you in conferences  and following is my impression

BM --- Great thinker and doer ... kind of stubborn。

Charles ---  Excellent educator and great seller  ...  easy to  adjust

I'll consider it if you guys make one of those cool boxing match posters.

They are both stubborn... I can assure you. 

[twitter]

I met both of you in conferences  and following is my impression

BM --- Great thinker and doer ... kind of stubborn。

Charles ---  Excellent educator and great seller  ...  easy to  adjust

I'll consider it if you guys make one of those cool boxing match posters.

[unreadPostsSinceLastVisit]

The value of having some of the brightest minds in the world work on your pet problems for free and also actively look for ways to break it is beyond measure. This is especially true in the hard sciences. There is still rigor in the STEM fields and computer science is among the most rigorous. Why not make the initial investment? You get free labor, branding, potential partnerships and recruits as well as legitimization in the eyes of many legacy actors. You win the free thinkers on the vision. You win the world with rigor and strong execution.

Sorry to derail your thread, but my reason for that is financial.  At this point it's either uopeople.edu, which ive been thinking about lately, or wait until bitshares rises.

[Tuck Fheman]

I'll consider it if you guys make one of those cool boxing match posters.

I'm on it!

[IOHKCharles]

I'll consider it if you guys make one of those cool boxing match posters.

[Tuck Fheman]

Sounds like a hangout topic the community would support, actually. But i wonder if it is possible to do so with class....

We have two of the brightest minds in the world, I don't think that would be an issue, but that's up to them ... if they had the desire to discuss such topics.

However, Charles did indicate he knows little to nothing about BitShares 2.0 and Graphene. So perhaps once he's had an opportunity (once such information is available) to research the topic this discussion could take place. Or perhaps the two of you, Charles and Dan, could simply have a discussion where it's a Q&A about BitShares 2.0, Graphene, etc.  That would probably be a quicker way for Charles to find out what he wants to know on particular topics rather than waiting for documentation to be written. I'm guessing there are certain areas that he would like to address more than others, the key issues.

Perhaps this adds nothing to BitShares 2.0. Perhaps it's pointless and a waste of Dan and Charles time (let us know!), but I sure would be interested to hear such a discussion and I feel it would benefit 2.0 and the Community.

That's my 2 UIA.

[fuzzy]

Guys it's ultimately about collaboration with the best and brightest. DL has stated that they don't come from academia and thus undervalues expansion into that field. I strongly disagree and feel an enormous amount of innovation comes from academia. It's a philosophical difference and one of the examples of why we don't collaborate more.

In respect to why I shared this interview, again I was hoping to have a discussion of the ideas presented within.

I think this is fair enough.   Ideas are what we should be discussing.   Academic papers are just another way of attempting to communicate ideas.

I have an idea.

What if Dan and Charles publicly discuss how to make BitShares 2.0, Cryptonomex and Graphene better ... in a Hangout on Beyond Bitcoin?

Sounds like a hangout topic the community would support, actually. But i wonder if it is possible to do so with class....

[Tuck Fheman]

Guys it's ultimately about collaboration with the best and brightest. DL has stated that they don't come from academia and thus undervalues expansion into that field. I strongly disagree and feel an enormous amount of innovation comes from academia. It's a philosophical difference and one of the examples of why we don't collaborate more.

In respect to why I shared this interview, again I was hoping to have a discussion of the ideas presented within.

I think this is fair enough.   Ideas are what we should be discussing.   Academic papers are just another way of attempting to communicate ideas.

I have an idea.

What if Dan and Charles publicly discuss how to make BitShares 2.0, Cryptonomex and Graphene better ... in a Hangout on Beyond Bitcoin?

[bytemaster]

Guys it's ultimately about collaboration with the best and brightest. DL has stated that they don't come from academia and thus undervalues expansion into that field. I strongly disagree and feel an enormous amount of innovation comes from academia. It's a philosophical difference and one of the examples of why we don't collaborate more.

In respect to why I shared this interview, again I was hoping to have a discussion of the ideas presented within.

I think this is fair enough.   Ideas are what we should be discussing.   Academic papers are just another way of attempting to communicate ideas.

[monsterer]

Similarly, there are three kinds of false credentials: celebrity endorsements, government studies, and rigorous academic reviews."

You cannot honestly believe that rigorous academic review sits in the same category as a cursory mention by Kim Dot Com?

[Tuck Fheman]

The one thing academic papers do provide is "respect" whether or not it is deserved.  I give them about as much respect as I do a college degree.  They are meaningless predictors of the ability of someone to actually do a job.

[IOHKCharles]

Guys it's ultimately about collaboration with the best and brightest. DL has stated that they don't come from academia and thus undervalues expansion into that field. I strongly disagree and feel an enormous amount of innovation comes from academia. It's a philosophical difference and one of the examples of why we don't collaborate more.

In respect to why I shared this interview, again I was hoping to have a discussion of the ideas presented within.