The beginning is quite crappy, to be honest:
“It’s been almost 10 years since the first cryptocurrencies were created. There was a great deal of ideology behind the whole thing. People wanted to try making an alternative to the traditional way of life. They were proving that there can be a free market with an exchange of goods and services for money. The price would be determined by what the community is willing to pay in these new coins”
It's been almost 10 years since the first one, bitcoin, was created, no the first ones. It didn't prove anything about the free market, as that had already been proven. Then, it is true that there was a great deal of ideology behind the whole thing, but it is a vague and basic way to state it. The rest of the article is not bad but not great either.
Regards.
And it keeps getting worse and worse as you scroll through it
Mining farms are monopolizing the right to generate new coins.
The right? There is no right to generate coins, this is not a democracy where everybody has the right to mine a block.
So, basically, it’s an implementation of these values in the form that is reversed to what we are used to (it’s not hard to know to whom the bank account belongs, but the transaction history is private).
Really? Tell me who owns this bank account PL86 1010 1010 0008 8172 3123 0000.
The value is mainly determined by rich market manipulators that keep trading cryptos instead of using them.
This price might be considered high by some people and low by others, but what matters is that this price is real.
What can I say about this...just lol!!
Next time when you write an article try to follow one idea. don't try to write down everything you know about bitcoin in 10 lines and stick to the main path. Otherwise, you might end the post with a conclusion that is the total opposite of the first paragraph, just like you did.
. It's really sad to read such negative feedback, but it's better than nothing and I'll try to take into account what you guys wrote here.
