^
Perhaps keeping it simple for the general audience. Lots of folks will stop listening if they don't understand what's being said. He appeals to a large group of investors I'd imagine of which most probably won't understand mining.
For context, we are referring to
my comments about the Tim Draper interview video.
Even though I agree with you (Icygreen) that Draper likely attempts to frame his discussion in terms of broad context ideas, I stick by the comments of my earlier post, and I may even double down to assert that he might not even understand the significance of certain technical aspects of projects in which he invests.
I am NOT trying to act as if I am technically smarter than Draper, but he is more of a broader concepts kind of investor and he does not necessarily get into the technical weeds of his various investments, but he does seem to be more than ready, willing and able to get into investing into technical matters that he does not understand so long as he largely agrees with the overall offer proposition of the thing that he is investing into. Probably the fact that he dabbles with a large number of investments at the same time, necessitates that he does not get into too many technical details, so, again, I am not sure whether he actually understands the significance of the every two weeks mining adjustment (because it would be easy enough to put that into laymans terms), but of course, I recognize that he easily would understand the whole concept if anyone were to explain it to him (presuming that he currently does not recognize it as an important factor to mention in these kinds of public overview of bitcoin discussions).
I will also assert that even though Draper does not seem to get into the weeds of any technical proposition arguments, he also does not seem to be easily distracted into any kinds of pumping up of various shitcoins, and maybe he does invest in shitcoins but just does not talk about them. Most of all interviews that I have seen him, he will redirect any attempts at shitcoin talking back towards bitcoin. So, whether he ends up being correct or not, his not getting into shitcoins is something else that bitcoin maximalists can appreciate.
Don't get me wrong, I, personally, am not really hostile to various possible technical offerings of shitcoins, but I am frequently against either overexaggerating their importance or attempting to put them on some kind of equivalency pedestal as bitcoin, when there is a BIG ASS lacking of actual factual and logical evidence to show any shitcoin to come even close to bitcoin, and I hate to even mention the network effects of Ethereum in this regard, because even the network effects of ethereum seem to be considerably built upon smoke and mirrors that have decent odds of completely collapsing in spite of all the supposed hundreds of thousands of snot nosed 14 year olds building upon it. But hey what do I know? I am surprised that ethereum is seemingly holding its own (to the extent that it is) for more than 5 years already... holiey ba-jeezus!!!!!
