Preston takes an insulting tone towards the basis team. Fine to critique, but assumes the visionaries of this project are uneducated, or haven't given things proper thought. I assure you they are thoughtful...
I think perhaps the right way to approach critique of the OP is to provide citations or proof against the author's claims. It isn't a productive conversation to take offense at the general tone.
It also shows quite a bit of bias when you describe the people involved with the project as 'visionaries' and a vague assurance that aforementioned visionaries are thoughtful.
I thought you were arguing from a position of authority but looking at your comment history all I can find is "I'm a blockchain investor at [redacted]" which leads me to a placeholder website. You'll have to come up with something a little more convincing if you want us to trust your judgment.
If you glance at their whitepaper, stability analysis, or old FAQs they had up, it’s clear they’re thoughtful.
Therefore, comments like these underestimate the founders:
“Please. Figure out what a government bond is, first. Then we can have a little chat about scalability.”
"electric boogalo"
"But you need to study politics, economics and history to learn things like this, which I understand are not computer science and are therefore unpopular"
If they actually wrote "one day, Basecoin might become so widely used as a medium of exchange that it actually starts to displace the USD in transaction volume" then they deserve whatever is thrown at them
The problem is that synthetic blockchain assets are an idea where we already have a significant history of competent, serious people misjudging the tech and making unrealistic promises. Hence, you can't just argue away problems by claiming the devs are "competent and serious".
That said, I agree Preston's writings should be taken with a grain of salt: he's a curmudgeon at heart and provides value to the community from that perspective.
