“Are you 14?”

Irrelevant.

ad hominem (adjective, ad ho·​mi·​nem (ˈ)ad-ˈhä-mə-nəm -ˌnem)

1. appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2. marked by or being an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

“Russia, which is blocked from other international payment systems.”

Fair enough.

“We’re still throwing around fallacies like it’s 2010? Okay, I cast fallacy fallacy!”

Guess I’ll simply parry with fallacy fallacy fallacy—quoting from your linked Wiki: “That one can invoke the argument from fallacy against a position does not prove one’s own position either, as this would also be an argument from fallacy”.

Your latter argument for the crypto cult is that the others are problematic too, therefore it’s okay to join the cult. This invalid reasoning renders the entire conclusion void. I did not claim your conclusion is false, only that your reasoning is invalid.

“like it’s 2010?”

There’s no expiration date on logical reasoning.

“Cryptocurrencies are a tool, similar to how money is a tool. You can’t blame money itself for all the scummy shit done using it, similarly for cryptocurrencies.”

A knife is a tool. Knives can be used for food and violence. However, knives do not persuade their users to buy as many knives as they can, they do not incentivize manipulating others to do so too, nor do knives inherently encourage violence. The exact opposite is true for crypto"currencies" because these are multi-level marketing pyramid schemes. As soon as one joins the Crypto Cult one benefits from recruiting new members—often by indoctrination and/or demagoguery.

“I guess some random HN user is smarter than the research arms of these companies who are all building on and utilizing crypto”

List of fallacies in the aforementioned statement:

• Ad hominem.
• Argument from authority.
• Bandwagon fallacy.

“I don’t have venmo, so I don’t use it. I don’t get mad when somebody offers it.”

Venmo is not a multi-level marketing pyramid scheme, all crypto"currencies" are^[1].

“Depending on where users are located, it might be the only realistic option they have if they want to donate.”

Could you give us an example of such a location please?

“Besides, traditional payment systems like PayPal, MasterCard, Visa etc are all problematic in their own right.”

Whataboutism fallacy.

“There’s a legitimate use for crypto, to support something you use and (probably) enjoy, and you want them to remove it to set a good example?”

Of course they should remove it, for it is the moral thing to do. The only legitimate use is donating to entities who have their access to a bank account removed, e.g., whistle blowers, Z-Library, et cetera. In any other case it is an unethical instrument that brings out the worst in humanity.

“All of this existed (except the bit about nazi coins) already.”

Whataboutism fallacy.

This whataboutism is probably the most used fallacy within the crypto"currency" sphere. If A and B cause cancer, and A was first, it doesn’t follow that B is less malignant.

Quoted from my Crypto Cult Science essay linked in the original post:

“Strong currencies are not the solution to poor governance. Good governance and democracy makes a country and its currency strong. Not vice versa.” —halukakin, HackerNews, 2021

Eating the rich—if they tried.

- -
✍︎ arscyni.cc: modernity ∝ nature.

That adults are mature and know what they are doing.

- -
✍︎ arscyni.cc: modernity ∝ nature.

Sitting down too much. It took four lumbagos in three years to finally get the point.

I don’t write as much anymore unfortunately, but the huge upside is that, after two decades of not being able to do so, I can finally squat again with heels planted without tipping over. A proper Slav squat. Practicing this almost daily for nearly a year has improved my foundational skateboarding skills significantly. And I simply feel more youthful too.