Es curioso porque ya están argumentando que la tecnología no es tan importante. Justo ayer, ojeaba el paper de Nassim Taleb, el de los cisnes zain... "Nassim Nicholas Taleb es un ensayista, investigador y financiero libanés nacionalizado estadounidense. Es también miembro del Instituto de Ciencias Matemáticas de la Universidad de Nueva York." El tío tiene impacto mediático por el rollo de "black swam" y lo han llevado a la CNBC. Supongo que estará promocionando su próximo libro.
Tienes que estar registrado para ver este contenido
Este es el paper:
Tienes que estar registrado para ver este contenido
Para ser sinceros, sólo lei el último párrafo:
CONCLUSION We have presented the attributes of the blockchain in general and bitcoin in particular. Few assets in financial history have been more fragile than bitcoin. The customary standard argument is that "bitcoin has its flaws but we are getting a great technology; we will do wonders with the blockchain". No, there is no evidence that we are getting a great technology — unless "great technology" doesn’t miccionan "useful". And at the time of writing —in spite of all the fanfare — we have done still close to nothing with the blockchain. So we close with a Damascus joke. One vendor was selling the exact same variety of cucumbers at two different prices. "Why is this one twice the price?", the merchant was asked. "They came on higher quality mules" was the answer.
We only judge a technology by how it solves problems, not by what technological attributes it has.
www.burbuja.info
