Yesterday, I watched a train wreck of an interview between some YouTubers and a blockchain startup. I couldn't believe the quality of the interview. Two of the interviewers were cool. The third was okay-ish. The fourth guy was awful. Unfortunately, he was the one who starred the show.
The opening question was not exactly 'welcoming the team to the show'. It was aggressive, disrespectful and unprofessional. In hindsight, I bet the team wouldn't have turned up to the show if they knew what they would be met with.
After the initial onslaught, questions moved on to a recent #Hack that affected the company. And... you guessed it... as so is often the case in the 'crypto community'...
The interviewers were looking for the victim of the crime to 'prove to the community why they should be trusted again'.
To be hacked is to be a victim of crime, guys. How about some love and support?
In case you don't get it, you just raped the rape victim on YouTube, guys.
Perversely, ridiculing and even laughing at hacks is common in the crypto space, which is tantamount to laughing at a victim of crime or a woman who has been raped. "Ha ha, you got hacked" and kicking a (wo)man while their down is way too common.
A hack is a disaster, from a financial and technical point of view, to a team that has poured blood, sweat and tears into a project. Only to have their creativity 'home invaded' by the scum of society and be subject to a witch hunt on social media. The snowball of FUD and bad PR surrounding hacks is alarming to watch from a 'community' looking to massively profit from similar projects. Just by clicking a mouse.
But watching things burn seems to be an entertainment in the crypto space. Scornful of projects from an armchair while waiting for your 'sick gains' that you earned off the back of others.
The same thing happened when Ian Ballina was hacked. The amount of ridicule and laughter on social media towards that event generated was disgusting. Admittedly, the guy needs to be more humble about his coin holdings, but still he was the victim of a cyber crime.
These and other events remind me of the sick mentality of throwing Christians to the lions for entertainment in ancient Rome. People get off on hacks and love to attack and jump up and down on the victim. A mob mentality forms around negative events made up of people who haven't coded a thing in their lives or started a company from scratch getting rich off the work of others.
Cheap, low-grade human behaviour.
The show in question was the latest episode of #TokenTank. Which is obviously modelled on TV shows like 'Shark Tank' where the aim of the show is to 'prove to the panel' that your crypto project is worthwhile. The 'prove to me' model reminds me of the disgusting actions of Simon Cowell who publicly destroyed young contestants on shows like 'American Idol.' Personally, I think a show that had 4 crypto experts chipping in with cool ideas to improve the project would be far more entertaining.
To be fair, other episodes of TokenTank have been good watching. This particular episode was a mess and the dev team should get an apology for wasting their time and putting their public image at risk.
Due to the Shark Tank, 'prove-to-me' model of the show, the interview was slanted and biased from the start. The line of questioning towards the dev team was geared towards them 'proving themselves worthy to the panel' rather than displaying their vision of the future, how their tech would change society or how they plan to go about it.
50% of the interview was hard going. And to be honest, I wished the dev team got up and walked out of the interview. That would have gained them hype and respect in the community by not putting up with crap.
To be honest, I came away from this interview unclear about what this project aimed to achieve because the questions failed to build a picture. The devs were articulate, in English, which is probably their second language but the questions failed to focus on the vision and got stuck on topics that could have been 'asked and answered' in 60 seconds.
The kicker is that if the interviewers ( plural ) had done their damn homework they would have found out that the hack was not of a blockchain.... the hack hit the LinkedIn account of one of the heads of the startup.
Please! Are you kidding me? Hey dude, how about apologising to the team on air for your bad behaviour?
These YouNoobs just risked a multi-million dollar project with their unprofessional interrogation. While the dev team handled themselves well, they should chalk it up as a marketing & PR mistake to appear on a show run hosted by low-grade thinkers.
I don't know why ICO's bother with using amateur YouTubers to promote themselves. There's a big risk, to the downside, of being completely mishandled during the interview. As was clearly the case with this episode.
These guys weren't 'clearing up the FUD surrounding the hack' as I was told later on Twitter by my favourite crypto YouTuber, who hosted the show ( who wasn't the chief offender but I do I think he should have moved the questioning along from where it got stuck ).
These guys weren't clearing up anything about a hack. They were out for blood. Right from the start of the interview. They weren't looking to clarify what had happened in a productive and dare I suggest it... supportive discussion.
They were blaming a victim of crime for being sloppy. Antisocial behaviour ( and perverse logic ) that we see again and again in the crypto 'community'. Perhaps this was fuelled by the bloodthirsty, low-grade behaviour we see on 'reality TV shows' like 'Big Brother' and have become used to as 'entertainment'.
Who knows?
This kind of low-grade stuff happens all too often in the crypto space. Which sharply contrasts with 'the utopian view of the future' that the blockchain is magically going to deliver to every man, woman and child on the planet. Rather, we need to be watchful of the innovation. We may have upgraded our tech... But the human brain and all of our lower tendencies have not changed one bit.
In fact, these lower human qualities may be magnified by the new technology. Not removed from society.
This post is the first in a series of posts called "The Darker Side of the Blockchain". I will be covering the social issues in the crypto space and potential problems for society caused by the unleashing of blockchain technology.
I plan to look at 'the cult of personalities & mob mentality', the 'HODL or die' mentality, 'indelible negative profiling' and a range of other issues caused by technology that may turn out to be quite invasive.
The next post in the series is called "Quantum Overlords: What Happens When The AI Gets It Wrong?". That post is based on something that happened to me yesterday and it made me stop and think about a technology that we would never voluntarily put back in pandoras box.
Thanks for watching,
Brendan Rohan - Indie developer of 'next gen' natural medicine from Melbourne, Australia
Www.Skyflowers.co ( see "botany" tab for the plant research )
Www.ClinicalFlowerTherapy.com
Social @iSkyflowers
YouTube Skyflowers.Tv
If you support natural medicine and an independent research project that began in 1997, then steem me. The creds I get will help me provide a solid body of information that future generations can build upon.
DISCLAIMER: This article and all information on this channel & all content is offered purely for educational & entertainment purposes. Always do your own research when investing money and seek the help of a registered financial advisor.