Anyone notice how the author goes to great lengths to 'bold' the claims in the original letter that talk about how worthless the technology is - and then fails entirely to address those points?
Letter: "Crypo rests on tech that is useless."
Blogger: "I disagree, I think there are some fascinating things to be done with blockchain tech! Just... don't expect me to share them. You should DYOR."
Letter: "Crypo rests on tech that is useless." Blogger: "I disagree, I think there are some fascinating things to be done with blockchain tech! Just... don't expect me to share them. You should DYOR."
sigh