Why Web3 Is Going Just Great (w/ Molly White)

07/07/22 • 41 min

1 Listener

Molly White is the world's foremost critic of cryptocurrency, according to a recent profile in the Washington Post. A veteran Wikipedia editor and software developer, White documents the frauds and catastrophes in the so-called "Web3" space on her website Web 3 Is Going Great. Molly actually drafted the Web3 Wikipedia entry, and joins today to explain whether it is anything more than a buzzword and how we can make sense of the bizarre ecosystem of cryptocurrency, Web3, blockchain, etc.

We discuss:

The popularity of the Web3 buzzword
The bizarre culture around cryptocurrency including the Fyre Festival-like "Cryptoland" island that some proponents tried to build
How the critics of cryptocurrency are maligned and treated as stupid
How the uncritical endorsement of crypto projects by celebrities and politicians is causing ordinary people to be swindled out of their money
The failure of Congress to properly regulate the sector including the dangerously pro-crypto framework put forth by senators Gillibrand and Lummis
Why blockchain is not going to improve Wikipedia, and why technology can't solve deep structural economic problems more generally

"I think a lot of my criticisms of crypto come down to that: A lot of these projects are seeking to find technological solutions to what are truly social and political problems." — Molly White

Molly's writings can be found here. The open letter to Congress that she co-signed is here. Here commentary on the "Cryptoland" video (and a link to the video itself) is here. The celebrity crypto ads feature Matt Damon, LeBron James, Spike Lee, and Larry David. Note that in fine print at the end of the LeBron ad, one can see the ominous warning "Before deciding to trade cryptocurrencies, consider your risk appetite." Though the line is not quoted in this program, the Spike Lee commercial features the "do your own research" exhortation that Molly discusses. Here is the clip of senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Cynthia Lummis plugging the idea of investing retirement savings in cryptocurrency. The honey badger video, for those who want to take a trip down memory lane, is here.

"I put a lot of time into trying to figure out whether this was just an elaborate parody or not. But I believe they were in fact trying to build a real crypto island." — Molly White

We discuss:

The popularity of the Web3 buzzword
The bizarre culture around cryptocurrency including the Fyre Festival-like "Cryptoland" island that some proponents tried to build
How the critics of cryptocurrency are maligned and treated as stupid
How the uncritical endorsement of crypto projects by celebrities and politicians is causing ordinary people to be swindled out of their money
The failure of Congress to properly regulate the sector including the dangerously pro-crypto framework put forth by senators Gillibrand and Lummis
Why blockchain is not going to improve Wikipedia, and why technology can't solve deep structural economic problems more generally

"I think a lot of my criticisms of crypto come down to that: A lot of these projects are seeking to find technological solutions to what are truly social and political problems." — Molly White

"I put a lot of time into trying to figure out whether this was just an elaborate parody or not. But I believe they were in fact trying to build a real crypto island." — Molly White

Previous Episode

Thinking About Police After Uvalde and the San Francisco Prosecutor Recall (w/ Alex Vitale)

Alex Vitale is one of the country's foremost experts on policing and criminal punishment. He is a professor of Sociology at Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, where he coordinates the Policing and Social Justice Project. His book The End of Policing is a comprehensive critique of U.S. police and argues that nearly everything useful done by police can be done better by other institutions. (The book was published in 2017 but recently got an unexpected boost from U.S. senator Ted Cruz.) Prof. Vitale joined to discuss how the recent shooting in Uvalde (and the disastrous police response) and the successful recall of San Francisco's "progressive prosecutor," Chesa Boudin, should inform our thinking about police and punishment. We discuss:

Why Ted Cruz thought of The End of Policing as "critical race theory"
How the Uvalde shooting shows why policing can't be relied on to protect students from violence
Why criticizing policing as an institution actually shows that individual police themselves are not the problem, because they are being asked to solve problems that the tools of police are inadequate to solve
How this was also evident in the San Francisco prosecution conflict: reformer Chesa Boudin was held responsible for problems that a prosecutor's office cannot solve (a problem that Prof. Vitale thinks shows the limits of the progressive prosecutor strategy on its own)
How district attorney Larry Krasner in Philadelphia, another public defender pursuing a reformist mission, avoided being ousted like Boudin
Why we need to stop talking about stopping crime as if the question is "more policing" or "less policing," instead of talking about how to replace policing
Why Matthew Yglesias' criticism of The End of Policing is silly and wrong
How those of us committed to opposing the existing criminal punishment system can show that we actually care more about preventing violent crime than those pushing for more policing

The Scientific American article on Denver's Support Team Assistance Response (STAR) program is here: "Sending Health Care Workers instead of Cops Can Reduce Crime." The terrible Matthew Yglesias review of The End of Policing that Prof. Vitale responds to is here, and the article on it in Current Affairs by Alec Karakatsanis is here. The idea of "simultaneous overpolicing and underpolicing" that Prof. Vitale critiques is discussed here by Jenée Desmond-Harris. The interview with Rosa Brooks that Nathan mentions is here and the John Pfaff article debunking some misconceptions about the public response to progressive prosecutors is here. Derecka Purnell's book Becoming Abolitionists can be purchased here.

Next Episode

Oxford and the Making of the British Ruling Class

Financial Times journalist Simon Kuper's book Chums: How a Tiny Caste of Oxford Tories Took Over the UK argues that in order to understand how power works in the UK, you have to examine Oxford University, where most of its prime ministers are educated. The university has long functioned as the springboard to power for aspiring UK politicians, and Kuper takes us inside this insidious clubhouse, delivering a "searing critique of the British ruling class." Kuper argues that Brexit, far from being a "populist" revolt, would not have been possible without Oxford-educated Tory elites who were in search of a grand political project. Kuper discusses the disturbingly reactionary culture of the Oxford that nurtured Boris Johnson (as well as its low intellectual standards), and explains why—although certain improvements have been made—he believes the university should stop teaching undergrads altogether in order to diversity the pool of backgrounds of those who end up in British politics.

The clip at the beginning is taken from the 1981 Granada Television adaptation of Brideshead Revisited, which Kuper says many Oxford students in Thatcher-era Britain watched and consciously tried to emulate.

The Guardian's review of Chums is here. Nathan's own article on the life and career of Boris Johnson is here.