48 pointsby billybuckwheat5 hours ago9 comments
  • webprofusion4 hours ago
    It's Jim Gordon btw, nobody watched the OC surely.
    • PierceJoy3 hours ago
      You obviously weren't in high school at the time the OC was on. Everybody watched it. I don't think I've ever viewed Ben as anyone other than Ryan Atwood ever since.
      • RedShift13 hours ago
        The first two seasons were really good. So good it kinda surprised me on a rewatch. After that it went downhill though.
  • BLKNSLVR5 hours ago
    Original ABC article, including video of interview: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-24/ben-mckenzie-cryptocu...

    I turned off when he said that Bitcoin is issued by corporations. The interviewer calls him out on it and he doubles down. That's blatantly false, and indicates poor research and / or poor understanding.

    It may be true for plenty of other cryptocurrencies, but it's definitely not true for some, including Bitcoin. In fact, 99% of cryptocurrencies are scams, but that's because they can now be created in seconds with little knowledge or skill.

    Feels like he's pushing an agenda, especially with the use of the term 'corporations'. Which is amusing, since it's the lack of trust of big-finance that (so the story goes) led to the creation of Bitcoin in the first place - the 2007 GFC in particular. Although electronic money was being dabbled with since the mid-late 90s, and that base formed the foundation of what Bitcoin was built on.

    This is probably just advertising for his documentary, really.

    • Nina_antalpha4 hours ago
      most crypto's junk. But saying Bitcoin is issued by corporations, then doubling down, just hands critics a free win. Sloppy for a guy selling a doc.
    • fechols29 minutes ago
      "In fact, 99% of cryptocurrencies are scams..." Almost got it! Just one more percent and you'll have it figured out.
      • wheelerwj10 minutes ago
        99% of phone calls i receive are scams. Clearly we should ban phones.
    • georgemcbay2 hours ago
      > I turned off when he said that Bitcoin is issued by corporations. The interviewer calls him out on it and he doubles down. That's blatantly false, and indicates poor research and / or poor understanding.

      He knows how bitcoin works. And what he said wasn't a lie, though you could argue it was a simplification, but he's not addressing the HN crowd with what he's saying and IMO his simplification is perfectly acceptable to the audience he is targeting.

      The cost to mine a single BTC in 2026 is > $70k. Random individuals and hobbyists are not spending that kind of money mining bitcoin.

      • JuniperMesos19 minutes ago
        I'd say that's such an important oversimplification that it's tantamount to a lie. Bitcoin's issuance model is one of the several completely novel financial concepts that Bitcoin introduced, and involves mentally-modeling a relatively-complex incentive structure and some non-trivial computer science properties to understand. Saying "Bitcoin is issued by corporations" is simply not engaging with the actual substance of how Bitcoin is issued, and instead says uses the vague-but-sinister-sounding word "corporations" to imply that Bitcoin is generically bad to low-sophistication viewers.
    • rvz5 hours ago
      This is the same author that attempted to short bitcoin and lost most of his money. [0] Perhaps that is why he is upset about cryptocurrencies.

      But the true scam is the complete debasement of the US dollar and people will slowly realize why the dollar will always be worth less than it was 40 years ago as it continues to be printed to zero and number go up with stocks and crypto.

      It is also the reason why some people are crying that $1m is not enough to retire on, and they are right. Because $1m is worth less today than it was 40 years ago.

      Hence why people here need >$500k and above a year to live, when in reality, it is the fiat currency becoming more worthless over time.

      Sounds like a scam in the long term.

      [0] https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/jul/15/ben-mck...

      • 2muchcoffeemanan hour ago
        He doubled down on his thesis. Shorted again, and made a bunch of money.

        So I guess, he was right?

        • BLKNSLVR29 minutes ago
          He did say that half the documentary funding came from shorting Bitcoin.

          Which works of you time the cycles correctly, and fails terribly if you don't (see: FTX, Celsius, many others).

      • catlifeonmars3 hours ago
        Where do you live where you need to make $500k and above to live in the US? Silicon Valley?

        If so, that’s definitely the exception rather than the rule.

        > Because $1m is worth less today than it was 40 years ago.

        And? $1 is also worth less than it was 40 years ago. You also make more than the same person would doing the same thing 40 years ago, so that’s not a useful comparison. If you want to make statements about standards of living, you need to use the same measuring stick. You can use inflation adjusted values to do so.

        • rvzan hour ago
          > Where do you live where you need to make $500k and above to live in the US? Silicon Valley?

          I live in reality.

          > If so, that’s definitely the exception rather than the rule.

          Ask anyone in a HCOL area in the US and it is hardly an "exception".

          > And? $1 is also worth less than it was 40 years ago. You also make more than the same person would doing the same thing 40 years ago, so that’s not a useful comparison. If you want to make statements about standards of living, you need to use the same measuring stick. You can use inflation adjusted values to do so.

          That depends on the occupation. You also didn't make any point and just casually accepted getting scammed on the debasement of your own fiat currency.

      • latchkey4 hours ago
        > the dollar will always be worth less than it was 40 years ago

        at this point, you don't even have to go that far back.

      • TMWNN4 hours ago
        > But the true scam is the complete debasement of the US dollar and people will slowly realize why the dollar will always be worth less than it was 40 years ago as it continues to be printed to zero and number go up with stocks and crypto.

        By contrast, there was essentially no inflation in England from 1614 to the start of WW1.

        • Yokohiii3 hours ago
          By contrast, england could summon anything from their colonies.
  • senectus13 hours ago
    No idea what the OC is, but the guy looks familiar.

    its largely a scam yes, but that doesnt mean it has no utility. Happy for it to get this sort of marketing tho.

  • fishgoesblub3 hours ago
    Every time an individual blanket labels the entirety of Cryptocurrency as a "Ponzi Scheme" just reveals their lack of knowledge. Plenty of them are, and plenty of them aren't in the fact that they aren't scams, or don't even fit the definition of a Ponzi. He can try to pry my Monero from my cold, dead hands.
  • alephnerd4 hours ago
    Don't call it that [0]

    [0] - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s78adWHXQ8U

  • 5 hours ago
    undefined
  • SilentM684 hours ago
    Somebody should probably let him know about this site:

    tftc.io

    I'd be educational for him, I would think :)

  • Sha1rholder38 minutes ago
    Though I've never heard of The O.C., but I'm sure there comes yet another comedy from the actor.
  • gatvol2 hours ago
    Celebs having opinions that get amplified because they're celebs is simply embarrassing all round for everyone.
    • xhevahir2 hours ago
      He's written a book on the subject and testified in front of the US Senate. The fact that he acted in a popular TV show more than twenty years ago isn't particularly relevant.
      • 2muchcoffeeman22 minutes ago
        I am also skeptical on celebrities being activists, because some, (many? most?) don’t know what they are talking about.

        But if there are signs they might be reasonable, you should adjust your opinions if you’re going to bag them out.

    • 2muchcoffeeman2 hours ago
      Dude completed under grad in foreign affairs and economics.

      Might have been good student. At the very least someone with an undergrad trying to understand crypto seems reasonable.

      Yes, made a doco and is trying to make money. But could still be reasonable.

      • someguydave2 hours ago
        Why did they pick him to testify, out of the tens or hundreds of thousands with a similar background?