Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- Though I've never heard of The O.C., but I'm sure there comes yet another comedy from the actor.by Sha1rholder
- 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.by fishgoesblub
- Celebs having opinions that get amplified because they're celebs is simply embarrassing all round for everyone.by gatvol
- 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.
- 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.by xhevahir
- Don't call it that [0]by alephnerd
- Washed up actor tries for headlines on book tour, more at 7by gos9
- 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.
by BLKNSLVR - 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...
by rvz - "In fact, 99% of cryptocurrencies are scams..." Almost got it! Just one more percent and you'll have it figured out.by fechols
- > 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.
by georgemcbay - 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.
- The kind interpretation of his statement is that Bitcoin mining has moved to the hands of corporations.
Its not nerds in their garages running gpus, but an entire "corporate" industrial complex designing, and shipping custom chips filling out entire data centers.
- 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.
by senectus1 - It's Jim Gordon btw, nobody watched the OC surely.by webprofusion
- 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.by PierceJoy
- The argument that private transactions are only for people with something to hide is one that we should be very careful with.
The same could be said about projects like Tor, which we know for certain is used for all sorts of illegal activities, and really just about any use of cryptography use outside of big tech and systems with law enforcement access. It is exactly the same as the argument that all chat and email providers that cannot intercept and store plaintext data should be outlawed.
Private chats and private value transfers are used by criminals, there's no question about it. We should think of the children. But the slope is slippery and the question is where to draw the line and what type of society we want to live in. To someone who valued abolishing export mode ciphers and key escrow schemes, the Overton window has really shifted on this.
by xorcist - > Crypto is really only good for gambling, betting the price of this or that crypto is going to go up or down, and, crime
Crime is a pretty broad category. Sure you can use crypto to scam people and dodge taxes, but illegal does not equal immoral. Piracy, leaking evidence of war crimes and police abuse, leaking source code to hurt controversial companies, donations to banned groups, even hosting source code for illegal tools. Not all of them benefit from crypto itself but adjacent technologies that need a blockchain like Arweave and ENS.
Then there are things like drug dealing and prostitution that have real world harms but not everyone agrees they should be criminal. It's great to have a bunch of different payment methods that can be as anonymous as cash (Monero) or fully programmable with smart wallets to protect you from scams, all without any corporate cartel that could block you.
Cyberleek is a great example for both sides of the debate. They used Solana programs and Arweave to make their site uncensorable, but also created a token donation system and market cap goals to make thousands of dollars in the process (a lot for someone probably based in Russia). Is it all morally wrong, or all right, or only wrong for the money side?
by tancop - -- and prostitution --
EU: Someone in this "business" told me lately that "his girls" in "his houses" are happily switching to SEPA instant payment, so they do not have take care of the cash and it reduces the risk of wierd clients becoming violent to get their cash back.
- Crypto is like AR/VR - in theory the technology is sound. In practice it's only used by bad actors and eshewed by the majority public due to how many ways it's easily exploited for illegal acts.
- Listen that's all great in theory, but the vast majority of the actual use is extortions, drug dealing[1], terrorist financing, money laudring and authoritarian regimes evading sanctions.
The only value is that it does not go through banks.
[1] The moral problem with drug dealing is not the drugs, but the fact the people selling them are using that money to perpuate an incredible circle of violence.