JK Rowling Asks About Bitcoin. Accursed Crypto Twitter Scares Her Off
Good job crypto Twitter!
This is why we can't have nice things!
Just Kidding JK!
It doesn't matter that we scared her off.
Her simply asking the question is all that matters.
Although if she had asked me...
What is up with all these explanations trying to link Bitcoin to Harry Potter?
I bet she does remember that because she wrote the books and it was big plot point.
So bad.
She asked a simple question.
Give a simple answer.
Bitcoin is a currency that no one can print more of.
or
Bitcoin is a currency that no one controls.
Honestly, that's all that needed to be said.
If she asks a follow up question like "How?" then you could start talking about the hash lottery and the block reward and the distributed ledger. Jumping the gun is a great way to instantly turn people off.
Blah blah blah
Shut up, Ivan.
LOL
Speaking of Harry Potter and LOL.
Remember that this is still a thing?
I can't believe these kids take this shit so seriously.
Running around playing sports with a broom between your legs?
It's just too funny and ridiculous.
Harry Potter and Quidditch.
I don't read a lot of fiction.
In fact I can probably count the number of things I've read on my fingers:
- Dune
- Ender's Game
- Issac Asimov
- Nine Princes of Amber series
- All that random shit I was forced to read in school
- Harry Potter series
That's pretty much it.
I gots the A.D.D, Fam.
It's very hard for me to commit to reading something, but once I do, I read it pretty quickly and nonstop as it feeds into my addictive personality. The Harry Potter books were one of those things, as embarrassing as that may be.
I took issue with the global setting of Harry Potter.
Many authors fit into two categories:
- Those who are good at character development and story-line threads.
- Those who are good at setting and big-picture variables.
It's really a macro vs micro situation.
It's really hard to be a master of both of these things, as they often tend to be completely different and often conflicting dynamics. Authors much pick and choose what they want to focus on.
I'd say for the most part the authors with the greatest success tend to be the best at the micro aspects (dynamic character development and specific story-line). Writing characters and how they interact with other characters and the environment can be difficult, and most readers will identify and prefer strongly written character dynamics rather than overall setting and background.
I'd say that George Lucas is a great example of someone who is terrible at the micro but excellent at the macro. The Star Wars series is one of the most popular tales out there. However, we see that when he tries to writes his own dialog he's pretty much absolute garbage. Honestly if I was J.K. Rowling I would have collaborated more with people like Lucas who know what they are doing on that front.
So what do I have against the environment of Harry Potter?
Well, for starters, the same two spells are used over and over again to advance the plot-lines across multiple books. There's one spell that is effectively mind control, and a potion that makes you look like another person for an hour. These tropes are part of multiple "big reveals", and are even used to break into the most secure bank in the world.
Like really? No one at the bank thought of that?
It just kinda comes off as lazy writing. Also, there is no way to deflect, absorb, or otherwise counter spells. You simply have to avoid them or you're fucked. The defensive magic is a joke; there are no checks and balances, and that should clearly be the case in a world like this.
For example, what if you could cast a reflective spell on yourself that would only reflect a single type of spell back at the attacker? That would make for some pretty interesting mind-games, because if you choose poorly you'll hit yourself with your own spell.
At the same time, many wizards would then have a favorite offensive spell that they would make themselves immune to so when they used it, it could not be reflected or used back at them. This, in turn, creates even more mind-games because you would be studying the actions and habits of all the other wizards like a crazy game of rock/paper/scissors. Nope, we're given none of that with this basic system.
None of that even compares to the dumpster-fire of Quidditch.
The reason I brought up Quidditch is because it's absolutely without a doubt the worst part about the book and the easiest thing to fix. There are so many rules and things going on in the game, and none of it matters because the only thing that matters is the position Harry Potter plays (Seeker) and whether or not he catches the "Snitch".
Because catching the Snitch is worth 150 points and ends the game, nothing else in the game even matters. Your team would have to score 16 times in a row before anything else mattered because scoring gets you 10 points.
How to fix this?
The only thing that needed to be done to fix this ridiculous game is to make the snitch worth ten times less. If catching the Snitch was only 15 points and ended the game, every time your team was down by 20 or more points you would no longer be able to win.
This would add a very interesting dynamic to the game, because whenever your team was down by 20 points (2 scores) then the Seeker position would have to go on a "power play" just like in hockey. In hockey, a power play occurs when someone is put into the penalty box and the game proceeds for a while 4 players vs 5. In the context of Quidditch, a seeker who could no longer win the game by catching the snitch would transition to trying to help score more points for the team or simply prevent the snitch being caught by the other player.
The choice that J.K. Rowling made to create this intricate game and then make none of the positions matter except for the main character really really annoyed me. And in the books they even make reference to the one time that a team who caught the snitch also lost the game. Stupid. It's like she's hinting at the fact that she knows she made the rules idiotic on purpose.
Poor people are also displayed lazily.
This is another really annoying thing about the books. If you can do magic to get all the basic necessities, how can you also be poor? It makes sense that there would be a class system and the book makes good on comparing that class system to real life, but really? Why is your house in disarray when you can just conjure a new house?
When it really comes down to it magic (and technology) create abundance. The poor people of today are much richer than the poor people of 100 years ago. Likewise, the wizards that are also poor would be poor in different ways (aka they can not afford elite services). They would still have a nice clean house and running water and good food, all for zero cost.
Conclusion
It was nice to have an excuse to talk shit about the world-building of Harry Potter.
Never thought I'd have the chance :D
I can't believe J.K Rowling made over a billion dollars with nothing but the intellectual property of a book series. Pretty mind-blowing honestly. The fact that she is now asking about Bitcoin should give the world pause. It doesn't matter that she now regrets talking about it. What's done is done; No such thing as bad publicity.
Those who decide today that Bitcoin is not for them are the same as those who said the Internet wasn't for them in the 90's. They'll realize the error of their statements soon™ enough.