TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Possible citogenesis concerning whether MtGox ever hosted an MtG trading site

75 点作者 dsirijus超过 11 年前

11 条评论

nwh超过 11 年前
There&#x27;s a nice explanation by <i>bunderbunder</i> in a previous discussion too:<p>&gt; <i>Interestingly, if you go back and look through the Wikipedia page&#x27;s history, you can see what appears to be exactly that process happening.</i><p>&gt; <i>Before the Wired article, the Wiki article implies that the site was an operating Magic card exchange, but the citation is a link to the Internet Archive&#x27;s copy of the stub page, with absolutely nothing there to substantiate the idea that it was actually an online exchange. The Wired article appeared later and is unsourced, but could plausibly have taken the Wiki article&#x27;s unsupported statement at face value. Then just the other day (February 9) the Wiki page was edited by a user named Agyle to use the Wired article instead of the Wayback Machine reference.</i><p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7220414" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=7220414</a>
derefr超过 11 年前
Note that there&#x27;s another equally-simple explanation that fits all the facts gwern posits here:<p>1. The MtG app was hosted on a subdomain (CNAME record, no A record) that sometimes had an accompanying apex-record lead-gen website to &quot;sell&quot; it, but usually didn&#x27;t. (When you&#x27;re an engineer making a webapp, writing the lead-gen copy is usually the last thing on your mind.)<p>2. The app subdomain served a robots.txt that prevented the Internet Archive from indexing it--as is usual practice with app subdomains.<p>3. McCaleb doesn&#x27;t generally want to talk about how his site used to host an MtG exchange, because that&#x27;d make people less willing to take BitCoin seriously. He doesn&#x27;t <i>deny</i> it, though, nor use the misapprehension as a source of humor in interviews. He just clams up.<p>I&#x27;m not saying gwern is wrong, but he hasn&#x27;t inviolably proven his hypothesis yet, either. I look forward to a comment from McCaleb, if there ever is one. (My own hypothesis would support McCaleb never responding to gwern&#x27;s query.)
评论 #7250039 未加载
评论 #7250540 未加载
评论 #7250495 未加载
评论 #7257233 未加载
javert超过 11 年前
&gt; While your Mt. Gox theory sounds plausible, unless a reliable source challenges the claim or provides an alternate history, I think all we can do is treat the now-established history as an uncontroversial fact.<p>Translation: Although there is no evidence for X, let&#x27;s assume X because it is repeated often.<p>This is so stupid that it bothers me that someone who edits Wikipedia (which, yes, could be anyone) said it.
评论 #7250332 未加载
评论 #7251097 未加载
mikeash超过 11 年前
It&#x27;s going to be hilarious if it turns out that this never happened. So many people have used the MtG origins of the site to criticize it.<p>(I&#x27;m one of those people. I guess this is a lesson in not repeating something just because you saw a bunch of comments discussing it.)
评论 #7250501 未加载
评论 #7250292 未加载
judk超过 11 年前
&gt; While your Mt. Gox theory sounds plausible, unless a reliable source challenges the claim or provides an alternate history, I think all we can do is treat the now-established history ad an uncontroversial fact.<p>Nice, Wikipedians actually believe that citogenesis creates real information.<p>This is difference between &quot;citation&quot; and &quot;scholarship&quot;.<p>When a wikipedia article cites a non-primary source, if that source doesn&#x27;t care its own sources, <i>it is not a valid source</i> for its claim, it is just hearsay.
评论 #7250549 未加载
评论 #7250074 未加载
评论 #7249993 未加载
gkoberger超过 11 年前
Wayback machine (far from conclusive) has this:<p><pre><code> * 2007: A landing page saying it&#x27;s coming soon * 2009: A blog (about Magic?), with nothing about trading * 2011: Bitcoins </code></pre> Source: <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/*/mtgox.com" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;*&#x2F;mtgox.com</a><p>Seems to be the domain was bought with the intention of trading Magic cards, but an actual exchange never launched. Now, it&#x27;s possible they had started developing it and just repurposed code, but I see no evidence that it was ever launched as a Magic trading site.<p>Most likely, though -- they just had an unused domain laying around, and &quot;Mt. Gox&quot; sounded cool. I&#x27;ve repurposed domains before; I have a ton.
评论 #7251248 未加载
dopamean超过 11 年前
Relevant xkcd<p><a href="https://xkcd.com/978/" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;xkcd.com&#x2F;978&#x2F;</a>
adamnemecek超过 11 年前
What would MtGox gain from making that up? Also, maybe the original site never launched but he reused the code, that was originally intended to be used for the MtG card exchange and repurposed it for Bitcoin.
评论 #7250362 未加载
PhasmaFelis超过 11 年前
You know, regardless of whether MtGox is built on trading-card code, it&#x27;s still pretty mockworthy that a supposedly serious monetary exchange chose to open and operate under an initialism whose only meaning is &quot;Magic: The Gathering Online Exchange.&quot; Domain names are not expensive, at least not if you&#x27;re already willing to settle for something like &quot;mtgox.com.&quot;
评论 #7251238 未加载
captainmuon超过 11 年前
Does it really matter whether there was a running MtG trading site with actual trades? I think it&#x27;s established that that guy <i>wanted</i> to make a magic the gathering online exchange, then discovered bitcoins, and started MtGox, before selling it to the current owners. He may or may have not facilitated trading playing cards on that domain, a subdomain, or somewhere else - it doesn&#x27;t really matter. The fact is that the MtG online exchange idea was put online first - so you can say MtGox started as an MtG trading site. Whether the site was actually open to the public, or a closed beta, or just on some guy&#x27;s laptop is just a detail.<p>Funny how self-referential (no pun intended) Wikipedia has become. Instead of just changing &quot;was a site for trading MtG cards&quot; to &quot;was a planned site for trading MtG cards&quot;, or the more ambigous and certainly true &quot;the original idea was a MtG trading site&quot;, they spawn endless threads on the discussion page.
评论 #7251863 未加载
dublinben超过 11 年前
How difficult should it be to get the founder on record?
评论 #7250012 未加载