Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

lasindias.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 79 posts

Re: The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

#61

Post by mr_sturd »

natrius wrote: post #2

This just isn't true. Yes, running your own blockchain node is infeasible, but a blockchain-based service with hosted nodes is better than a federated service. Proof-of-work creates an illusion of dependence on blockchain miners. Proof-of-stake makes it clear that blockchains are run by a corporation that wants to maximize transaction fee revenue. Transaction validators have to do the best job of maintaining a unifie…

> An IPFS-based Twitter is probably a better way to start

Did you see the AKASHA discussion, last week?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11678810

Re: The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

#62

Post by jon_richards »

goldbrick wrote: post #5
natrius wrote: post #2

This just isn't true. Yes, running your own blockchain node is infeasible, but a blockchain-based service with hosted nodes is better than a federated service. Proof-of-work creates an illusion of dependence on blockchain miners. Proof-of-stake makes it clear that blockchains are run by a corporation that wants to maximize transaction fee revenue. Transaction validators have to do the best job of maintaining a unifie…

What part isn't true, specifically? We are dependent on blockchain miners, because without them our transactions don't get accepted. Moreover we have a couple established big players that control the market and no clear way for them to get disrupted, save abandoning Bitcoin entirely. Blockchains are much more than receipt paper. Receipt paper is a superfluous byproduct. The blockchain is the system of record.

One idea I had was if it is possible to somehow have all the miners "guessing" where the next block is going to be signed. A correct guess would net a bit of the transaction fee. Huge server farms concentrated in an area would therefore lose out, because everyone would guess that location.

The biggest difficulty would be accurately identifying where the signature came from, but with clever timing mechanisms, it might be possible given the latency of light. I haven't thought about it much, but maybe require the current time be included in what gets hashed. Anyone cheating by using a future time could be caught by looking for missing transactions in that time space.

Re: The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

#63

Post by samuellb »

Animats wrote: post #36
stcredzero wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't a federated system that looks like a centralized system work? What if something like Diaspora just installed itself on an AWS EC2 instance for you, and you only had to enter a credit card?

An EC2 instance is probably too much for one user. The model here is Wordpress, which is easy to install and widely used, even in its distributed form. Of course, what's happened is that more and more Wordpress sites run on centralized Wordpress. Compare: "wordpress.com" (hosted): "Create your new website for free. WordPress.com is the best place for your personal blog or business site. Create Website (button)" "word…

Many (or perhaps even most?) web hosts will offer to install Wordpress for their customers, usually with some "Install Wordpress" option either at sign up or in the control panel. And I suppose these installations are configured with automatic upgrades, and are supported to some degree by the web host. Federated and open source doesn't mean that every end-user installs and maintains the software by themselves.

Re: The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

#64

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #56
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At ludicrous cost, yes.

Is $70 ludicrous because that is what T-Mobile's US plan with international roaming costs. They did that 2 years ago, I don't know what is available now.

Does that include unlimited transfer at no extra cost while roaming internationally? The blockchain is huge.

Re: The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

#65

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

dilemma wrote: post #60
em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #53

Threat is poor word choice. If blockchains don't provide good distributed service, then they simply won't be used, in which case they aren't much a threat. Maybe author should have use the thesis that blockchains aren't the end-all-be-all of the distributed internet.

No, what the post is saying is that power will be consolidated among a very small number of very large players. The system won't be distributed but relatively centralized.

In which case it is not very effective. So it is not a threat.

Re: The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

#66

Post by dilemma »

em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #65
dilemma wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, what the post is saying is that power will be consolidated among a very small number of very large players. The system won't be distributed but relatively centralized.

In which case it is not very effective. So it is not a threat .

What won't be effective and why?

Re: The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

#67

Post by wslh »

natrius wrote: post #2

This just isn't true. Yes, running your own blockchain node is infeasible, but a blockchain-based service with hosted nodes is better than a federated service. Proof-of-work creates an illusion of dependence on blockchain miners. Proof-of-stake makes it clear that blockchains are run by a corporation that wants to maximize transaction fee revenue. Transaction validators have to do the best job of maintaining a unifie…

> Proof-of-work creates an illusion of dependence on blockchain miners.

PoW depends on blockchain miners by definition and the Bitcoin experience shows that at the end you have a concentration of power.

> With that said, it's still unclear whether blockchains are the right choice for publishing.

It is very clear that blockchains ARE NOT the right choice for publishing, its limitations for that purpose are based on strong computer science principles on distributed systems, consensus and network speed.

Re: The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

#68

Post by zardo »

troymc wrote: post #33
kkennis wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Blockchain' isn't a meaningless buzzword, it's a database protocol. Its market positioning aside, there's a very real value that immutable databases offer from both a technological and a commercial perspective. The blockchain protocol isn't going to 'save the world' - but once a little air gets let out of the balloon, it's going to see a lot of adoption in both financial institutions and back offices in a wide, wide…

I agree that "blockchain" is essentially a database protocol for a special kind of database, but I'm fairly sure there's no standard, agreed-upon, single "blockchain protocol." Bitcoin may be the best-known blockchain protocol, but there many others in active use.

IpPFS

Re: The blockchain is a threat to the distributed future of the Internet

#70

Post by natrius »

wslh wrote: post #67
natrius wrote: post #2

This just isn't true. Yes, running your own blockchain node is infeasible, but a blockchain-based service with hosted nodes is better than a federated service. Proof-of-work creates an illusion of dependence on blockchain miners. Proof-of-stake makes it clear that blockchains are run by a corporation that wants to maximize transaction fee revenue. Transaction validators have to do the best job of maintaining a unifie…

> Proof-of-work creates an illusion of dependence on blockchain miners. PoW depends on blockchain miners by definition and the Bitcoin experience shows that at the end you have a concentration of power. > With that said, it's still unclear whether blockchains are the right choice for publishing. It is very clear that blockchains ARE NOT the right choice for publishing, its limitations for that purpose are based on st…

Technological frontiers are no place for dogma. Sure, blockchains probably aren't a good choice for publishing, but a culture that constrains people's technology choices is incompatible with progress.
Post reply on HN