I agree with Vili Lehdonvirta's analysis about governance and wrote a similar conclusion previously.[1] Yes, the concept of "money" existed before governments and therefore doesn't require government. That said, today's modern money is very much an instrument of government power. This is why alt-coins will not overthrow fiat currencies like some enthusiasts believe because Bitcoin does not come with its own Bitcoin-p…
> prove useful for other recordkeeping such as real estate property transactions (e.g. no need to pay $300 fee for title searches in the future) That doesn't require a distributed ledger, just a database. In the UK it costs £3 and is searchable online. If it costs $300 then that is because someone wants it to cost that much.
The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
121–130 of 355 posts
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin is mostly popular in Eastern Europe and Asia for transfer payments, fiat currency conversion, money laundering, and evading capital controls (getting money out of China). In the US if you're doing legitimate business with other US entities then there's really no need for such a thing. I can write a check or send a credit card payment or wire transfer to another US bank with a reasonably high level of trust th…
I agree with this but you might be missing my point. Crypto as a store of value and the ability to transfer funds is nice and all but it's not the big picture. I think focusing on that you rightly see limited practical application in large parts of the world, such as the USA. The real revolution is in smart contracts and virtual machines that run on a blockchain and the ability to define ownership of a distributed or…
>The real revolution is in smart contracts and virtual machines that run on a blockchain and the ability to define ownership of a distributed organization to distribute profits accordingly. Blockchains on blockchains that having turing complete contracts that can guarantee there isn't even the ability to cheat the distributed, mainly anonymous organization participants.
Sounds like something utterly complex even to describe, so imagine how more difficult it is for any average person to identify as a problem they have and care about.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
>miners control bitcoin Incorrect, I can sign or construct any type of cryptographic payment I wish. Miners trade their Proof of work to prevent double spends in exchange for coinbase (currency issuance) that the market values. If miners chose to mine on a chain that no one wants, no one will trade for their coinbase. The game theory nuance is, how do you organize an economy around changes to blockchain consensus? Th…
If miners chose to mine on a chain that no-one wants, then everybody has to grudgingly go along with it, or cease to transact. The longest chain is always the most valuable.
>If miners chose to mine on a chain that no-one wants, then everybody has to grudgingly go along with it
No, if the miners mine on a chain that doesn't meet consensus rules, users will not follow it. If miners decide that the coinbase issuance schedule isn't to their liking, and decide to revert it back to 50 bitcoins per block, users will reject those blocks. This is a fundamental governance property of a blockchain.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#124If I had a Bitcoin for every skeptic that posts a blog on why it can't work... This may just be my general observation but I feel like Silicon Valley hegemony has a grudge against crypto currencies and I'm not sure why. For an industry that has constantly tried new things and saw potential where no one else did, I just don't see the love for the potential of smart contracts, DApps, etc. And how this is just the begin…
[deleted]
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#125If I had a Bitcoin for every skeptic that posts a blog on why it can't work... This may just be my general observation but I feel like Silicon Valley hegemony has a grudge against crypto currencies and I'm not sure why. For an industry that has constantly tried new things and saw potential where no one else did, I just don't see the love for the potential of smart contracts, DApps, etc. And how this is just the begin…
The source of the distaste is obvious: breathless hyperbole without much substance to show for it. Posts like yours are a great example of it. In this very comment you write: > leading the charge on what could be the next major technical revolution Unsubstantiated hype. Where is the revolution? A common thread among cryptocurrency enthusiasts is that the revolution is coming... except it never does. When you talk abo…
Watch this video [1] of Bill Gates explaining the value of the Internet to David Letterman, where he's just not getting it at all. Bill's telling him the things it can do relative to David's interests, but he just sees those as problems that don't really exist because they've already been solved.
It took decades before the Internet was useful to "the masses." I don't think there's some conspiracy among VCs, but I do think dismissing cryptocurrencies for the reasons you have is short-sighted.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bitcoin does not come with its own Bitcoin-police-force and Bitcoin-law-courts My government will enforce a contract even if it is denominated in some foreign currency, will it not? Currency used is independent of jurisdiction. They may award damages in legal tender, rather than in Bitcoin, but I have to pay taxes in legal tender anyway, so there will always be a market to convert back. Right now they might be conf…
So the point is to use the stateless currency, but continue to rely on the state to settle disputes and redistribute funds as it sees fit? That seems counter to the ethos of the BitCoin enthusiasts. I also doubt it will necessarily work for large sums. Governments may enforce contracts related to foreign money (if they find that the contract itself is in their jurisdiction, which isn't always the case) because they h…
>That seems counter to the ethos of the BitCoin enthusiasts.
That's because it's a non-realistic ethos.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
ICO's are clearly enjoying a use. Largest crowdfunding in history can't be ignored - whether it ends in tears for most investors is another matter entirely.
I asked for a practical example. Just because a bunch of people decided to spend their money on internet tokens does not mean it is useful. How is it useful ?
[deleted]
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#128If I had a Bitcoin for every skeptic that posts a blog on why it can't work... This may just be my general observation but I feel like Silicon Valley hegemony has a grudge against crypto currencies and I'm not sure why. For an industry that has constantly tried new things and saw potential where no one else did, I just don't see the love for the potential of smart contracts, DApps, etc. And how this is just the begin…
"I do see a lot of enthusiasm from Eastern Europeans and all across Asia and they seem to be leading the charge on what could be the next major technical revolution." You may wish to also include hubs in London,UK and Zug,Switzerland
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#129If I had a Bitcoin for every skeptic that posts a blog on why it can't work... This may just be my general observation but I feel like Silicon Valley hegemony has a grudge against crypto currencies and I'm not sure why. For an industry that has constantly tried new things and saw potential where no one else did, I just don't see the love for the potential of smart contracts, DApps, etc. And how this is just the begin…
> If I had a Bitcoin for every skeptic that posts a blog on why it can't work... And if I had a real dollar for everyone raving about some optimistic Bitcoin utopia... > This may just be my general observation but I feel like Silicon Valley hegemony has a grudge against crypto currencies and I'm not sure why. Because they're a solution of a problem that doesn't exist? Or rather, whose actual solution is political, no…
Cars were a solution to a problem that didn't exist when considered a certain way.
Texting seemed fine but yet here we are with many billions of market cap for messaging programs.
I agree there's hype on the other side of it too - look at the recent ICO craze. I'm not saying that crypto isn't getting love. But that it isn't getting much love from a very particular place. A place that traditionally has never had a problem embracing a million odd ideas. A place with a culture where 90% failure is expected because that 10% success more than makes up for it.
I just find it conspicuous.
Re: The blockchain paradox: Why DLTs may do little to transform the economy
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the concept of "money" existed before governments This is not actually true. The concept of money (quantifiable debt in a standard unit, such as coinage) was created by early states to lock subjects into what anthropologist David Graeber has called the "military–coinage–slave complex". Money cannot be separated from state violence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt:_The_First_5000_Years
>anthropologist David Graeber [...] Money cannot be separated from state violence. I've read David Graeber's book. I do agree with him that the common (e.g. John Locke) narrative about money arising from direct barter is probably wrong. Money actually comes from credits/debits (aka delayed consumption). However, I disagree you need government enforced violence for the basic apparatus of money. Perhaps it's a matter o…
>If you have a small community where everybody knows each other, the people can cooperate to keep track of "accounts" of who owes what.
Well, those people are then the government. In small scale communities it's one and the same -- they can all join together and deal with anybody who doesn't play nice. And these punishments are the analogous of e.g. prison.
So, what you say is true, but not very important in practical use, as we don't live in such small communities, and don't deal strictly in our own community even.
Sure, 2 people also don't need government. They can keep tabs, and if one doesn't repay or cheats, the other can always beat them up or stop dealing with the first. But they're basically acting as a government in themselves (in that they assume the role of government officials like law enforcement, law-making, etc).
"Government is not required" would made actual practical sense if somehow the technical solution used instead of money took care itself of debt repayment and ensured punishment (or make it so that punishment is redundant) of wrongdoers.