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

Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

linkedin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 92 posts

Re: Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

#11

Post by icebraining »

rebelidealist wrote: post #8
Theodores wrote: post #7

On a more day to day level, a few years ago a lot of e-commerce pay-by-bitcoin options existed. You would not put this on the checkout next to PayPal because nobody was doing bitcoin then. What I don't understand is why this never took off. People know bitcoin through the news, it is not new. In this time Apple Pay has come along nicely but not bitcoin. Bitcoin has gone off on a tulips tangent. This seems at odds wit…

Due to the limited supply of 24 million BTC, Bitcoin is deflationary meaning it will go up in value as more people adopt it. Govt print fiat currency out of thin air to encourage the population to spend on the economy. Bitcoin as the opposit affect as people use it for a store of value and a hedge against fiat currencies.

That limit will only be hit in 2140.

Re: Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

#12

Post by wyc »

What really upsets me is that most of the whitepapers pumped out by ICOs today are emphatically not the way we best understand how sustainable new companies come into existence. Many contain big grandiose plans that stretch years and don’t admit the necessary network effects, new technologies, etc., for even modest success. An idea, a LaTeX installation, and WordPress landing page are a very low bar for raising millions of dollars, especially by today’s standards. With open source software and services like AWS and GCP, we should expect more.

Startups by definition are organizations in flux seeking their scalable business models, and claiming to have all the answers upon inception is an exercise in hubris and/or grandstanding. The late Steve Jobs did say that customers don’t know what they want, but many of these ICO firms don’t even seem to take the first steps in talking to early prospects.

1999 is calling, and they want their 18-month growth plans, 50-page business plans, and million dollar war chests back.

Re: Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

#13

Post by lallysingh »

CJefferson wrote: post #9
a_d wrote: post #2

"What else ticks me off about this, is that there is absolutely nothing wrong with issuing stock in your company as tokens on a block chain instead of through brokers on a standard exchange. Just do it legally, for Pete's sake! Go to the SEC, or whoever the appropriate regulatory authority in your jurisdiction is, and get authorization to issue stock! Hire somebody to implement shareholder voting as block chain trans…

I can't imagine blockchains ever satisfying all legal requirements. At some point I expect some court to say "X shares were illegally transferred from person A, give them back". If we don't know where they went, it's impossible on block-chain to give them back, unless we assume the existence of someone who has the rights to make arbitrary changes, at which point there is no point having a blockchain.

Why can't you require that each wallet be signed by a party that identifies the person behind it? Then you find where the money went and you force them to give it back.

But I think really the statement of interest is here: > ... at which point there is no point having a blockchain.

Lots of people have different reasons for liking block chains. Their reasons may disagree with yours.

Re: Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

#15

Post by 52-6F-62 »

dahart wrote: post #4

> Make sure they have the ... authority to issue stock (yes, that's what the coins on the block chain legally are, if they're selling them at launch) I hadn't thought about a launch of e-coins as stock. This is interesting and helpful, as someone who's only been lightly following blockchain and e-coin news. I have some fear of missing out, and Ray's perspective makes me think I've worried about the wrong things.

I don't know if other people have any dramatically different thoughts on the matter, but if you don't want to miss out but don't want the blatant risk of dealing in ICO's, it seems somewhat reasonable (nothing is reasonable or save in cryptocurrencies, really) way to involve yourself then I'd suggest having a look at just purchasing some of the larger coins (eg Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin) and sitting on it for a couple of years. Cost average your buy in, especially since it's dipped a little recently. Then again, only at an amount that you could lose and not regret it too much.

I've been following the progression of the tech in general and have friends who try and play the ICO game, but it's just too fickle for me. I'm not ready to go full day trader over that stuff. However the long term trend (zooming out) tends toward:

---

Minimal attention > growing attention > hype and burst > pop and settle > stagnation > return to attention, and start over

---

repeatedly, and all generally on an upwards trend over the past ~6 years from what I can tell so far. Just speaking to the prices, here. Something different is happening with the ICOs and the ability to build upon the networks like Ethereum. It's hard to predict, and it's curious what all the calamity surrounding those gambles will amount to. I'm sure a few of the companies will stand out and remain, but most of it just seems so... poorly footed.

Re: Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

#16

Post by wmf »

orsenthil wrote: post #14

Who is Ray Dillinger? Why should we trust him with this post?

We're talking about Bitcoin so obviously you should trust no one. But most of this post is either his opinion or information that was already well-known, so I think we can get some value out of it even if we don't trust the author.

Re: Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

#17

Post by AceJohnny2 »

orsenthil wrote: post #14

Who is Ray Dillinger? Why should we trust him with this post?

A cursory search reveals guy who was involved in BitCoin from the very start. For example, here's an exchange he had in 2008 with Satoshi over the design of Bitcoin:

http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/5/

Re: Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

#18

Post by grandalf »

a_d wrote: post #2

"What else ticks me off about this, is that there is absolutely nothing wrong with issuing stock in your company as tokens on a block chain instead of through brokers on a standard exchange. Just do it legally, for Pete's sake! Go to the SEC, or whoever the appropriate regulatory authority in your jurisdiction is, and get authorization to issue stock! Hire somebody to implement shareholder voting as block chain trans…

Compliance with what, the whim of officials in any nation?

Re: Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

#19

Post by lisper »

orsenthil wrote: post #14

Who is Ray Dillinger? Why should we trust him with this post?

> Who is Ray Dillinger?

He is a well known figure within the crypto community. He is also a very private person.

> Why should we trust him with this post?

What makes you think that you should? I'm pretty sure Ray would be the first to tell you that you shouldn't trust anyone, particularly not on the internet.

Re: Ray Dillinger: If I'd Known What We Were Starting

#20

Post by mattnewton »

rebelidealist wrote: post #8
Theodores wrote: post #7

On a more day to day level, a few years ago a lot of e-commerce pay-by-bitcoin options existed. You would not put this on the checkout next to PayPal because nobody was doing bitcoin then. What I don't understand is why this never took off. People know bitcoin through the news, it is not new. In this time Apple Pay has come along nicely but not bitcoin. Bitcoin has gone off on a tulips tangent. This seems at odds wit…

Due to the limited supply of 24 million BTC, Bitcoin is deflationary meaning it will go up in value as more people adopt it. Govt print fiat currency out of thin air to encourage the population to spend on the economy. Bitcoin as the opposit affect as people use it for a store of value and a hedge against fiat currencies.

It's arbitrarily divisible, up to the limit of a float though right? So nominal prices can keep "decreasing" in bitcoin for a long time. Maybe that's just too much work to keep the prices reasonable? Edit: they can't actually be using a float for money though, right? So what is the actual limit of divisibiity?
Post reply on HN