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

Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

theoutline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 128 posts

Re: Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

#91

Post by [deleted] »

netsharc wrote: post #72
diego_moita wrote: post #49

The best criticism I've seen on Bitcoin is, by far, Paul Krugman's "Bitcoin is Evil" [1]. In essence: Bitcoin doesn't have "monetary policy" to regulate it's supply. That's why it is prone to speculative bubbles and very dangerous as money. [1] https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/28/bitcoin-is-evil...

You gotta love that the 2 responders to Krugman is to call him an idiot who's been wrong many times, and a Kardashian. But I'll just reply to your post because I don't feel like engaging with the brainwashed.

[deleted]

Re: Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

#92

Post by 0xf8 »

ordinaryradical wrote: post #50
cryptodogemoon wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why bother attempting to patch on layers on top of BTC when it's already centralized with ASIC farms? Start fresh. Early adopters of BTC are trying to con new users into buying coins produced for minimal capital/computational work. The flaw in BTC is inherent to the malicious minting algorithm designed to harm new users. There's other cryptocurrencies who are far out pacing the BTC core team.

Which currencies do you see as addressing these problems in a technically proven way?

Ethereum (which definitely has its own fair share of issues) recently hit its all time high in daily transactions, which incidentally is more transactions than all other existing decentralized blockchains put together--a set containing Bitcoin.

Re: Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

#93

Post by t0mbstone »

QML wrote: post #66
pkulak wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one who owns BTC wants it used for transactions. They want it to be an investment and go up forever, so they'll never go with a fork that allows it. It's like home owners in a neighborhood locking out new construction so their own homes raise in value.

But that was the original goal of Bitcoin — the paper states specifically transaxtions. I personally found it interesting when I bought shoes over Overstock via BTC earlier this year; only problem was my phone didn’t have a default QR scanner.

The original goal was to have transaction fees cover network processing costs, but anyone who does the math can quickly see that the number of transactions allowed by the current block size is an issue, and prevents bitcoin from scaling to visa/mastercard levels of usage.

The reason why this flaw was accepted back then was because "space is cheap", and "we can always make the blocks bigger later".

Basically, it was a known issue all along, and the plan all along was to evolve as needed. It was never intended to be a perfect solution from the get-go.

The problem now, is that people are actively preventing bitcoin from evolving.

Re: Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

#94

Post by nrhk »

owenversteeg wrote: post #62
wereHamster wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal is that there will be fewer BTC transactions once LN becomes widespread, especially if people or institutions open long-lived channels between each other (active for months, years, or even indefinitely). Then you'd only have to hit the BTC blockchain a few times a year, at most, and that's a level of transactions which the BTC blockchain can easily handle, even if the whole world population uses it for every…

Let's say "a few times a year" is once every two and a half months. Everyone who wanted to use Bitcoin would then have to pay about $100 a year to use it at today's rates. That's still ridiculous. And fees have increased mostly because the price increased. If people actually started using Bitcoin, the price would skyrocket and fees would rise even higher.

Some premium credit cards come with annual fees and benefits. $100 a year for the ability to use a censorship resistant, semi-anonymous payment system doesn't sound like a bad deal.

Re: Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

#95

Post by mirimir »

jhiska wrote: post #88
mirimir wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If buying a hamburger cost you $30 in fees on top of the $6 burger, you'd stop using dollars for everyday purchases, too. Or maybe you'd buy a few month's worth of burgers.

But then they'd spoil!

I meant as subscriptions.

Re: Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

#96

Post by coryl »

wott wrote: post #60
coryl wrote: post #3

The author seems to expect that the changes created by cryptocurrency should be visible immediately. It is a lack of patience, and lack of understanding that changing deeply rooted systems and behaviors takes time. People have never managed software where if you lost your "password", your money was gone forever. They never had to keep a 12-24 word recovery phrase. They've never sent money to addresses that look like…

> People have never managed software where if you lost your "password", your money was gone forever. They never had to keep a 12-24 word recovery phrase. They've never sent money to addresses that look like hash strings. Their money value was never this volatile (in some countries anyway) and never this complicated to use (understanding and waiting for block confirmations, looking up transactions in the blockchain ex…

I doubt that blockchain was invented by a fresh out of school computer science graduate. The breadth and depth of technical complexity (even if just the white paper) that blockchain covers requires time and experience to accumulate.

Re: Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

#98

Post by daddosi »

pkulak wrote: post #18
pc2g4d wrote: post #14

The high transaction fees are forcing Bitcoin in this direction. If buying a hamburger cost you $30 in fees on top of the $6 burger, you'd stop using dollars for everyday purchases, too. Seems we're stuck in this situation so long as the block size remains where it is. That artificially reduces the supply of transactions, forcing the price up. No matter how many miners there are competing for those transaction fees,…

No one who owns BTC wants it used for transactions. They want it to be an investment and go up forever, so they'll never go with a fork that allows it. It's like home owners in a neighborhood locking out new construction so their own homes raise in value.

It realy seems the libertarian utopia story the way non libertarians envision it.

The main joke is satosi's people skills. A coin needs a community to launch it. It wil forever be asociated with it. Ponzi coin wil stay ponzi coin, porn coin wil stay porn coin etc

Re: Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

#99

Post by Balgair »

dawhizkid wrote: post #55
pkulak wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one who owns BTC wants it used for transactions. They want it to be an investment and go up forever, so they'll never go with a fork that allows it. It's like home owners in a neighborhood locking out new construction so their own homes raise in value.

Of course Bitcoin is the digital crypto analogy for SF Bay Area NIMBYism :)

Christ, that's some deep snark!

Re: Bitcoin is none of the things it was supposed to be

#100

Post by johnny22 »

DINKDINK wrote: post #64
diego_moita wrote: post #49

The best criticism I've seen on Bitcoin is, by far, Paul Krugman's "Bitcoin is Evil" [1]. In essence: Bitcoin doesn't have "monetary policy" to regulate it's supply. That's why it is prone to speculative bubbles and very dangerous as money. [1] https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/28/bitcoin-is-evil...

> Bitcoin doesn't have "monetary policy" to regulate it's supply Actually it has the best monetary policy: it's supply is inherently regulated and prescribed: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply . Intellectual-yet-idiot Krugman is a Kardashian of the economic's world. Popular because he is popular, nothing more. "Economists" should take a note from the medical profession: First do no harm. AKA unless there i…

You can't just meme your way through a conversation. This just reads you're spouting other people's words here without actually understanding them.
Post reply on HN