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

MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 258 posts

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#81

Post by otoburb »

lumberjack wrote: post #63
espadrine wrote: post #47

Using Stellar’s Federated Byzantine Agreement as a basis for consensus is a solid foundation. David Mazières’ paper[0] displays strong insights and proofs into the structure of byzantine systems with open membership. [0]: https://www.stellar.org/papers/stellar-consensus-protocol.pd... I wonder where the code for MobileCoin is, or when it will get open-sourced. All GitHub yields currently is this clearly non-affiliate…

I'm not sure I understand correctly, but from what I got, Stellar is a distributed ledger, but not a currency. There are no coins as such. But the upside is that the consensus is reached without a taxing algorithm. Everyone can run a node, but the whole system is not itself decentralised, because you need "anchors", which are banks or payment processors, to get your money in and out of the system. So then, what is th…

>>Stellar is a distributed ledger, but not a currency. There are no coins as such.

From the Stellar FAQ[1]: "Lumens are the native asset of the Stellar network.

Native means that lumens are built into the network. Asset is how the network refers to an item of value that is stored on the ledger.

One lumen is a unit of digital currency, like a bitcoin.

While you can’t hold a lumen in your hand, they are essential to the Stellar network—they contribute to the ability to move money around the world and to conduct transactions between different currencies quickly and securely."

[1] https://www.stellar.org/lumens/

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#82

Post by wmf »

dustdrops wrote: post #77

The title here says "A new Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike." But the article describes his involvement as "Marlinspike has been working on as a technical advisor." Those two descriptions sound different.

That's just "meritocracy" in action. The founder of a project gets all the credit for it, and when there are multiple founders the most famous one gets all the credit.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#83

Post by CryptoPunk »

bkolobara wrote: post #76
CryptoPunk wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stellar is not decentralized. It is federated, meaning a number of trusted third parties act as the intermediary, and eventually, will become the gatekeepers as governments deputize them to enforce their respective laws (e.g. capital controls in China).

Like if 90% of mining power owned by 2 companies makes something more decentralised. I would argue that the Stellar Consensus Protocol is more resilient to centralisation than any proof of work one.

Manufacturing GPUs doesn't give a company control over how the buyers use the GPUs. GPUs are by market necessity general-purpose. And all of the full nodes in a decentralized cryptocurrency network like Ethereum will validate the blocks generated by the miners.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#84

Post by JepZ »

Wow, what an impressive move.

I don't trust Moxie ever since he argued that Signal will not be a decentralized network due to the technological complexity (just BS as Matrix, XMPP and other have shown). While I suspected that he had other plans in mind, I didn't see that coming.

Using your wide spread chat app to deploy a global payment system. Just wow. If he will pull that off, Elon Musk gets competition for the title 'Innovator of the Century'.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#85

Post by jimmies »

espadrine wrote: post #47

Using Stellar’s Federated Byzantine Agreement as a basis for consensus is a solid foundation. David Mazières’ paper[0] displays strong insights and proofs into the structure of byzantine systems with open membership. [0]: https://www.stellar.org/papers/stellar-consensus-protocol.pd... I wonder where the code for MobileCoin is, or when it will get open-sourced. All GitHub yields currently is this clearly non-affiliate…

In no time in history do I find so rewarding reading and understanding crazy papers like right now. I wish I had the balls to actually read and understand the bitcoin years ago. Even if this thing becomes nothing, this is a bubble, I don't care. The fact that there are things that rival fiat money makes me so glad that I'm alive today :)

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#86

Post by highd »

wmf wrote: post #80
kang wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The hypothetically optimal crypto system would be cheaper for merchants Incorrect. Decentralization is always more expensive and slower than centralized system(both hypothetically optimal) due to extra sync cost.

You're mixing cost and price. Let's say the cost of a Visa transaction is 0.1% and the price is 2.5% while the cost and price of a MobileCoin transaction are 0.2%. It costs more but it's still cheaper for merchants.

Cash is cheaper for merchants, but people have only continued to use credit cards more. Further, if crypto becomes attractive from a cost perspective Visa will just be forced to bring down fees and stay competitive. It's pretty near impossible to imagine crypto with costs less than Visa's database.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#87

Post by dha10_11 »

https://us.teamblind.com/article/ama-round-2-i-manage-a-mult... I think this post about managing a multi-million crypto portfolio can really relate. I think it still is difficult for the average person to understand, but this is a really great discussion going on.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#88

Post by knicholes »

highd wrote: post #86
wmf wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're mixing cost and price. Let's say the cost of a Visa transaction is 0.1% and the price is 2.5% while the cost and price of a MobileCoin transaction are 0.2%. It costs more but it's still cheaper for merchants.

Cash is cheaper for merchants, but people have only continued to use credit cards more. Further, if crypto becomes attractive from a cost perspective Visa will just be forced to bring down fees and stay competitive. It's pretty near impossible to imagine crypto with costs less than Visa's database.

A wire transfer fee to China would cost me ~$45. Sending it in bitcoin would cost ~$17.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#89

Post by dogma1138 »

DennisP wrote: post #73
superquest wrote: post #4

> "Nobody actually transacts in cryptocurrency," Goldbard says. "So making something that people can actually use is our first goal. And then we want to find additional ways that people can implement it over time. But initially all we want is to make it so people can actually complete transactions." Amen. Too few projects have this focus.

On reason, in the U.S. at least, is that you're supposed to pay capital gains on every little bit you spend. There's a bill in Congress right now to exclude crypto transactions under $600 from capital gains, which would be a big help. Even if you do want to hold long term, you could just replenish what you spend along the way, if it weren't a tax reporting nightmare.

You also do so in the UK and virtually every other country I can think off.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#90

Post by snowwrestler »

lumberjack wrote: post #66
superquest wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't you get rich building it? I doubt one would get rich as Bitcoin creators, but one could still make a killing .... Edit: And this stands to reason. We're relatively later in the game, and so new contributions are less fundamental by definition.

> Why can't you get rich building it? Because it defeats the point. There is no "coin" that will exponentially appreciate in value, making you a billionaire. There is also no centralisation, so you cannot be the owner of the payment system in the same way that Paypal or Visa are. At best you can be the Linus Torvalds of your payment system non-profit. Which would be a good gig in itself. But that comes with lots of h…

To build on this comment, the purpose of a currency is to facilitate the transaction of value, not to store value.

If an instrument stores value, it's an asset, not currency. One can of course transact business with assets, but it's a lot more complicated because you have to agree to a valuation. And without a currency, how do you measure that?

Plus, the incentives for assets and currencies are opposed. Currency exists to be spent, but if an asset is appreciating, you'll want to hold it, not trade it.

Bitcoin was advertised as a currency but it's acting like an asset. (And it's regulated like an asset.)

If you create a new class of asset, you can buy in early, hold on, and get rich on appreciation.

But if you invent a new currency? It's like inventing the inch. Even if everyone uses it, that doesn't give you any more length of your own.

Post reply on HN