To repeat an earlier comment, this scheme encourages a centralization of trust into a private key managed by processor manufacturers. You might say that by integrating SGX mechanisms into your security model, you create a set of 'feudal lords' [1] who can wield their power over you. A manufacturer may 'legitimately' establish an enclave in your most trusted hardware which you may not audit or even measure. And if tha…
MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike
161–170 of 258 posts
Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike
#162Now everyone is inventing a new breed of digital turnips (not forgetting to secure a middle man position for themselves) as if this is anything but hype. My block-chain based turnips are better than yours.
Laws of economics are bound by the laws of physics. It is merely the principle of energy efficiency at work and related medium of exchange and social constructs. If something grows out of nothing it is not economics anymore. It is something else. Mass hysteria. Social momentum. Lifecicle of a meme. Whatever it is.
Crypto currencies to finance are what cat pictures are to the internet. One could monetize can I haz hamburger meme, but there is nothing substantial behind it. So are crypto currencies.
Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike
#163Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing revolutionary about distributed consensus. It was the 2008 financial crisis that brought the anti-banking crowd into frenzy, seeing all sorts of claimed benefits in using this sort of thing for money. They would have been goldbugs or tulip collectors under other circumstances. Or do you mean the revolutionary scamming techniques never seen before? /s
Trustless Byzantine fault tolerant decentralized consensus as long as < 50% of participants are not acting in concert. That _is_ revolutionary.
Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still think it's an interesting approach. If you want to be more efficient and less wasteful than Bitcoin, at some point trust has to come into play. And reducing your trust to the manufacturers of secure enclaves (whose products can also be audited to a degree) is surely an improvement still, even if it doesn't have the radical threat model of conventional cryptocurrencies (which inevitably run into scaling proble…
> From centralized exchanges, to centralized mining cartels, what does something like Bitcoin have left to offer? I'd say you're being overdramatic here. Mining is still decentralised and if there are any mining cartels, they haven't abused their position yet. It's still possible to buy, sell and spend Bitcoin peer to peer as well.
Wait what, no.
Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trustless Byzantine fault tolerant decentralized consensus as long as < 50% of participants are not acting in concert. That _is_ revolutionary.
Not consensus, probabilistic consensus. And not 50% of participants, 50% of computing power. Those are critical distinctions.
Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not consensus, probabilistic consensus. And not 50% of participants, 50% of computing power. Those are critical distinctions.
But distinctions that make it no less revolutionary.
Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pseudonymity/anonymity, for one. You can freely transact across borders, for another.
That's really only useful to a small number of users, relative to the overall size of the economy, and many of them are doing things that aren't legal. Not a market I'd probably target if I was going for mass adoption.
Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still think it's an interesting approach. If you want to be more efficient and less wasteful than Bitcoin, at some point trust has to come into play. And reducing your trust to the manufacturers of secure enclaves (whose products can also be audited to a degree) is surely an improvement still, even if it doesn't have the radical threat model of conventional cryptocurrencies (which inevitably run into scaling proble…
> From centralized exchanges, to centralized mining cartels, what does something like Bitcoin have left to offer? I'd say you're being overdramatic here. Mining is still decentralised and if there are any mining cartels, they haven't abused their position yet. It's still possible to buy, sell and spend Bitcoin peer to peer as well.
Controlled by a handful of people is absolutely not decentralized.
They have abused their power. Ghash double spends. Segwit blocked for a year. Bitcoin cash proxy support.