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

211–220 of 258 posts

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#211

Post by miracle2k »

nileshtrivedi wrote: post #147
eridius wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't just spin up your own CoinBase if you don't trust coinbase.com. I mean, it's BitCoin, so you can run your own transactions, but you can't do any of the other stuff CoinBase does. But with Stellar or something based on its consensus protocol, you can run your own node if you want, or more likely, a bunch of public nodes can exist and you can pick the one you trust to work with. For example, if banks decide t…

> you can run your own node if you want, or more likely, a bunch of public nodes can exist and you can pick the one you trust to work with Still not getting it. If I don't trust CoinBase, I can go to any other online wallet that manages my private keys. With some effort, I can even start one myself. If Chase is running such a wallet, I can use them. How is a decentralized protocol not a superset of a "federated" one?

Every node in Ripple or Stellar works with the same global state. You have to trust Coinbase not to run away with your money, but your Stellar node cannot. The consensus system is more like a replacement for proof of work, ensuring that no one double spends.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#212

Post by whiskyant »

wmf wrote: post #71
lumberjack wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

you need "anchors", which are banks or payment processors, to get your money in and out of the system. You also need exchanges for cryptocurrency[1], so why not admit it from day one and build that concept into the system? And maybe it's possible to graft a cryptocurrency onto SCP by using consensus to choose nodes which receive freshly "mined" currency. [1] The mythical closed-loop Bitcoin economy ain't going to hap…

Then why have a decentralized solution at all? Why not just make it like Paypal?

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#213

Post by SmellyGeekBoy »

Cyberdog wrote: post #119
jerdfelt wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if you're trying to imply that Lightning Network is vaporware, but there are currently three implementations that pass the integration tests: https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning https://github.com/ACINQ/eclair https://cdecker.github.io/lightning-integration/

Oh, please. You and the other replier knew what I meant by "implemented."

"Code written and passing integration tests" seems like a pretty typical definition to me..?

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#214

Post by Confiks »

golangnews wrote: post #180
Confiks wrote: post #25

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…

Your argument would be stronger if you didn’t resort to epithets. Bitcoin was designed to be as decentralised as possible. It turns out this has serious downsides and it’s difficult to pursue the sort of financial revolution it aspires to without social revolution. This currency chooses different trade-offs which the creators believe will make it more popular because most people don’t need or want trustless transacti…

If you (re)read the blog post I'm referring to, you'll find that your concerns are very much addressed.

I actually chose to refer to 'feudal security' as coined by Schneier (at least in the context of computer security), because it is such a compelling and balanced approach to the exact same trade-offs you're describing.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#215

Post by dogma1138 »

golangnews wrote: post #177
psergeant wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t believe any assets held in an ISA have any bearing at all on your capital gains allowance.

This is correct, gains in ISAs are tax free and have no impact on cgt allowance. So if cryptocurrencies were a good investment an ISA would be an excellent place to hold them and convert gains to currency you can spend, but I don’t think any isa providers support them.

They don’t have impact unless you sell or cash out.

The same goes for many other assets you pay cgt only when the profit is realized.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#217

Post by DennisP »

garmaine wrote: post #170
DennisP wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the U.S. there's already a small-purchase exclusion for foreign currencies.

Bitcoin is not a currency for tax purposes in the USA.

Right, which is why you can't exclude small transactions now. The bill I mentioned has been introduced to fix that.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#218

Post by dchest »

pwaai wrote: post #138

I'm not sure using Stellar is wise as the majority is owned by a small group of people, much smaller than Bitcoin, which creates conflict of interest and not future SEC proof. on a side rant: So...many...coins...I too have something called BrowserCoin.com but still haven't figured out what problems to solve. Too many people just go implement a pseudo-academic blockchain tech with fancy dials without vetting the probl…

AFAIK, they are using Stellar Consensus Protocol, not Stellar itself. Nobody uses MobileCoin yet.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#219

Post by eternalban »

amscanne wrote: post #164
tylersmith wrote: post #145

Earlier 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.

Exactly. Consensus by brute force. It is a curiously anti-democratic design.

Re: MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike

#220

Post by explainplease »

golangnews wrote: post #180
Confiks wrote: post #25

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…

Your argument would be stronger if you didn’t resort to epithets. Bitcoin was designed to be as decentralised as possible. It turns out this has serious downsides and it’s difficult to pursue the sort of financial revolution it aspires to without social revolution. This currency chooses different trade-offs which the creators believe will make it more popular because most people don’t need or want trustless transacti…

> Your argument would be stronger if you didn’t resort to epithets.

No, an argument is strong or weak regardless of whether you like the words used to express it.

Post reply on HN