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

Building for the Blockchain

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 337 posts

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#191

Post by ThomPete »

Terr_ wrote: post #187
davesque wrote: post #162

A blockchain ensures that some sequence of agreements was made in a way that everyone can trust. If everyone keeps their secret keys secure and solely in their possession, then no activity can be forged on the network by any significant likelihood. Anywhere this concept has value, a blockchain has value. That's all there is to it. The rest is fairy dust and noise. I don't really follow a lot of the discussion in this…

> A blockchain ensures that some sequence of agreements was made in a way that everyone can trust. [...] The rest is fairy dust and noise. Amen. "Blockchain" is today's fad just like the "nanotech" mania of yesteryear. That doesn't mean there aren't advances and opportunities, but it feels like 90% of the people promoting it can't even give a high-level explanation of why it's a good fit for their use-case. > For exa…

They actually can and fairly well IMO. What seems to be a bigger problem is that people don't want to accept that that has value.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#192

Post by ruiquelhas »

jhwang5 wrote: post #93
rrecuero wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main benefit of blockchain is that it is trustless and censorship-resistant. You don't need to trust any business entities. You can transact with someone in a zero trust environment on the other side of the world

Not sure about censorship-resistance. Bitcoin transactions can be traced back to some identity, especially if the payer's Bitcoins were originally funded with fiat currency that came from the banking system.

That does not say anything about censorship resistance, because it does not mean the transactions can be reversed (on the contrary).

That's a problem of anonymity (or lack thereof).

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#193

Post by xorcist »

kang wrote: post #68

Naval does a much better job of explaining what the tech is about : https://startupboy.com/2014/04/01/the-fifth-protocol/ However, OP nor Naval, really understand the protocol, or wouldn't be supporting non-blockchain things like ethereum (there is nothing that you can do with ethereum but not with git). >One of these developers, Vitalik Buterin, was frustrated by Bitcoin’s immobilism I am amazed at how HN is selling…

Reading old logs may also reveal something about the project Vitalik had before getting involved with Ethereum: Selling access to his quantum computer ... for mining Bitcoins.

Strange how the PR puff pieces around Ethereum never seem to mention this project. Amazing also how the quantum computer seems to disappear as the pre-mined coins were sold off.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#194

Post by [deleted] »

fragsworth wrote: post #182
davesque wrote: post #162

A blockchain ensures that some sequence of agreements was made in a way that everyone can trust. If everyone keeps their secret keys secure and solely in their possession, then no activity can be forged on the network by any significant likelihood. Anywhere this concept has value, a blockchain has value. That's all there is to it. The rest is fairy dust and noise. I don't really follow a lot of the discussion in this…

It seems like in most cases, the tokens are being used as a way for the developers to get funding to implement their project without the bureaucracy and costs of doing a real IPO. That would be fine on its own, but they're almost all pretending this is not the reason for it, and that the token is necessary. This is an obvious lie in nearly every case when you dig into the details. Nearly every dapp that has its own t…

[deleted]

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#195

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

meri_dian wrote: post #168
davesque wrote: post #162

A blockchain ensures that some sequence of agreements was made in a way that everyone can trust. If everyone keeps their secret keys secure and solely in their possession, then no activity can be forged on the network by any significant likelihood. Anywhere this concept has value, a blockchain has value. That's all there is to it. The rest is fairy dust and noise. I don't really follow a lot of the discussion in this…

Well said. Wealth is built through control, while a distributed ledger rejects control by design. Now distributed ledgers have utility, but that does not necessarily mean they will create business value for entrepreneurs and investors. It's almost like how regulation has value in society, but regulation is decidedly not profitable and businesses usually reject it.

> "Wealth is built through control"

Centralised wealth is built through centralized control.

Distributed wealth is built through distributed control.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#197

Post by elmar »

Toine wrote: post #196

Contrarian approach to this article : is there a way to short Bitcoin, and other "cryptocurrencies" ?

yes, just borrow Bitcoin and sell it for fiat and when the repayment is due just buy Bitcoin again, you are basically "short selling" it.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#198

Post by thinkmassive »

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #57
Jasper_ wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't understand is how Ethereum can describe their dapps as "trustless" when all the trust is still centralized in an oracle. This can even happen accidentally, such as with the Mayweather/McGregor smart contract breakage. [0] But now imagine if BoxRec had intentionally reported false results from their website in order to make a lot of money on the bet. People would lose their money, and there would be no re…

You can solve this by using multiple oracles and a stake-based consensus algorithm to de-incentivize malicious reporting.

This is how Vitalik initially described oracles, as far as I know: https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/07/22/ethereum-and-oracles/

The terminology seems to have changed to mean any system that provides external data to ethereum contracts.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#199

Post by ruiquelhas »

CPLX wrote: post #21
0x4f3759df wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you are moving the goalpost. edit: If UPS doesn't count then nothing is going to count.

The guy said it seems interesting in theory but asked where the actual value was. You replied with some theoretical examples. Lots of things are interesting in theory. Bitcoin is about to end its first decade though. Asking where the actual value comes from seems on topic to me.

I don't know about so called blockchain projects like ethereum, but bitcoin has value because it has inelastic demand. There are a lot of underserved people out there that need bitcoin, regardless of its value, in their daily lives because they can't use fiat currency for things like buying quality drugs online, getting rid of ransomware, laundering money, etc.

Hell, if these don't pass the ideological test, just ask someone from Venezuela why do they need bitcoin.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#200

Post by briatx »

matte_black wrote: post #169
jondubois wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I like about Blockchain tech is that non technical people will never be as good or as quick at identifying opportunities as a technical people who can understand the whitepapers and look at the code themselves. For example, some of the coins that have been going up in price recently are complete garbage and it's a matter of time before their technical limitations become apparent to non-technical people. I think…

If this is true then name and shame a few of them (preferably some that we are likely to have heard about). Sick and tired of accusations being thrown out with no skin in the game.

> Sick and tired of accusations being thrown out with no skin in the game.

This is a weak attempt at deflection by those who want to discredit criticism. Anyone who understands this sector and thinks it is a bad investment, will not invest. This doesn't mean their view is somehow incorrect.

As for finding an ICO that hasn't lived up to the hype, throw a dart at the dartboard. How about Tezos, for one.

How about Tron for another, whose white paper was found to have plagiarized from IPFS and/or Filecoin. See: http://www.trustnodes.com/2018/01/08/trons-whitepaper-copied...

Post reply on HN