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

211–220 of 337 posts

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#211

Post by fspear »

jondubois wrote: post #146
C14L wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It solves some problems, especially when it comes to networks of shared information where no one actor trust any other single actor. But as usual, as soon as a lot of money is to be made, non-techies get dollar signs in their eyes and --without understanding the tool-- jump in and start using it for everything. It will be very amusing to watch, for sure.

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…

Can you elaborate on the technical/scalability limitations you have seen in some of these coins and how to look out for these?

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#212

Post by joosters »

felipeccastro wrote: post #209
joosters wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing there that is impossible without a blockchain. The steemit website might as well issue its tokens using a simple database. Running it on a blockchain adds nothing except a 'shiny new technology' feel.

The tokens here are essentially altcoins, like ether or bitcoin. How would that be done with a simple, private database?

The steemit coins, as I understand it, have little to no other use (unless 'speculation/gambling' is a use case) so they don't need to be crypto coins at all. Instead they could be magic internet points that are all accounted for and transferable on steemit's website, with options there to buy more or to sell them for cash.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#213

Post by tptacek »

vec wrote: post #202
tptacek wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most coherent pitch for tokens?

...is a sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek dismissal of the fundamental idea. That's about par for the course for intellectual debate around cryptocurrencies of late. To be clear, I don't have a dog in this fight. Tokens may be the Next Big Thing, I don't know. But it'd be really nice to have a full conversation on the topic that didn't either go off the rails or devolve into a political diatribe as soon as I ask a question…

It's sarcastic? Tongue-in-cheek?

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#214

Post by wepple »

api wrote: post #2

Yet so far I still see almost nothing on the block chain (beyond its core currency use case) that is useful outside the domain of block chain stuff. The only exception is things like Sia, and that's not cost or convenience competitive with Amazon S3 or Backblaze. Where is the value here? When I visited this I was expecting to see at least something about building something useful for... something... Building what for…

I opened this link thinking “finally, someone will explain why blockchains are great, with some solid practical examples: ycombinator themselves”

Nope. Still hype and noise.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#215

Post by felipeccastro »

jhwang5 wrote: post #172

In general, it's a red flag to see people promoting some technology or idea without concrete, end to end examples, and circular logic. It's okay for the authors to make speculations, but I am disappointed at their excessive handwaiving in answering just two simple questions. a) Do "dapps" really to use their own tokens instead of USD or even ETH to function? b) How are closed ecosystems that utilize "utility tokens"…

a) they could use ETH, but if you launch your own token you get two advantages:

- funding (ICO) - an economic incentive for attracting early users (give tokens for using your app in the promise that they will be worth more in the future)

b) if a user earns tokens that value over time, that's a huge win: imagine if all the time you spend on apps today, generating valuable data to a few companies, would generate in turn some of these tokens back to you?

Besides, what do you mean by "closed" exactly? The data being on the public blockchain should actually encourage integration by default. For example, several new dapps are being built on top of IPFS for data, using uPort for identity, Aragon for governance, etc.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#217

Post by felipeccastro »

joosters wrote: post #212
felipeccastro wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tokens here are essentially altcoins, like ether or bitcoin. How would that be done with a simple, private database?

The steemit coins, as I understand it, have little to no other use (unless 'speculation/gambling' is a use case) so they don't need to be crypto coins at all. Instead they could be magic internet points that are all accounted for and transferable on steemit's website, with options there to buy more or to sell them for cash.

That’s like saying bitcoin could be a Money table on my personal database. It’s not the same at all. These coins are unique, wont be tampered, work on exchanges, and don’t depend on you trusting the startup that created it.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#218

Post by joosters »

ThomPete wrote: post #180
joosters wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But all your examples are possible (and have been successfully implemented) without a blockchain. So what does the chain add? Besides which, when is turning abundance into scarcity a good thing?

A secondhand market no relying on a centralized player is the goal, someone who cant control what can be sold and resold. That cannot be done without de-centealized network.

The only project that comes somewhat close to that is OpenBazaar, and that is buggy and unwieldy, despite four years of development and millions in funding. The implementation requires a complex mess of software installs (even for potential buyers!), trusted moderators (how exactly do you trust a random unknown username on a pseudo-anonymous market anyway?) and an appalling user experience. The installation page tells me that I shouldn't risk large amounts of money, so even the developers aren't confident in their system.

On top of all that, the 'decentralized' part is a pipedream anyway, there's no other implementation of the marketplace and everyone ends up having to trust thousands of lines of code. Under the hood, there's likely to be some centralized control, since the OpenBazaar investors most likely want to earn some money, which is through commission on sales. If it was actually decentralized, then everyone would be able to run their own version and avoid paying the commission in the first place.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#219

Post by sova »

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…

Absolutely right, the tokens are just a stepping stone to getting the [distributed] app off the ground. It's a great model! If you believe in the utility of something you can fund it very early on and reap great rewards, or at least root great endeavors on.

Re: Building for the Blockchain

#220

Post by Karrot_Kream »

sova wrote: post #219
fragsworth wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Absolutely right, the tokens are just a stepping stone to getting the [distributed] app off the ground. It's a great model! If you believe in the utility of something you can fund it very early on and reap great rewards, or at least root great endeavors on.

How so? Can't you just do the same thing staking Ether instead of yet another ERC20 token?
Post reply on HN