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

Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 226 posts

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#151

Post by l8again »

I honestly thought the author was trolling us (until I read the comments). There are so many holes in his example of ebook transaction. Here's just the two points he made that were the most egregious to me:

>> and that the book — rather than some other file, or nothing at all — will actually arrive

Really? Ever heard of checksums - its used all over the place. And if we weren't able to trust it, I guarantee you that blockchain tech is not the only thing that will break.

>> It’s a complicated way to buy a book! It’s not trustless, you’re trusting in the software (and your ability to defend yourself in a software-driven world), instead of trusting other people

It's like arguing with my grandma about evolution. "But you are trusting the scientists!!". I don't know where to begin.

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#152

Post by tptacek »

mr_spothawk wrote: post #127
tptacek wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a lot easier to avoid paying a fee on Venmo than it is to use a cryptocurrency to send money to someone: just don't use a credit card.

this is absolutely untrue. Venmo requires a bank account, and presumably some proof of citizenship, to have been setup far ahead of the point at which "money" goes into or comes out of Venmo.

Gajillions of people send money to each other on Venmo, to the point where my parents know what it is. You can't say that about Bitcoin. QED.

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#153

Post by wk2jkhkjdfglsl »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #24
45h34jh53k4j wrote: post #2

No coiners. Its fine, we will listen to them protest for years and years, telling us it cant work, it isn't a real solution, etc, while we invent the future. This internet thing will never take off, you need a box that screeches, connected to your phone all day long! I can't even get faxes while im 'online'. Pointless.

The internet was consistently useful year after year, and more so over time. Bitcoin has been around for almost a decade and has pivoted from being a decentralized currency to being a quasi-decentralized store of value amidst a classic speculative investment bubble. It has actually gotten increasingly less useful over time.

Yet, in general, more valuable, thus increasing in usefulness over time. 1 bitcoin in 2018 is objectively more useful than a 2010 bitcoin, as it has more buying power.

So I would argue that any deflationary cryptocurrency will more likely be more useful over time as it has increased buying power. (But not necessarily value!)

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#154

Post by gtrubetskoy »

simias wrote: post #101
gtrubetskoy wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> HashCash, ECC, Merkle trees etc... Just combined together in a clever way to create something that's more than the sum of their parts. No, not really. The way proof-of-work is used is nothing like in HashCash (more generally known as a time lock puzzle ), the solution to a decentralized clock is the one piece that is new. In the paper it is referred to as "Timestamp Server". Everything else is previously known tech…

What I meant is that this decentralized clock is an emergent property from the use of these various algorithms. The code is actually HashCash, just used in a way that creates a new side-effect. The Time Server is not an algorithm, it's a side effect. I agree that it's a bit subjective though.

Well - the way you describe it is it's like Satoshi used a bread knife to cut something other than bread, but it's more like he used it as an antenna. He is exploiting a feature of HashCash that Adam Back (who invented it) didn't even know existed. It has to do with multiple participants solving the same timelock puzzle in parallel and some very interesting stuff happens then - you should read the link I posted (I take it you have not read it), I think it does a fair job of explaining how incredibly clever it is.

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#155

Post by nokcha »

spookthesunset wrote: post #93
cowpig wrote: post #68

> Venmo is a free service to transfer dollars, and bitcoin transfers are not free Venmo is not free. There's a cost, it's just hiding. > Blockchain-based trustworthiness falls apart in practice... The particular brand of trustworthiness the author is arguing against is indeed a myth, but that doesn't mean blockchain is "crappy technology" or "a bad vision for the future" Blockchain adds a new thing to the world: digi…

> digital property that cannot be reproduced for free. Sure, all through the magic of using a medium sized country's worth of electricity.... > Smart contracts add another new thing to the world: the ability to build immutable software that interacts directly with the financial system. "Immutable" as in "immutable up until the folks at the top decide to alter history to benefit themselves financially". See also - Eth…

>"Immutable" as in "immutable up until the folks at the top decide to alter history to benefit themselves financially". See also - Ethereum & The DAO.

You seem to be implying that the Ethereum Foundation had the ability to unilaterally alter the blockchain for everybody. But that's not really true. While anyone can hard-fork the blockchain, that doesn't mean that anybody else is going to accept the new fork. In fact, a bunch of people revolted against the Ethereum Foundation's decision and kept the old blockchain alive as a Ethereum Classic. Ultimately, it was the market that decided to recognize the Ethereum Foundation's fork as the winner.

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#156

Post by golergka »

emodendroket wrote: post #128
mpfundstein wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin solves a problem. Ever used a dark web market. Good luck with Paypal

If the problem it solves is "I need a way to buy illegal drugs, weapons, and fake IDs while evading the police," I think you can see obvious problems to mass-market adoption. I also wonder whether a system with a permanent, publicly accessible ledger is truly ideal for this application.

It's already massively adopted in this field, like it or not. Buying drugs with bitcoin is mainstream; no drug dealer takes cash now.

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#157

Post by tCfD »

clarkmoody wrote: post #145
aalleavitch wrote: post #110

In many ways, blockchain tech is the stupidest thing that has ever existed. It is a colossal monument to the inefficiency of human behavior. You are literally throwing energy and immensely valuable computation time out of a window simply because people can't trust each other. It is a massive sink for the destructively self-interested behavior of mankind. The problems that blockchains are trying to solve are not inher…

> We need to fix human beings. As a non-utopian, I understand that human beings cannot be "fixed." Thus, we must create systems that cannot be corrupted by humans. Creating a money outside of state control may be the smartest thing that humanity ever does. We'll need maybe a century to see how it plays out. That said, most of the blockchain projects out there are scams. If your project can run on a centralized databa…

> creating money outside state control

Which if successful enough to constitute a counterweight with enough force to push back against "the state" will yield merely... another state, but conveniently one with "Our Guys" in control of all the economic leverage.

You call yourself non utopian, yet Bitcoin - a tool to deleverage the state by sapping its power of taxation - is a nakedly self serving utopian project. And yet tax rent (in the form of landowner's premiums like mining rewards and tx fees, and soon by lightning network channel brokering fees, not to mention off chain but indispensable infrastructural scaffolding like exchange fees and fiat ramps) doesn't just disappear, it merely flows to the pockets of a different cabal composed of early adopters and wealthy latecomers who were able to buy large tracts of influence and infrastructure in bitcoinland.

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#158

Post by vageli »

spookthesunset wrote: post #93
cowpig wrote: post #68

> Venmo is a free service to transfer dollars, and bitcoin transfers are not free Venmo is not free. There's a cost, it's just hiding. > Blockchain-based trustworthiness falls apart in practice... The particular brand of trustworthiness the author is arguing against is indeed a myth, but that doesn't mean blockchain is "crappy technology" or "a bad vision for the future" Blockchain adds a new thing to the world: digi…

> digital property that cannot be reproduced for free. Sure, all through the magic of using a medium sized country's worth of electricity.... > Smart contracts add another new thing to the world: the ability to build immutable software that interacts directly with the financial system. "Immutable" as in "immutable up until the folks at the top decide to alter history to benefit themselves financially". See also - Eth…

> Bitcoin is more than 10 years old. It is a mature tech that is still in search of a problem.

I don't understand how this can be said with a straight face. Aeronautics, ballistics, these are examples of mature tech. I can't think of a single example of technology that was considered mature after a mere ten years.

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#159

Post by hudon »

klibertp wrote: post #148
aalleavitch wrote: post #110

In many ways, blockchain tech is the stupidest thing that has ever existed. It is a colossal monument to the inefficiency of human behavior. You are literally throwing energy and immensely valuable computation time out of a window simply because people can't trust each other. It is a massive sink for the destructively self-interested behavior of mankind. The problems that blockchains are trying to solve are not inher…

> We need to fix human beings. I admire your optimism. Meanwhile, we have quite a few millennia of trying and failing in this, so I'd rather try fixing the system instead. > Meanwhile, imagine if every GPU used for mining right now was being used for training neural nets instead With what, MNIST? For the billionth time? ML and the current incarnation of AI don't need more CPUs, they need more data and better algorith…

> we have quite a few millennia of trying and failing in [fixing human beings]

Actually, research is showing that brutality is declining and empathy is on the rise [0]. We may be living in the most peaceable times in history. Maybe the optimism is warranted?

[0] https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424053111904106704576583...

Re: Systems built on trust, norms, and institutions function better than blockchain

#160

Post by spookthesunset »

nokcha wrote: post #155
spookthesunset wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> digital property that cannot be reproduced for free. Sure, all through the magic of using a medium sized country's worth of electricity.... > Smart contracts add another new thing to the world: the ability to build immutable software that interacts directly with the financial system. "Immutable" as in "immutable up until the folks at the top decide to alter history to benefit themselves financially". See also - Eth…

>"Immutable" as in "immutable up until the folks at the top decide to alter history to benefit themselves financially". See also - Ethereum & The DAO. You seem to be implying that the Ethereum Foundation had the ability to unilaterally alter the blockchain for everybody. But that's not really true. While anyone can hard-fork the blockchain, that doesn't mean that anybody else is going to accept the new fork. In fact,…

> Ultimately, it was the market that decided to recognize the Ethereum Foundation's fork as the winner.

So instead of a carefully designed system of law that has thousands of years of evolution to get where it is today, we'll just regress back to what is basically mob rule?

Post reply on HN