Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not about if we want it. If it's more efficient, it's bound to replace the decentralized one.
Why would decentralized Uber be more efficient?
There's no middleman.
Introducing A16Z Crypto
211–220 of 312 posts
Re: Introducing A16Z Crypto
#212a16z is just responding to market demand. Regardless of your personal beliefs in crypto, investors have made a killing, and are convinced that more nuggets must be out there in those hills... If you can raise a $300M fund and charge 2%/yr to maintain it, that's $6M worth of headcount luxuriously plugging away up on Sand Hill Road.
Keep in mind: Venture Capitalists mostly invest other people's money, and charge a great deal to take care of it in the mean time.
Re: Introducing A16Z Crypto
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The reality is is that Blockchain is no longer new. Compare it to iPhone - they both roughly came out at the same time, yet we're still having the same conversations - "What problem does Blockchain solve" - while the iPhone found its place in the market. I still do not understand what kind of problem the iPhone solves (seriously!), while I can imagine quite well what kind of problem Bitcoin attempted to solve when…
While I'm not certain I could state what problem iPhone (or smartphones in general) solves, it's definitely proven market fit. Bitcoin has not.
> While I'm not certain I could state what problem iPhone (or smartphones in general) solves, it's definitely proven market fit.
Being a market fit does not mean that it solves a problem. To me, this is only one important reason (though IMHO a more safe one to bet on) among many, why aroduct is successful in the market.
As I wrote: Bitcoin attempted to solve a problem that seemed (and in my opinion was) very important at the time when it came out (this also IMHO explains the initial hype). The problem simply has become a lot less important and urgent for most people in our days.
Re: Introducing A16Z Crypto
#214Trust isn't really a feature of blockchains, nor is it a byproduct (or "software primitive") of blockchains. Bitcoin was designed to avoid a need for trust, so it really just steps around the issue of trust in a distributed ledger. This is a critical misunderstanding that a lot of people are still preaching and perpetuating. You can't really build systems that rely on trust on top of a blockchain, and those who have…
> Trust isn't really a feature of blockchains, nor is it a byproduct (or "software primitive") of blockchains. Bitcoin was designed to avoid a need for trust, so it really just steps around the issue of trust in a distributed ledger. I'm not sure what you're saying here. BTC wasn't designed to avoid the need for trust. It was designed to incentivize the network to act in a way such that you can trust it. That's how i…
Bitcoin was indeed designed to avoid the need for trust:
"What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust,
allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted
third party." [1]
To your point, in a broad sense the Bitcoin network relies on an inherent kind of "trust" that a certain set of economic assumptions and cryptographic algorithms will continue to function as designed.
If you want to equate that with the trust given to financial institutions and governments that handle most of the world's money, I'm not going to stop you; I just happen to think those are very different things. If someone (or a group of people) is able to pull off a 51% attack on Bitcoin (or if a serious flaw in the cryptographic algorithm gets discovered), there's a very high likelihood that everyone will know about it, and it will be fixed quickly. On the other hand, when the federal reserve decides to print another pile of cash, very few people know about it until they start noticing their grocery bill increasing. And even when you know there's a problem with the way our money is being manipulated, there's really not a lot you or anyone can do about it.
Re: Introducing A16Z Crypto
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Trust isn't really a feature of blockchains, nor is it a byproduct (or "software primitive") of blockchains. Bitcoin was designed to avoid a need for trust, so it really just steps around the issue of trust in a distributed ledger. I'm not sure what you're saying here. BTC wasn't designed to avoid the need for trust. It was designed to incentivize the network to act in a way such that you can trust it. That's how i…
Bitcoin was indeed designed to avoid the need for trust: "What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party." [1] To your point, in a broad sense the Bitcoin network relies on an inherent kind of "trust" that a certain set of economic assumptions and cryptographi…
I'm not equating government trust and blockchain trust in the strict sense. I'm saying they're both forms of trust.
You're saying trust isn't a feature of the blockchain, seemingly based on the fact that users no longer have to trust central authorities. But the only reason this is possible is because users can trust the blockchain instead. So how is trust not a feature?
Re: Introducing A16Z Crypto
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best thing I've seen blockchains used for, besides currency, is as an integration platform for a non-centralized supply chain. There's really no money in it, since there aren't any gatekeepers, but that's sort of the point. The idea is that the farmer picks his carrots, puts them in a box and sends them off to the carrot juice guy. When he does this he puts a upc code on the side of the carrot box and then puts t…
This is solvable without blockchain though. Supply chain tracking already happens at the moment without Blockchain.
The blockchain solves the problem of trust. Without the blockchain, you need to trust some monopolistic middle-man that became monopolistic because he was the winner in the 'race of acquiring trust' from its consumers.
With a blockchain to track phisical goods, any third-party can consult or print a new transaction into the blockchain, it we wont need to deposit our faith in a company or a government.
We managed to solve the problem of trust, the best way we could, with the tools we had as a society, but if you analize all the paperwork, the bureocracy, the taxes and time taken to make the same system work in the classical way, there's a clear advantage in the new way od doing things.
Re: Introducing A16Z Crypto
#217The skepticism of blockchain technology is borne out of a lack of specific problems it solves. Which happens to also be the bedrock of the conventional startup wisdom -- value derived from solving a problem or exploiting an opportunity. So much of the blockchain hype is focused purely on the technology and the valuation of the tokens / coins. Not the problem it solves. It's distributed trust. That's the problem it so…
The problems of trust that blockchain aims to solve are currently solved by the banks, the state and legal systems. Our society is built on this enormous system of trust that is backed by hard power (threat to hardship, violence and coercion) and if these systems collapse, then blockchains will suddenly be extremely valuable.
Blockchains in theory are much more efficient and than governments, so this is what people are betting on, without putting it in so many words.
If you think of it, governance is one the biggest monopolies out there and some competition might not be a bad idea for people with large amount of assets.
Re: Introducing A16Z Crypto
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
Solve an actual, real life problem. All I see are Long Island Ice Tea Blockchain Corp. and Walmat saying that they're using blockchain to help their supply chain (whatever that means). The reality is is that Blockchain is no longer new. Compare it to iPhone - they both roughly came out at the same time, yet we're still having the same conversations - "What problem does Blockchain solve" - while the iPhone found its p…
> The reality is is that Blockchain is no longer new. Compare it to iPhone - they both roughly came out at the same time, yet we're still having the same conversations - "What problem does Blockchain solve" - while the iPhone found its place in the market. I still do not understand what kind of problem the iPhone solves (seriously!), while I can imagine quite well what kind of problem Bitcoin attempted to solve when…
Smartphones: "I want to search for something on the Internet when I'm not at home." It's a very simple problem statement, it's well solved by a smartphone, and it's a far superior solution than the pre-existing one, which was to find an Internet cafe or free wifi hotspot. This is borne out by smart phone adoption worldwide.
Meanwhile, bitcoin was never better than the existing alternatives of barter and foreign currency for dealing with a failing central currency. It's not got substantial traction as an electronic currency.
Bitcoin does solve one problem: "how can I rake money in from suckers when I'm providing them with nothing in return". It does this well. Tremendous amounts of money are going from "investors" to miners and people at the top of the pyramid. This can only continue so long as there's a growing base of new money coming in - but nothing of value is coming out, just the promise of more coming in later.
My opinion is that Bitcoin was originally a political statement or thought experiment in crypto-anarchy, with a poorly thought out economic model that actively discourages its use as a coin, and history continues to reinforce that opinion.
Re: Introducing A16Z Crypto
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, those aren't real problems either. Problems are experienced by humans. Humans willing to pay money for solutions. Actual problems are things like "I want to buy this candy bar," or "I want to fly to New York in August and I need to pay for the ticket." Those are problems Bitcoin, as "a purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash" [1], was intended to solve. It didn't. As far as I can tell, the main problems bl…
"I would like to pay/donate to an organization even though no major credit card will let me."
Thanks. That's a plausible hypothetical. Could you name an organization like that? One that you are eager to donate to? How many people would like to donate to it? What's the total payment volume per year?
The only organization I can think of that might be in that category is Wikileaks. But they take both credit cards and Paypal, so they don't qualify. Maybe Hamas or Al Qaeda? Except that those are illegal to donate to, so the market is not going to be large.
Re: Introducing A16Z Crypto
#220The skepticism of blockchain technology is borne out of a lack of specific problems it solves. Which happens to also be the bedrock of the conventional startup wisdom -- value derived from solving a problem or exploiting an opportunity. So much of the blockchain hype is focused purely on the technology and the valuation of the tokens / coins. Not the problem it solves. It's distributed trust. That's the problem it so…
> It's distributed trust. That's the problem it solves
I don't know that to be true exactly. I don't think that distributed trust is a problem really. I also don't think that blockchain itself actually solves for it. From what I can tell, and I may be naive here, with bitcoin for example two people enter into an agreement and a transaction is made and I guess the blockchain agrees to it and commits it to the chain through magic (hashing). But the trust is put in the wrong place I think, should the network have trusted the transaction was correct? I suppose bitcoin has keys that attempt to ensure ownership of the coins, but I don't think that is a blockchain thing precisely. I'm just rambling... I'd like to hear more about why you think blockchains solve for distributed trust.. also why is distributed trust a problem to begin with.