There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
1–10 of 164 posts
Re: There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
#2That's kind of the whole point of it - is that you don't need to trust it.
Re: There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
#3That's kind of the whole point of it - is that you don't need to trust it.
Correction: you need to trust the technology, just not the actors.
Re: There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
#4That's kind of the whole point of it - is that you don't need to trust it.
No reason to trust blockchain technology. Just like anything else in life, you have to trust the foundation and the construction material to have a good product.
Re: There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
#5That's kind of the whole point of it - is that you don't need to trust it.
Trust or not, you have to be insanely vigilant not to lose it to bad exchanges, extortionists, theft, automatic software like malware, losing a password, or media that destroys itself.
Those are widespread problems I even had bitcoin destroyed on a failed thumb drive.
Decentralization is a solution without a legally acceptable problem.
Re: There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
#61. yes there is a trust flow when you join a network:
* you need to trust the paper behind the consensus mechanism
* you need to trust the people who have implemented the client, and trust them to maintain it
* you need to trust the TLS connection you use when you download the client. Meaning the whole CA system
* you need to trust your own machine, when running the client
* you need to trust the first peers you connect to when you join the network
* after you're connected to enough peers, you can usually feel safer. But you'll still have some out-of-band comparison to do between your chain and other people's chains.
2. supply-chain with blockchain = scam to me. I'd be interested in hearing about a real use-case, but when you're trying to bridge the gap between reality and the blockchain, then it usually doesn't work well.
3. Here is my mental model of consensus and why it can be useful: we have protocols that work well when everyone is honest. They mostly break when malicious peers start appearing. Consensus is the cryptography field of study that attempts to solve this issue. You need a good chunk of people to be honest when you run such a protocol in a "public" setting. We recently discovered, with bitcoin, that financial incentives work well. So now we have:
* financial incentives can help us make public consensus protocols work
* research brought us good consensus mechanisms that we can use in more private settings
The technology works well when you think of banking. Many banks want to cooperate in the way they exchange money between them, but they don't necessarily trust each other, or their security. So they form a protocol using a consensus mechanism.
Now, a cryptocurrency is exactly the same thing, but in a way where anyone can connect directly to the backbone of these banks' infrastructure. You will necessarily have plenty of issues stemming from that: what if you lose your money, get it stolen, what if the exchange you use get hacked, etc. But the benefits are still pretty awesome: you are not going through a bank, you are directly connected to the system.
Just my 2 cents.
Re: There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
#7That's kind of the whole point of it - is that you don't need to trust it.
The point the author is making is that the "you don't need to trust it" is fundamentally misplaced. You do need to trust the institutions, and builders of, much in the same way you need to trust any business you choose to interact with them. The issue of public blockchain is that I now need to trust code and technology in a system where the events are no longer reversible. We know that code and technology is not perfect. This shifting where the trust is placed, without the recourse of law by peers, is why public blockchain may not make it beyond the great experiment. Now add the incentives and protections for malice... what's a reasonable person to trust in public blockchain
Re: There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
#8I hate blockchain so much and I can’t even exactly say why. Not because of the technology itself. I care about it as much as any other technology. I think it’s because of the sleazy non-tech people that suddenly turned into “experts” raising money for their BC startup, people organizing meetups, becoming “consultants” and of course the whole crypto craze... I really wish it will die soon.
Re: There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
#9That's kind of the whole point of it - is that you don't need to trust it.
Trust or not, you have to be insanely vigilant not to lose it to bad exchanges, extortionists, theft, automatic software like malware, losing a password, or media that destroys itself. Those are widespread problems I even had bitcoin destroyed on a failed thumb drive. Decentralization is a solution without a legally acceptable problem.
> Decentralization is a solution without a legally acceptable problem.
Therein lies the problem—asset forfeiture, genocide, and numerous other horrors have all been legal.
Re: There's No Good Reason to Trust Blockchain Technology
#101. yes there is a trust flow when you join a network: * you need to trust the paper behind the consensus mechanism * you need to trust the people who have implemented the client, and trust them to maintain it * you need to trust the TLS connection you use when you download the client. Meaning the whole CA system * you need to trust your own machine, when running the client * you need to trust the first peers you conn…
I completely agree with this. Why would the average Joe trust the chain you describe more than a Corporation with a physical address and humans to interact with?
What are your thoughts on stuff like the many blockchain real estate related projects? e.g. "tokenized real estate" "100% liquidity" etc etc.