There's no free lunch. These gains come with a tradeoff in security. Bitcoin's proof of work which uses an algorithm and processing power to secure it. Vault/Algorand throws out PoW and replaces it that with a pure "proof of stake" system that requires 2/3rds of the currency's value is held by honest actors. In addition, if the network were ever to go offline, there isn't a deterministic way to get it back online.
A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
171–180 of 839 posts
Re: A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
#172This gets asked often, but in case something changed recently - what are the use cases of cryptocurrencies that are not: - Attempts to side-step the law (however misguided the law is) - Trivial to do using a typical centralized database (e.g. Federal Reserver or VISA) - Tantamount to waiting for a greater fool to buy out the current players I am not looking for answers of the form "well whenever you want to avoid a t…
It's a very good question. There's an interesting argument that the greatest value is not in the ledger, but in a mechanism for reliable, unalterable history: https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2017/05/25/blockchains-never-forg... It's also worth considering that crypto is effectively the greatest experiment the world has ever seen in free banking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_banking . Hypothetically, this could be do…
One could make an argument that Tether is one big experiment in free banking.
Only question is when it will end.
Re: A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
#173Another approach to similar problems is Coda: https://codaprotocol.com .
Coda takes an entirely different cryptographic approach than Algorand. Different layers of solutions.
Re: A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
#174I have long wondered how cryptocurrency fans would answer the question: ‘Would you be happy if the crypto-utopia you bring up happens in the next 10 years, and all value is stored/transacted through a cryptocurrency, but it was a coin that you do not possess now, nor could you transfer any of you current currencies into it?’ Say tomorrow someone releases the one true coin, but no one notices. All other cryptocurrenci…
Yes of course! But it needs to be a proper cryptocurrency. Which means worldwide, feeless, instant transactions.
Re: A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
“First they think you're crazy, then they fight you, then you change the world.” - Elizabeth Holmes
I don't think she is the original author of this quote. Going to share another quote, which I think is relative here - “Those who are crazy enough to think they can change the world usually do.” - Steve Jobs
I feel like the "usually" is pretty important here.
Re: A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outside of what others replied to you with, there is another aspect I find about it, that truly resonates and excites me, despite not being a holder. To me, Bitcoin is also a large experiment where laws and rules are written as open source code, which any1 code fork and run their own version of it, or any1 can submit a proposal for. This is what traditionally legal system with the power of violence used to deal with…
I don't accept this assessment of how Bitcoin's consensus fundamentally works. Yes, anyone can fork the code, but consensus comes only when the miners choose a fork. As far as I can see, there's no significant incentive to mine other than money, so miners want money, so you can persuade them with money. The "consensus" is fundamentally an auction.
yep and therein lies some power. There have been a few wars within bitcoin already. In the real world, people would have died. In the coin world, people just voluntarily chose different pastures.
Re: A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Also why would I trust them, when there is no need to? Because your alternative is to trust the crypto infrastructure, which is far less trustworthy.
But muh decentralization! /s In reality most of the exchanges and sites dealing with crypto were (and probably still are) built by absolute amateurs with no checks and balances on their apps from a security perspective. Its scary as hell that people trust those sites with their actual money.
The recent QuadrigaCX fiasco shows this very clearly. The entire exchange (one of the biggest in Canada) was somehow just running on the encrypted laptop of this one guy, and after he suddenly died in December, there is 250 million Canadian Dollars owed to 100k+ customers that nobody can recover, because the guy with the password is dead.
Re: A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ten MB block size limit lowers the number of transactions that can occur in a single block therefore inflating what miners can charge for a transaction. Increasing the blocksise would require miners to choose to mine a hard fork. See the DAO hack for what can happen with strong governance.
Without a small block size you would end up with a centralization of nodes onto datacenter servers.
We anyway have ended up with a centralization of nodes onto datacenter servers, so it's hard to argue that it would have made a difference.
Re: A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
Escrow situations work like that. You cannot use a bank in an escrow situation, because they are not capable of providing digital proof of payment. Whenever you need to digitally prove payment to a third party, you need to use a payment method that can provide such proof.
How did we manage to ship anything so far? In practice that hasn't been a problem. Or has it?
That is also what horse-and-cart sellers said when they saw the first car. The lack of digital proof of payment is obviously not felt when you don't have it in the first place. The same for multi-signature contracts. The same for atomic swaps. None of these things are needed if they do not exist in the first place. People did not even need a roof over their heads until they built the first one.
Re: A faster, more efficient cryptocurrency
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
Care to elaborate? If this is faster and more efficient, why is it #40 on coinmarketcap.com?
Coinmarketcap is not to be taken as a standard of quality. I mean Bitconnect used to be in the top 10 before it was exposed as a massive ponzi scheme. https://coinmarketcap.com/historical/20171029/ Coinmarketcap just reflects what people invest in at a certain time, it doesn't mean that these investments are rational or are based on highly calculated decisions. A lot of coins in the top 100 are copycats, tokens or ju…
> I mean Bitconnect used to be in the top 10 before it was exposed as a massive ponzi scheme.
and after