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

You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

blog.smartdec.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 415 posts

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#351

Post by nootropicat »

simonw wrote: post #340
nootropicat wrote: post #314

The main argument is a logical fallacy: just because some trust is still required doesn't mean there's no value in minimizing it. The land registry argument is the best example of this fallacy >the regulatory authority can make its own record and thus rewrite yours, which means that blockchain doesn’t work. No, the value is precisely the fact that it's the regulatory authority that forcibly changes ownership, and not…

The thing I don't understand about the land registry / stock ownership scenarios is this: If someone hits me with a rubber hose until I give them my private key, do they get to then keep my house?

It would be treated just like a forced transfer would be treated today, depending on the jurisdiction. Which at least in some countries means that you would lose your house if the thief managed to sell it fast enough [1][2].

The control over the house, or majority of it, could be set to require multiple signatures, or require each transfer to have a forced delay.

[1] https://gradestack.com/CA-CPT/Transfer-of-Property/Exception... Sale by a person in possession of goods under a voidable contract

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Goods_Act_1979#Part_II...

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#352

Post by raiyu »

basch wrote: post #194
raiyu wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't see how this happens. How do you verify the work? It works in a purely electric fashion which is what Bitcoin is but you still need someone to verify things in the real world. Audits exist so that third parties can verify the books. Literally in a blockchain you just put in whatever you want how did you verify that that is what happened in the real world?

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/announcing-microsoft-... the participants audit each other real time, one party cant cook its books, if youre all writing one shared book. both parties agreeing to work being done and pressing "this work was done" or a camera watching for the work being done, would be a prerequisite for the task being marked as complete in the system. things like enron/toshiba happen when compan…

Goes against the idea of blockchain. It's for untrusted parties to transact electronically. If you trust someone to review your books and sign off on it then both parties are trusting one another and no need for blockchain.

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#353

Post by arcticbull »

skilgarriff wrote: post #304
arcticbull wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> number is only growing IMO Please cite sources to justify your opinion because every graph I've seen has accepance going down.

I don't have any graphs as like I said it's just my opinion. I'm really only basing it off of 4 things. 1. The general excitement around Lightning Network on Twitter with Jack and tippin.me, as well as this website: https://lightningnetworkstores.com/ 2. Coinbase's reported 48,000 merchants/partners reported here: https://www.coinbase.com/clients?locale=en-US 3. I frequent similar places everyday - 2 out of the 3 pla…

1. LN won’t serve the worlds needs it will take 35 years to open a channel for everyone on earth and another 35 years to close it again, assuming the population doesn’t grow.

2. Coinbase merchants take out fiat like bitpay merchants because their suppliers take real money, and so does the tax man. Holding crypto exposes them to unbelievable forex risk. If they took bitcoin and held it over the last year how on earth would they pay their tax bills? Taxes are due on the face value of the crypto at acquisition.

3. That’s an anecdote.

4. Venezuela is zero sum unless you can trade bolivars for bitcoin with outsiders in which case that’d be better off with dollars by any measure. If you’re buying locally you’re moving the bags around. Real mining equipnent just gets nationalized. It’s not a solution for Venezuela or any other developing nation because you haven’t solved the initial distribution problem.

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#354

Post by AnthonyMouse »

techslave wrote: post #252
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In other words, anything illegal. Not exactly. It's anything for which the legal system is not effective. For example, you can have a perfectly legal contract, but the other party is in a corrupt foreign jurisdiction that would never find in your favor in the event of a breach. Then you can't contract with them because they have no incentive not to breach, without an alternative method of ensuring compliance that d…

> For example, you can have a perfectly legal contract, but the other party is in a corrupt foreign jurisdiction that would never find in your favor in the event of a breach. Then you can't contract with them because they have no incentive not to breach, without an alternative method of ensuring compliance that doesn't rely on their corrupt government. can you give a concrete example? this requires a smart contract d…

> can you give a concrete example? this requires a smart contract does it not? what is an example contract (specifically) where this is useful?

Suppose you make a loan to someone in an untrustworthy jurisdiction. The contract says you provide X amount in Bitcoin today and get paid back with interest in five years.

The borrower is a real estate developer who has a separate contract with a local buyer to purchase the property in five years, so they can use the smart contract for the real estate purchase to commit the portion of the purchase price to you equal to the loan principal plus interest.

If the borrower breaches by not building the property then you still get paid and the dispute is between the developer and the buyer over the separate contract, but they're both local which means the local courts would be fair to them (and if they're not it's still not your problem).

Using an escrow service doesn't work because the chronology of the loan requires you to release the money to them to build the property five years before they receive the money to pay you back with.

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#355

Post by kabacha »

gregschlom wrote: post #33

I've said this several times before on this site but will keep repeating it: there's exactly one use case where the blockchain is a superior (and, in fact, the only) solution: when you can't use contracts and the legal system to ensure trust between the parties. In other words, anything illegal. For any other conceivable use case, a database and a contract between parties are a superior solution. Edit: To clarify wha…

> In other words, anything illegal

You're missing the point where blockchains are much more efficient and trustworthy than a court or government institution would be.

It's pure math versus interpreted law and it's brilliant.

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#356

Post by [deleted] »

kabacha wrote: post #355
gregschlom wrote: post #33

I've said this several times before on this site but will keep repeating it: there's exactly one use case where the blockchain is a superior (and, in fact, the only) solution: when you can't use contracts and the legal system to ensure trust between the parties. In other words, anything illegal. For any other conceivable use case, a database and a contract between parties are a superior solution. Edit: To clarify wha…

> In other words, anything illegal You're missing the point where blockchains are much more efficient and trustworthy than a court or government institution would be. It's pure math versus interpreted law and it's brilliant.

[deleted]

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#357

Post by philliphaydon »

schoen wrote: post #67
melkiaur wrote: post #3

I hate the blockchain hype. I think most uses can be solved by a simple database hosted by a trusted authority. Yet, just reading the first two samples, I already disagree with them. Re the 1st one: it's true only if the transporter doesn't risk anything if the sensor is tampered with. As soon as you introduce strong fines and/or consequences if a validating authority randomly checks your goods and discover some tamp…

In the second case, couldn't Louis Vuitton also host the associated records itself? There are several concepts related to this in other areas: provenance, catalogues raisonnés, serial numbers, title registries, pedigree registries, among others. People who make or who deal in rare or expensive things often adopt some of these mechanisms to help answer questions like: which one is this? is it genuine? who owns it? who…

In China there is a lot of issue with fake milk powder. You can now buy powder which contains a barcode in the container sealed at the factory that you can look up online to Ensure it came from the factory and not a 3rd party counterfeit. Blockchain adds exactly 0 value to this.

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#358

Post by PakG1 »

ip26 wrote: post #272
notahacker wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What does a republic get you that a dictatorship couldn't do more efficiently? We're wayyyy off on a tangent here, but the removal of an unpopular leader from office ...

Nah man, a dictatorship is capable of removing an unpopular leader from office more efficiently than any other form of government. Whether it's likely to or not is a different question!

You're talking about a coup or revolution. If you want to say that, I think the efficiency of a coup or revolution doesn't vary according to the government system that is getting attacked. The efficiency at which such attempts operate are a function of how organized they are.

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#359

Post by PakG1 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #342
perl4ever wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What you're arguing is that a perfect system of government removes the need for any alternative. But we haven't got a perfect system of government." Yeah, but maybe something like bitcoin is a cancer on an imperfect system. If you asked a tumor, maybe it would say, well, the infrastructure of the body I'm living in sucks! There are all these use cases that the immune system and the circulatory system and so on don't…

If you like a cancer analogy, blame the cigarettes, not the tumor. People wouldn't be so interested in Bitcoin if the existing financial system didn't fail so many people. You don't get the cancer without the defects that cause it. It shouldn't be possible to deny someone the ability to send or receive money. It sounds like a good idea (down with the bad guys), until you also push for a cashless society, at which poi…

I get the impression most people in the general population were enamored by bitcoin based on how high and how rapidly its value was climbing, not its features or potential to upend international monetary systems.

Re: You Do Not Need Blockchain: Popular Use Cases and Why They Do Not Work

#360

Post by PakG1 »

matchagaucho wrote: post #316
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In other words, anything illegal. Not exactly. It's anything for which the legal system is not effective. For example, you can have a perfectly legal contract, but the other party is in a corrupt foreign jurisdiction that would never find in your favor in the event of a breach. Then you can't contract with them because they have no incentive not to breach, without an alternative method of ensuring compliance that d…

Escrow services exist for this purpose.

In some ways escrow is safer because blockchain transactions aren't reversible, no? Yeah, the transaction is there for everyone to verify, so everyone can tell the guy cheated someone, but without law enforcement (not necessarily easy across borders), how do you get the guy to honor the contract when he has no honest intent?
Post reply on HN