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

Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 262 posts

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#191

Post by ForHackernews »

DINKDINK wrote: post #175
ForHackernews wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that all of these random tokens are functionally identical from the perspective of most users. If you're claiming there's a hard limit on the number of limited edition funko pop action figures produced, you'd better be able to explain what makes them any different than these other identical clones. It'd be like if counterfeit designer clothes were actually indistinguishable from the "real" ones, and argu…

>all of these random tokens are functionally identical from the perspective of most users. If a clone of Bitcoin is identical to Bitcoin then why does Bitcoin trade 25x the price of a clone? Your argument would cary weight if the protocol and price facets were similar. The market says otherwise.

"why does Bitcoin trade 25x the price of a clone?"

Because humans are stupid, faddish creatures.

The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#192

Post by russdpale »

root_axis wrote: post #143
russdpale wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeh and they all fuckin suck. I wonder why? Its because they compromise on the quixotic properties that make bitcoin valuable.

What is the substantive meaning behind "fuckn suck"? As an example, most exchanges and processors have both BTC and BCH so if you're not a speculator there isn't much functional difference. (I know there are technical differences, but those differences don't change the fact that they are fungible blockchain tokens)

There isn't that much difference from a functional perspective. However, they will never achieve the value of bitcoin because many of them have forsaken the properties that give bitcoin its value.

There is too much argument over which chain will win, imo, its like asking which nation will win- it doesn't have an answer. We are humans, we excel at patchworked cooperation, which is why we have so many nation states and governing systems. There will be more than enough room for users to have many choices when it comes to blockchains for the foreseeable future.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#193

Post by buboard »

ForHackernews wrote: post #154
buboard wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yet it costs me $10 to send $500 to the UK and $39 to send to the US. And even more to receive.

Try http://transferwise.com/ , that's what I usually use.

not available for the kind of businesss payments i want

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#194

Post by bduerst »

root_axis wrote: post #126
bduerst wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conventional wisdom also dictates that it is desirable for Bitcoin to handle more than 7 transactions a second - and yet that problem isn't possible for Bitcoin to solve either. Again, it's an argument from ignorance and gross oversimplification to claim "the future wisdom of the community" will solve problems for bitcoin.

You can equivocate all you like, but accusing me of ignorance doesn't make it so. It's an undeniable fact that it is possible for any of these properties to change and the poster that claimed it was impossible for them to change is wrong. There is no debate here, it's just reality.

I'm not accusing you of ignorance - An argument from ignorance (i.e. argumentum ad ignorantiam) is the name of a known fallacy, which you're making with your claims: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#195

Post by root_axis »

buboard wrote: post #190
root_axis wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/09/50-mi...

Well no, facebook has pretty good security. 50 Mil stolen credentials in 15 years out of what is probably more than ten billion accounts is nothing.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/millions-facebook-user-records-...

I'm guessing your response will be that it wasn't Facebook's fault.

I would also note that there aren't even 10 billion people living on earth, so it sounds like you're just making stuff up.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#196

Post by bduerst »

onion-soup wrote: post #173
root_axis wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So is that a "yes, it's possible" or "no, it's impossible"? "Theoretically it's possible" sounds like it's possible. Saying "here are some examples of things that didn't happen" doesn't prove that they, or anything else, can't happen.

Yes it is possible and it is already done on Bitcoin SV (original bitcoin). Recently 128 MB block were mined as a proof that bitcoin can scale to hundreds of thousands of transactions per second

> Anything is Possible with Bitcoin ᵗᵐ

Just that the network known as Bitcoin can't do that. The block mined just 10 minutes ago was capped at 0.904 MB.

Anyone can mine a gigabyte sized block on their own computer, but that doesn't make it Bitcoin (even when branded as Bitcoin SV).

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#197

Post by wmf »

spir wrote: post #176
runeks wrote: post #25

The reason for Bitcoin’s design is precisely because a centralized/pegged alternative was tried and failed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecash Facebook’s currency is not a successor of Bitcoin, it’s an inferior reincarnation of a failed predecessor.

The Libra whitepaper is supposed to debut this month, so I guess we'll see to what extent it's a true cryptocurrency. I wish Libra was building on an Ethereum scaling technology, like Plasma, but most likely it's a new standalone proof-of-authority blockchain where the validators are the hundred companies investing $10M each. In terms of the sliding scale between centralized and decentralized, Ethereum v1 and Bitcoin…

In practice the Bitcoin and Ethereum hashrate is controlled by far fewer than 100 mining pools.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#198

Post by bduerst »

root_axis wrote: post #128
bduerst wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything is Possible with Bitcoin ᵗᵐ Except something as simple as increasing the block size to allow Bitcoin to process more than 7 transactions a second (Visa handles 42,000 tx/s comparatively). Theoretically it is possible, but the way Bitcoin is designed puts changes in control of people who stand to profit from preventing certain changes (i.e. Tragedy of the commons) like block size increases - and they are bloc…

So is that a "yes, it's possible" or "no, it's impossible"? "Theoretically it's possible" sounds like it's possible. Saying "here are some examples of things that didn't happen" doesn't prove that they, or anything else, can't happen.

It's as possible as a number of rational actors collectively acting irrational. It's economics, not technology - so it's theoretically not impossible, just very highly improbable.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#199

Post by bduerst »

gervase wrote: post #166
bduerst wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those fees with credit and debit card networks aren't arbitrary - they usually cover dispute support, insurance, anti-fraud, and other financial services that consumers have come to expect. If Facebook has fees that are less than industry standard I would be highly suspect of that payment method.

They're not arbitrary, but they're not razor-thin, either. If we take a quick look at profit margins (net income over revenue) for 2017 as a proxy for fees relative to service costs, Visa was something like 36%, which is pretty good (for context, Google's is ~22%, Apple's is also ~22%, Citigroup is ~25%, Mastercard ~31%, Paypal ~13%, Facebook is just under 40%). It would definitely be a big shift from the "support" t…

What these financial conglomerate accountants report on their SEC filings are not the same margins that they have on payment processing. For example, much of that margin could be on interest for credit debt or Adwords CPC. It's a massive stretch to compare the two.

Again, I would be highly suspect of Facebook if they charged less than the industry standard, especially if they don't explain how they cut costs for risk management.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#200

Post by root_axis »

bduerst wrote: post #194
root_axis wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can equivocate all you like, but accusing me of ignorance doesn't make it so. It's an undeniable fact that it is possible for any of these properties to change and the poster that claimed it was impossible for them to change is wrong. There is no debate here, it's just reality.

I'm not accusing you of ignorance - An argument from ignorance (i.e. argumentum ad ignorantiam) is the name of a known fallacy, which you're making with your claims: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

You're engaged in the fallacy known as "straw-man", where you argue against a point I'm not making. I'm going to state my argument clearly so you can't continue to weasel around it.

The technical properties of bitcoin can be modified, saying that it is impossible to change them is wrong.

Post reply on HN