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

Facebook Libra Is Architecturally Unsound

stephendiehl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–347 of 347 posts

Re: Facebook Libra Is Architecturally Unsound

#341

Post by randomidiot123 »

arcticbull wrote: post #328
randomidiot123 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As for the Soviet Union - I was talking about their centralized / planned economy. Socialism. We have a socialist monetary system in the West. Yes New Zealand is the least corrupt government in the world, apparently, and despite that, the divide between rich and poor is increasing. It has become way less affordable to live here since the mid 2000's and is not getting any easier. We are locked in to a corrupt global s…

(traditional, not "American") Socialism isn't central planning it's the state owning the means of production. To my knowledge, there's no concerted effort in New Zealand to have the government own the means of production. > ...the divide between rich and poor is increasing... For sure, and it shouldn't. At least in the US it really started to get bad after Reagan dropped the top income tax from 90% to the current 35%…

The money supply is centrally planned. The interest rates are centrally planned. Therefore I call it a socialist monetary system.

Re: Facebook Libra Is Architecturally Unsound

#342

Post by randomidiot123 »

arcticbull wrote: post #328
randomidiot123 wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As for the Soviet Union - I was talking about their centralized / planned economy. Socialism. We have a socialist monetary system in the West. Yes New Zealand is the least corrupt government in the world, apparently, and despite that, the divide between rich and poor is increasing. It has become way less affordable to live here since the mid 2000's and is not getting any easier. We are locked in to a corrupt global s…

(traditional, not "American") Socialism isn't central planning it's the state owning the means of production. To my knowledge, there's no concerted effort in New Zealand to have the government own the means of production. > ...the divide between rich and poor is increasing... For sure, and it shouldn't. At least in the US it really started to get bad after Reagan dropped the top income tax from 90% to the current 35%…

Listen man, you’re obviously a very smart guy (I’m assuming your gender), but it seems that you haven’t been exposed much to the “Austrian School” of economics.

Keynesian theory is the orthodox economic religion, which you have fully subscribed to. Austrians are heretics and we are burned at the stake for our beliefs.

I’ve read both sides. The Austrian school is far more compelling and rational. It cuts through the obscurantist bullshit with precision.

To me, Keynesian theory with its justification for continued economic chaos, is for those suffering from “battered wife syndrome”. To accept the Keynesian excuses, is akin to a wife getting brutally raped and beaten by her husband every day, while telling everyone “It’s OK, I deserve it, he knows what’s best for me”.

If you haven’t seriously examined the Austrian side of the debate, have a look at this:

https://mises.org/library/austrian-theory-money

https://mises.org/library/one-lesson

https://mises.org/books-library

EDIT: In the first link, read the paragraph that begins with "In the face of overwhelming arguments against inflationary expansion ..." . The entire article is good but that really gets to the point of inflation.

Re: Facebook Libra Is Architecturally Unsound

#343

Post by Acrobatic_Road »

Retric wrote: post #311
Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The cost of doing that is making the wallet largely useless for purchasing anything over 50$. I don't think I ever spend that much in a single day though. The limit will differ from person to person. >The independent ability to send all your money to a recovery address is a new security risk. It's not new and it's not a risk. You could always send all your money to another address. And the recovery addresses are mea…

It’s the “independent ability” that’s new. Without that you just need to keep your key safe. With it your key could be safe and you still end up with a problem. > objectively better than cash Many people don’t use cash just credit cards. They might keep 50$ or less in their wallets, but that’s about it. Further, Billions of people can hack my PC, only those I come into contact with can take my cash.

You still need the private key to make a transfer. This is for cases when you key is stolen.

>Many people don’t use cash just credit cards. They might keep 50$ or less in their wallets, but that’s about it.

Because they value convenience over privacy and freedom.

>Further, Billions of people can hack my PC, only those I come into contact with can take my cash.

Even if someone managed to gain access to your wallet they would still have to decrypt your private key. So, it isn't an issue if you use a strong password.

Re: Facebook Libra Is Architecturally Unsound

#344

Post by not_kurt_godel »

kragen wrote: post #329
not_kurt_godel wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I think you're locating the problem in the wrong part of the conjunction: the reason fiat currency in a US bank is more secure is because US banks are fairly secure, not because the fiat currency is secure. Fiat currency is secure in US banks because there is vast institutional protection for banks such as FDIC insurance and extremely strict laws against bank theft, the Federal Reserve, and so on. There are no…

Leaving your Bitcoin in an exchange is not now and has never been an "effective necessity to use" Bitcoin. However, for fiat-currency transactions, it is an effective necessity to leave your fiat currency in an "exchange" called a bank, if you want instant electronic transactions. Unlike with the banking system, you can engage in instant electronic transactions with Bitcoin you hold in your own wallet — although some…

> However, for fiat-currency transactions, it is an effective necessity to leave your fiat currency in an "exchange" called a bank, if you want instant electronic transactions

Yes. However there is also cash which allows for instant anonymous transactions in the physical world which is sufficiently widely accepted to be used to the exclusion of banks, if you so choose.

> you can engage in instant electronic transactions with Bitcoin you hold in your own wallet

Isn't the fact that transactions are not instant widely perceived in the Bitcoin community as one of, if not the, greatest barrier to adoption? If not, why all the investment in the Lightning network?

> Bitcoin's design permits all the same institutional protections available for dollar bills or precious-metal coins, and additionally permits others that are enormously more secure than the mere incentive structures we must rely on in the case of dollar-based institutions. For example, a bank holding gold or dollars cannot produce a mathematical proof of its reserves as a Bitcoin bank can, and there is no dollar equivalent of multisig wallets.

You're saying these words but not addressing the substance of what I said. There is no FDIC equivalent for Bitcoin - unless there's an exchange that guarantees replacement of lost/stolen Bitcoins? Replacing Bitcoin seems a difficult proposition when fiat currency can just be created out of thin air but Bitcoin cannot - once it's lost, it's lost, and can only be replaced in a zero-sum way.

Re: Facebook Libra Is Architecturally Unsound

#345

Post by blotter_paper »

K0SM0S wrote: post #336
blotter_paper wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yeah, mesh nets are another great thought. We definitely need our own pipes. CJDNS is beautiful (I love that addressing scheme), but lacks incentives for people/corporations to build infrastructure for non-ideological reasons. The OpenLibreNet whitepaper had the incentives theoretically correct, but didn't go anywhere. I honestly haven't kept up on this space, but I still think about it a lot. My biggest question…

> CJDNS I need to research more into that. Great pointer, thanks! > IPFS Yup, definitely, it's on the radar. It's still not production ready though, I'm unsure whether it will/can (I mean this particular project/implementation, not the concept). > payments You've definitely thought this through, maybe developed already on e.g. blockchain? Note that my initial idea, for a neutral human communication medium/protocol, d…

Sent you an email. It's from a recently created protonmail address, so it might end up in your spam folder.

Re: Facebook Libra Is Architecturally Unsound

#346

Post by K0SM0S »

blotter_paper wrote: post #345
K0SM0S wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CJDNS I need to research more into that. Great pointer, thanks! > IPFS Yup, definitely, it's on the radar. It's still not production ready though, I'm unsure whether it will/can (I mean this particular project/implementation, not the concept). > payments You've definitely thought this through, maybe developed already on e.g. blockchain? Note that my initial idea, for a neutral human communication medium/protocol, d…

Sent you an email. It's from a recently created protonmail address, so it might end up in your spam folder.

Got it.

Re: Facebook Libra Is Architecturally Unsound

#347

Post by kragen »

not_kurt_godel wrote: post #344
kragen wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leaving your Bitcoin in an exchange is not now and has never been an "effective necessity to use" Bitcoin. However, for fiat-currency transactions, it is an effective necessity to leave your fiat currency in an "exchange" called a bank, if you want instant electronic transactions. Unlike with the banking system, you can engage in instant electronic transactions with Bitcoin you hold in your own wallet — although some…

> However, for fiat-currency transactions, it is an effective necessity to leave your fiat currency in an "exchange" called a bank, if you want instant electronic transactions Yes. However there is also cash which allows for instant anonymous transactions in the physical world which is sufficiently widely accepted to be used to the exclusion of banks, if you so choose. > you can engage in instant electronic transacti…

> There is no FDIC equivalent for Bitcoin - unless there's an exchange that guarantees replacement of lost/stolen Bitcoins? Replacing Bitcoin seems a difficult proposition when fiat currency can just be created out of thin air but Bitcoin cannot - once it's lost, it's lost, and can only be replaced in a zero-sum way.

I didn't realize you were laboring under the misconception that the FDIC has the authority to mint money, like a central bank. That's why I didn't address it. Now I can. It doesn't. The FDIC is funded by premiums paid by its member institutions, not by creating currency out of thin air; an insurance scheme for Bitcoin depositors in a bank that provided fractional-reserve Bitcoin accounts could be funded in the same way. It could even be provided by the FDIC, which already provides deposit insurance for deposits denominated in foreign currencies.

> Isn't the fact that transactions are not instant widely perceived in the Bitcoin community as one of, if not the, greatest barrier to adoption?

Bitcoin transactions are instant; they reach everywhere in the mempool in a matter of seconds. It's just that until they're a few blocks deep in the blockchain, they might be reversed, like bank transactions can be for several months. This usually takes half an hour or so, and that's a hassle for some kinds of transactions. However, I think bigger barriers to adoption include the network effect of existing currencies, a sketchy reputation, and the fact that Bitcoin exchanges are now illegal in China.

> there is also cash which allows for instant anonymous transactions in the physical world which is sufficiently widely accepted to be used to the exclusion of banks, if you so choose

Cash limits you to transacting with people you can meet in person, which condemns you to poverty unless you are very lucky indeed.

Post reply on HN