Live data from Hacker News

Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later

vitalik.ca

241–250 of 378 posts

Re: Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later

#241

None of these are the actual hard problems in cryptocurrency and the fact this is the focus speaks volumes. The real hard problems are: 1. How do we stop using more power than Switzerland to process 4 transactions per second (lol) 2. How do we stop payments to international terrorists and rogue states. 3. How do we stop money laundering. 4. How do we stop price manipulation by fraudulent actors. 5. How do we allow pe…

2. The problem is that there are so many terrorists and such.

I've become very skeptical of the idea that technology can solve social problems, and unfortunately decades of futility propaganda by the existing order has convinced us that the political order we have now cannot be improved upon.

On the flip side this principle also makes me skeptical of cryptocurrency, which seems like a very expensive attempt to use technology to solve social problems.

Existing simple money systems work and are highly efficient. Corruption in those systems is a social problem.

Re: Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later

#242
post #19

Whether or not you're aligned with Bitcoin political values and goals, please don't be duped by Ethereum. It may appear as something useful, without the stigma of Bitcoin being black market money. However, you ONLY need black market money. Everything else that's ok with being regulated, does not need a blockchain. The hard problem that Bitcoin solved was "How do we create money that wouldn't collapse and lose value o…

Ethereum has the first ever decentralized banking system based on on-chain smart contracts. I'm earning high interest on usd stablecoins for several months now. The interest rate was double digit until very recently, but even 5% is still very good for a completely anonymous system. DAI itself is a decentralized usd stablecoin, meaning it can't be confiscated by the issuer. It's overcollateralized by locked eth. Anyone can generate new dai after locking eth. Those two together make the previously impossible possible - an Iranian or Venezuelan citizen earning interest on a USD-denominated savings. This is all called DeFi. Once mortgages and other external assets are tokenized, it's going to allow fully decentralized mortgages.

https://trade.dydx.exchange/markets

https://app.compound.finance/

>Bitcoin solves a real problem: it allows people to escape and bypass existing financial system and continue doing business, save and not be subject to policies outside of their control. It is black market money which governments hate and will try to outlaw in some way.

Bitcoin completely failed, as majority of its hashpower is located in China. The Chinese government can tell miners to censor transactions tomorrow and to orphan blocks from non-compliant miners and it would happen. There's no defense against this. Changing PoW via a hard fork would result in a gpu-secured network that's even more vulnerable than an asic-based one, as it's easier to a large entity to rent or buy enough gpus.

PoS is the only defense against such centralization. Most hashpower is going to be an impossible to hide industrial facilities, while PoS only needs an internet connection, much harder to catch. More importantly, even if a determined attacker acquires a very big fraction of the tokens and attacks the network, a hard fork can just delete the hostile accounts. One a gpu based PoW network is attacked there's no solution, as it's not possible to make the attacker's mining hardware ineffective via a hard fork.

Re: Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later

#244

I literally spent the past week reading a couple dozen papers on cryptocurrency attacks, in service of a term paper which should hopefully turn into a master's thesis (and possibly more during my PhD campaign). I'm pretty damn pessimistic as a result. Smart contracts basically throw all of your consensus guarantees out the window because they can cause arbitrary exchanges of value in the application layer, which can…

Eos is a good a example. It's governance is falling apart. How to solve it? Well, I guess it needs more governance and rules :)

What's happening to EOS?

They've got a gagillion dollars in funding. What's the problem they're facing.

Re: Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later

#245

I literally spent the past week reading a couple dozen papers on cryptocurrency attacks, in service of a term paper which should hopefully turn into a master's thesis (and possibly more during my PhD campaign). I'm pretty damn pessimistic as a result. Smart contracts basically throw all of your consensus guarantees out the window because they can cause arbitrary exchanges of value in the application layer, which can…

Whether you disagree or not, sometimes the best solution is analog, or paper. Everything scales too easily and massively when you digitize things. Especially money and voting.

Paper money already was a level of abstraction above the physical assets like gold and silver. The problem with paper money is that it can be devalued very easily.

You are also not going to have a say about paper money getting banned in the coming years. You'll have a choice between different digital currencies, most of them centralized and some that are not.

Re: Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later

#246

Oh shut up already with big block phobia. BSV proves that big blocks is the most rational way to scale. The small block mantra started by blockstream completely rotted the crypto space

I agree, although I’d say BCH proved it first. :P

Re: Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later

#247

I literally spent the past week reading a couple dozen papers on cryptocurrency attacks, in service of a term paper which should hopefully turn into a master's thesis (and possibly more during my PhD campaign). I'm pretty damn pessimistic as a result. Smart contracts basically throw all of your consensus guarantees out the window because they can cause arbitrary exchanges of value in the application layer, which can…

Smart contracts are a bad paradigm for developing applications on the ledger, they're far too permissive, the stakes are too high to want to trust your assets to arbitrary turing-complete code. You can do much better with composable state machines, because everything you do gets the same level of security as the native token transfers https://www.radixdlt.com/post/radix-engine-a-simple-secure-s... Disclaimer: I work…

> the stakes are too high to want to trust your assets to arbitrary turing-complete code.

Does it matter whether the language is turing-complete or not? you're trusting a contract, not the PL used to write the contract, and the contract can be very simple (and formally verified, if the PL has a formal semantics).

Re: Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did about 0.1% of the amount of research you did a few years ago and was really struck by the irreversibility of mistakes. Other engineering domains can have irreversible (e.g. fatal) mistakes as well, but they don't have as many enthusiasts jumping in to the field.

Our CTO likens developing a smart contract to civil engineering. Our CTO also remembers what it was like to ship your software in its final form on a floppy disk! I think it’s great that more and more people are jumping in and learning what it’s like to develop in such an unforgiving domain (no point here, I just think it’s great!)

Learning on the job in an unforgiving domain can be costly.

Re: Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using a poor implementation of an app as a reason why smart contracts are bad. I hope you realize this is the same thing as saying databases are bad because of the Equifax hack.

I don’t think you understand. The arbitrage bots aren’t exploiting poorly written contracts, they are capturing free value that users of a dApp have opened up. This free value is available to miners as well, and could be used to subsidize an otherwise-unprofitable double spend attack. But more to the point: allowing smart contracts in a blockchain introduces all of the complexity of trying to make any other piece of…

I do understand. I work in the industry, specifically with decentralized exchanges. Both the order book and the order matching should be P2P with 0 conf transactions and client side verification. The fees paid by the user should be top off fees for the contract balance rather than pay to play fees.
Post reply on HN