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

Bitcoin still makes no sense

thinkoutloudnews.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 161 posts

Re: Bitcoin still makes no sense

#111

Post by garmaine »

bitxbitxbitcoin wrote: post #64
jimmysong wrote: post #14

Posts like these make it clear to me that the author does not really understand money, not Bitcoin. It's hard to reason about what Bitcoin's advantages are without first considering what the purpose of money is and the analysis from this article is mostly just sniping at the edges about some of the perceived flaws and not the actual usefulness which is the good part of the trade-off. For a better understanding of mon…

Heya Jimmy! Glad to see you on HN. In case anyone would like a YT video so they can listen/watch at 2x instead of read... check out: The Complete Case for Bitcoin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjeXIGWY2DI&ab_channel=Block...

I can read much faster than 2x the speed of a YouTube video...

Re: Bitcoin still makes no sense

#112

Post by sesuximo »

toolz wrote: post #70
sesuximo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK, stamps don’t use our resources enough to move prices for energy/chips/etc

bitcoin uses less resources than traditional banking. I think people should stop judging it in a vacuum and instead speak in relative terms. If energy use is a concern then fiat is the greater offender. https://bitcoinist.com/banks-consume-energy-bitcoin/ further crypto would be a much more flexible domain at working towards reducing carbon emission than deeply embedded and slow changing fiat systems

Banks use way less energy per customer

Re: Bitcoin still makes no sense

#113

Post by scoopertrooper »

superkuh wrote: post #69
scoopertrooper wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the key difference is that less startups have bilked investors by peddling fantastical dreams of post-fiat ancient coin based economies.

Hardly. The finance bros came from traditional finance based on fiat. That's where the majority of bilking still goes on. All of us using it as a currency since the start are still here. Sure, it's nice that it's worth over 9000 now but what matters to me is being able to send and receive money myself . Besides physical cash there's nothing like it. And unlike other currencies this one doesn't require the energy expe…

> Hardly. The finance bros came from traditional finance based on fiat. That's where the majority of bilking still goes on.

I don't think that's a substantiated claim, but even if it were true, the lack of regulation in the *coin sphere made a fertile breeding ground for scammers from wherever they originated.

> but what matters to me is being able to send and receive money myself.

Yourself and billions of computing hours that could be doing stuff like protein folding or climate modelling.

> And unlike other currencies this one doesn't require the energy expenditures of a full standing army or the diplomatic trades to enter into protection with someone who has one. Seen through that lens bitcoin is absolutely green.

Are you suggesting that if not for fiat money then there would be no need for standing armies? Like we'd all just join hands: Russia would hand back Crimea, Pakistan and India would grant Kashmir independence, Iran and Saudi Arabia would realise they practice essentially the same religion, and the former states of Yugoslavia would hold the world's largest pancake breakfast? If not, then you can not attribute the environmental impact of maintaining militaries to fiat.

Re: Bitcoin still makes no sense

#114

Post by nullc »

mandragon wrote: post #34

What's the risk for bitcoin pertinent to entrenched pre-quantum encryption? Are the wallet/private key pairs based on such cryptography? What's the technical feasibility of migrating BTC's pow scheme to quantum-resistant hashing? What is the technical feasibility of migrating wallet/private keys to quantum-resistant crypto? Would any such migration of wallet/private keys be dependent on public/non-public interactions…

There is no particular negative interactions with the hash functions and quantum cryptography.

Bitcoin is designed so that different asymmetric crypto governing controlling coins can be compatibility introduced-- as has been done a couple times in the past (to introduce revisions to the script system). PQ crypto could be introduced in that way.

Unfortunately existing PQ signature schemes don't have a great mix of maturity and performance that make them especially attractive absent a clear and present need.

For years I maintained a private patch set to introduce hash based signatures on short notice if needed. I haven't for a number of years now in part because there are now enough contributors I'm confident that if it were needed it could be done quickly without any special preparatory effort.

Users can change the rules governing their coins just by moving them.

Re: Bitcoin still makes no sense

#115

Post by bawolff »

beaner wrote: post #92
SrslyJosh wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bitcoin is better money, because it allows for more pure self-organization, as a result of its money supply being predetermined by hard-coded algorithm, rather than by fiat decree. Because bitcoin requires substantial inputs (hardware, energy), if it actually has legs, it will end up being controlled by whoever controls the most capital. That's not self-organization, that's just replicating the same broken economic…

> Because bitcoin requires substatial inputs... it will end up being controlled by whoever controls the most capital Huh? Whoever has the most capital has the most capital? I don't get it. > Citation needed The boom/bust cycle is caused by what we declare to be the solution: active management and printing of the money supply as desired to achieve short-term economic or political goals. > an anonymous market manipulat…

> The boom/bust cycle is caused by what we declare to be the solution: active management and printing of the money supply as desired to achieve short-term economic or political goals.

That seems like quite an extraordinary claim without much evidence.

Re: Bitcoin still makes no sense

#116

Post by bconnorwhite »

1996 wrote: post #43

To the people who really want to learn: you won't get quality advice here. BTC has been hated on HN since it's creation. Even over 10 years later, the crypto luddites keep coming at it. Learn by yourself instead of listening to the doomsayers: some people thought independently, like this person in 2011 who was ridiculed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2596475 Check the discussion from 2017: https://news.yc…

This is super common on HN. Just look at threads on Tesla. Fortunately betting against someone with a closed mind is super profitable, because they'll always mis-price the risk/reward.

Re: Bitcoin still makes no sense

#117

Post by scoopertrooper »

bawolff wrote: post #89
scoopertrooper wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if you're defending bitcoin or comparing people buying it to crazed beanie baby collectors. At least, nobody was talking about a beanie baby based financial system at the time - however adorable it may have been.

I don't think bitcoin should be entirely dismissed as a scam (its more complex than that), but if we're going to compare it to a scam (and there are definitely plenty of scammers in the bitcoin ecosystem), i think its important to remember that neither scams nor speculative bubbles are new to human history.

The important innovation of Bitcoin (and the like) was that it democratised the ability to scam. A band of techno-utopians created a technology (ideology?) that made it much easier and cheaper to empty the pockets of the gullible.

Re: Bitcoin still makes no sense

#118

Post by ponyfleisch »

domatic1 wrote: post #32

I'm still surprised that bitcoin is hated here, such a great technology. It's a decentralised currency, and it's working really well. A lot of big institutions are taking it seriously now. Does paper cash printed by government make more sense?

> Does paper cash printed by government make more sense?

Than energy wasting cash computed by chinese miners and (in the early days) a select group of early adopters? Yes, it makes more sense.

Re: Bitcoin still makes no sense

#119

Post by timbit42 »

tamrix wrote: post #47

Everyone wants to be rich through bitcoin as an investment. No one will actual use it as an everyday currency. If it is the winner of the cyrpto digital currency war. It will be the end of civilisation.

Bitcoin wasn't designed to be an everyday currency. You misunderstand it.
Post reply on HN