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

Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 278 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

#201

Post by prohobo »

Rd6n6 wrote: post #200
prohobo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'd say your entire approach is antithetical to healthy discussion: insinuating anyone who is interested in crypto is technically inept, and turning the discussion into a 2-sides polarization. There's no use in talking about crypto in a sincere way now because of the way its been politicized. I tried recently to explain to someone that cryptographically codifying law and contracts can be beneficial in a lot of…

> cryptographically codifying law and contracts can be beneficial in a lot of ways (like transparency/enforcement in governance) Would 51% attacks spoil the party with that? The incentives would be enormous to do such a thing, it might even become a polarized political imperative to try to do these attacks. It might also be like replacing the one citizen, one vote system with a one gpu (or future hardware item), one…

We don't really know. A lot of work has gone into trying to minimize incentive for 51% attacks though, and it continues. "Fork off" is a classic argument, that the attacker may take over the chain but then cause a fork where they're left with a worthless system anyway - meaning the 51% attack would only be profitable for a short duration before a fork devalues their winnings and everyone continues on the new system.

Vitalik Buterin is involved in a lot of the theory in handicapping plutocrats, and enabling fair representation/voting in the blockchain space. Check out his blog.

Re: Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

#203

Post by reginold »

svennek wrote: post #3

I think basically because there is nothing interesting left to discus. One camp (where I am in) basically believes it is an environmental disaster, unsuitable for its stated purpose and most likely as scam by the "whales" manipulating the price, and with a potential 51%-disaster. The other camp believes that it is the future of money, untraceable wealth storage and inflation/"confiscation proof" and that all the envi…

Agreed, there is nothing left for the HN community to discuss about cryptocurrencies. There is plenty worth discussing for others though. I posted a thread here asking where to go to find curiosity driven discussions about the topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29297611

Re: Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

#204

Post by svennek »

throwaway554 wrote: post #189
svennek wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to the the people of the ex-DDR, the North Korea and REALLY targeted individuals.. Sadly there exists no sure way to secure you belongings if the other party is sufficiently motivated to strip you of them (or your life).. You can also be killed/robbed outside of your country by intelligence officers of your country...

What a weird attitude of helplessness. You might as well argue against encryption because the state can always do the $5 wrench attack. It is much easier for the government to confiscate your money from your bank account than to go after your Bitcoin. And it is impossible for the government to stop you from accepting payments in Bitcoin and to cut you off from financial system.

Maybe it is the other way around.

I live in an old and free democracy in Scandinavia (in the EU) and actually believe in my government's mostly pure motives. Our laws are solid and confiscation is unheard of outside of criminal activity.

If that changes drastically, I am screwed either way...

And it might be impossible for my government to stop me taking bitcoin but they could surely hinder me in converting them back to regular currency. And in my country nothing can be bought by any cryptocurrency.

Re: Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

#205

Post by gjulianm »

fsflover wrote: post #165
gjulianm wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're wrong about "lacking initiative and the detailed procedures" - that's exactly what blockchains were created for: A response to opaque and unreliable systems. This is the solution to a systematic problem in governance. You can't solve non-tech problems with technical solutions. If the government doesn't bother to have accessible documentation about how to do X thing, why would they bother to make a blockchain…

> You can't solve non-tech problems with technical solutions. This is useless and unconstructive generalizaton. AFAIK many non-tech problems were solved with technical solutions.

It's a basic fact. If a problem is caused by something that is not related to lack of technology, you won't solve it with a technical solution. This is obvious in any other field (for example, you won't see a doctor that says that drugs could fix poverty) but a lot of tech people don't seem capable of admitting that some problems cannot be solved by technology.

Re: Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

#206

Post by gjulianm »

throwaway554 wrote: post #190
gjulianm wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a source for that? Last time I checked there weren't reliable reports even on total energy usage, much less energy sources.

https://www.hope.com/content/dam/hope-assets/collateral/Mini...

That's a self-reported survey by members of a Bitcoin mining council, which represent an unknown portion of the total mining capacity, and if I'm correct the term "sustainable energy" includes "carbon-based energy with net emission credits". It doesn't seem the most reliable source to me.

Re: Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

#207

Post by jkhsdfkjgh »

reginold wrote: post #196
jkhsdfkjgh wrote: post #35

In my case there isn't curiousity left. I was curious at some point, learned and explored about the subject, and made up my mind. After that there was also a period where I was curious why people were disagreeing with me, but that's gone now too, mostly because I repeatedly find their arguments make no sense. In a nutshell, I'm all for cheaper money transfer, but I've never seen convincing arguments that it follows t…

Sorry to hear it. Curiosity is a special thing. It's hard or impossible to force it. I wonder where my own curiosity about cryptocurrencies comes from.

Don't be sorry. There's infinitely many things I no longer have any curiosity left for. Astrology, scientology, homeopathy....

Re: Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

#208

Post by karmakaze »

There should be a subreddit or other forum that does have such conversations. The alternative is that there isn't one, which would make one wonder why aren't there intelligent people discussing this? Asking why where aren't intelligent discussions on HN seems to be a special case of the latter.

Re: Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

#209

Post by malermeister »

throwaway554 wrote: post #192
Applejinx wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is one heck of a waste, at a time when managing the thermal runaway of our planet is a matter of great and immediate urgency.

Separating money from the state is worth the cost.

I think this is what every crypto argument secretly comes down to, this ideological disagreement.

I don't want money to be separated from the state, and especially not at a cost.

One man's crypto-anarchocapitalist utopia is another man's dystopian capitalist nightmare that we sacrificed our environment for.

Re: Ask HN: Why does cryptocurrency subjects on HN lack curious conversations?

#210

Post by malermeister »

throwaway554 wrote: post #69
gjulianm wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a straw man. Yes, if the energy mix was only reliant of renewables, energy usage wouldn't be as much as a problem. But it is not, and won't be in years, decades, so we can't just brush off the energy usage of crypto as "well it's the energy mix fault". You cannot evaluate a technology in isolation of its real world, practical context. Not to mention that even with renewables, energy usage would be still a co…

56% of energy used for Bitcoin mining is coming from renewable sources of energy.

In other words, 44% comes from non-renewables.

It's not like those 56 are free either, we could use that energy to run more important things instead that crypto is taking away from.

Post reply on HN