The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto • Hacker News Board

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#181

Post by roywiggins » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

kinnth wrote: post #124

Decentralisation offers the following value over centralisation: * Control by a majority, not a minority. (democratic) * Open ecosystem that visible and able to be analysed by anyone (transparent) * Immutable (no one makes up assets without everyone knowing about it) * Fair. Same price for everyone at all times, no chance of a monopoly. Those don't exist in central systems and so the price you must pay for that is sp…

Proof of Work/Stake are both oligopolistic, not democratic. If you can buy yourself a larger vote, that's not democratic.

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#182

Post by b3spoke » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 4:59 PM UTC

maneesh wrote: post #60

ninjanomnom wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voting is intentionally designed for it to be impossible to verify what your final vote is so that it's impossible for someone to use that to hold you to a particular vote. A classic example being a household all being forced to vote one way by the head of that household. With no verification possible you can freely vote without influence from others who would use that verification for their own ends. This is also wh…

This is interesting and something I hadn't thought of. Thank you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3_0x6oaDmI elaborates on that point, and has some other useful points against electronic voting

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#183

Post by betwixthewires » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 4:59 PM UTC

They're really hammering away at the narrative these days. Every one of these articles i see reference one another. If this issue is so contentious as they claim every time, why is it that they can only seem to find a handful of people to reference each other? Seems like a group of people that for whatever assortment of reasons (probably their stated ones) don't like cryptocurrency and are crafting and hammering away at a narrative.

I don't disagree with a lot of what's said in the article. But there's a lot that is ignored, and a lot that isn't put into context. Yes, this entire system is designed to put financial interaction outside the purview of regulators. This is 100% true. But that's a selling point, at least to those who see it as a positive. That doesn't equate to "crime" though (although it includes crime as a subset) unless you blanked define all financial activity outside the reach of regulation as "crime", which is circular logic.

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#184

Post by Igelau » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 5:00 PM UTC

joshmarlow wrote: post #157

I think a lot of discussions around the utility of blockchains misses (or just ignores) a really subtle but important point: smart contract networks (like Ethereum) could be thought of like public utilities that are implemented via markets. And I think that perspective can unlock a lot of innovation. If I want to launch a startup, I have to cover hosting costs, manage infrastructure (terraform, AWS/DigitalOcean, Dock…

I thought the article did a fairly good job pointing out:

- The only applications anyone is implementing on progcoins are exchanges and/or gambling. So far, dApps are a circular argument.

- Smart contracts aren't so smart. They are ticking time bombs waiting to get exploited DAO-style.

That doesn't leave a whole lot of room for utility.

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#185

Post by throwaway21332 » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 5:00 PM UTC

wizardofdos wrote: post #69

coralreef wrote: post #5

This entire post seems to avoid or lack the understanding of the basic reasons blockchain were created; that is, to offer a decentralized, permissionless, censorship-resistant network. This was Satoshi's vision, and those values are a blockchain's express priority over scale and efficiency. Centralization is great for speed and efficiency, not so great for protection against authoritarian actors (governments or centr…

>> censorship-resistant As in impossible to influence via regulation. Once you realize that proper regulation is a good thing and a must in a functioning society, you realize something that can not be regulated can't be allowed to exist as it will undermine said society.

Using the word "regulation" does not give you a moral pass for taking other people's money.

Nobody forces you to use Bitcoin. Just keep using fiat if it's such a good thing for you.

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#186

Post by paulgb » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 5:00 PM UTC

JuliusBranson wrote: post #162

andrewla wrote: post #103

If anything, I think stablecoins are way more dangerous than the author indicates. People talk about things like Bitcoin as a threat to sovereign currencies, and they are, as competitors, of sorts. But stablecoins are another matter entirely. One huge aspect of the value of sovereign currencies is that they are instruments of law -- courts will settle in them as a lowest common denominator, and it is safe to use them…

Stablecoins are dangerous because they have the potential to change the current selection effects on the elite. For one thing, stablecoins subvert the ability of the Federal Reserve to print money and give it to their friends at Goldman Sachs et al --- normally this is supposed to result in their friends have a larger fraction of money than they previously had. You start with 1 dollar, David at Goldman Sachs starts w…

Leaving aside the dubious idea that the Federal Reserve can give their friends the ability to print money, stablecoins don't subvert any party's ability to print money if they are pegged to that money. If you can print USD, and I have a stablecoin pegged to $1 USD, you can just print $1 USD and buy my stablecoin on the open market.

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#187

Post by krisrm » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 5:01 PM UTC

"every economist worth their weight in salt"

Which ones might those be? I think the public's trust in economists has been rightly damaged for a long time.

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#188

Post by betwixthewires » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 5:01 PM UTC

JuliusBranson wrote: post #162

andrewla wrote: post #103

If anything, I think stablecoins are way more dangerous than the author indicates. People talk about things like Bitcoin as a threat to sovereign currencies, and they are, as competitors, of sorts. But stablecoins are another matter entirely. One huge aspect of the value of sovereign currencies is that they are instruments of law -- courts will settle in them as a lowest common denominator, and it is safe to use them…

Stablecoins are dangerous because they have the potential to change the current selection effects on the elite. For one thing, stablecoins subvert the ability of the Federal Reserve to print money and give it to their friends at Goldman Sachs et al --- normally this is supposed to result in their friends have a larger fraction of money than they previously had. You start with 1 dollar, David at Goldman Sachs starts w…

> When there's stablecoin, you just put your dollar in bitcoin before they print the money, the dollar inflates, bitcoin goes up proportionately, you spend the bitcoin and things remain fair.

Alright, exactly where do stablecoins come into play in this scenario?

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#189

Post by JuliusBranson » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 5:01 PM UTC

the_gastropod wrote: post #93

rawtxapp wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You fail to see people who lost trust in their governments and organizations? You don't see how people are unhappy with getting their savings diluted by unlimited money printing?

It seems like the people most upset by money printing learned to be upset by money printing from crypto propaganda.

Weird how most people still don't know about fractional reserve lending and how their food and heat costs more because the ruling class is printing money and giving it to their friends, but if normal people do the same thing they will get locked up.

Re: The Handwavy Technobabble Nothingburger of Crypto

#190

Post by georgeecollins » Wed, Nov 24, 2021, 5:01 PM UTC

rawtxapp wrote: post #99

the_gastropod wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like the people most upset by money printing learned to be upset by money printing from crypto propaganda.

Propaganda? Does it matter where they learned it as long as it's true and factual?

Can we start by talking about how modern money works in a more factually accurate way. In particular, can we stop talking about "printing money"? Printing money has no impact on the value of money. I think most people in a forum like this understand that but when we talk that way I worry that someone, somewhere doesn't understand.

Money is created when it is borrowed from a bank or banking institution. Even that is an oversimplification but it is still much more accurate than saying money is created by "printing" it because it isn't. One of the really key things to understand is that the money supply is created by government but it is also created by businesses and individuals.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it always drives me crazy when people talk about economics in a sloppy way.