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

Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

seldo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 318 posts

Re: Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

#271

Post by meheleventyone »

mantenpanther wrote: post #270
meheleventyone wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well no they don't because the NFT only has meaning in the game world which is still owned and operated by the game company. NFTs in their current incarnation merely move the receipt from a centralized private DB to a decentralized public one and make the entire thing much more expensive.

But the NFT should be independent of the game and exists elsewhere. The game company can integrate it - or not.

So someone’s selling in-game items for games with no game with the expectation that games will just magically support them despite the cost to the developers to do so?

FWIW I can definitely see an asset store like model if that’s what you mean. Where games that share an engine can share developed assets. But you need to look at how that works out in practice in terms of how much integration cost there is, gamers tolerance for asset reuse and actually how broadly applicable it is between different games. And even then extant asset stores already work perfectly well so it’s not clear what putting it on the blockchain and presumably some decentralised storage actually provides.

Re: Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

#272

Post by andrewingram »

Nursie wrote: post #89
pcthrowaway wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but our problem is with proof of work, not crypto. I don't buy/use bitcoin any more because of this. Ethereum is moving (the sooner the better), and the only other PoW crypto I have a bit of is innovating PoW and (hopefully) becomes more environmentally friendly as a result. To be honest, I'm still unclear on if this is even possible, and if energy usage becomes significant relative to what it does, I would…

Yes, PoW is the major problem here. I just don’t agree that it can be dismissed as easily as the article does there, by saying that you can choose not to use it. We only have one planet we share and other people’s choices are also important.

Yeah, it may be right to dismiss the environmental criticism as the weakest one, but I don't think the article sufficiently makes the case for that dismissal.

In a system centred around the premise that money is the only thing that motivates, for thing A to beat thing B, there has to be more money to be made from doing thing A. I don't think the case has been made here (though perhaps it has elsewhere) that PoS can beat PoW on these grounds -- are there sufficient incentives to make that shift?

Re: Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

#273

Post by notch656a »

mathnmusic wrote: post #76
notch656a wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I didn't say "income tax" or "federal tax". I asked for examples of economies that don't collect taxes but have been effective. Survival is one important aspect of "being effective". So, an example that has survived to the present day would be more relevant. The reason why charities underfund public goods is because of the well-known free-rider problem. It's the same reason why cryptocurrencies need to collect transa…

The OP I responded to said income and sales tax. You're just copping out by saying that I've fulfilled the criteria laid out was somehow wrong. But even without taxes, a charity can exist.

I guess you think all dead men were failures, if survival to present day is your criteria.

The "frees-rider" problem applies to government programs, too. But you're right, we can't just depend on charity. We need for profit enterprise too.

Re: Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

#274

Post by sn1de »

ramazanpolat wrote: post #237
rvz wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK. I am convinced. The entire cryptocurrency industry is a scam. So rather than saying the same thing over and over on every HN thread about it being a 'scam', let's do something about it then? How do we ban it all to save the planet and stop the scams everywhere then? Or are we going to complain on the next HN thread about cryptocurrencies and web3 once again?

People like you helped a lot to make cryptocurrencies born by banning rights and oppressing freedom. Paper money does a lot more, and I mean A LOT more damage to the world, still damaging... You just don't understand what you are talking about. Everything can be abused, but just because it is abused that does not mean it should be banned.

Karma police Arrest this man He talks in maths He buzzes like a fridge He's like a detuned radio

Re: Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

#275

Post by jaclaz »

Reichhardt wrote: post #13
null_object wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The current fiat system (and the Governments that control it) are completely enslaved to the welfare (pension) and healthcare demands of baby boomers. If we can craft a new financial system without spending 15%+ of our GDP and rising on Pensions, even with some inefficiency its still worth it. Avoiding sales taxes, platform commissions, and income taxes is a major advantage. So you think the problem solved by crypt…

50% of healthcare costs are incurred in the final 5 years of life, and in much of the world private healthcare is accepted and efficient. I'd rather euthanize myself at age 80 and pay much lower taxes throughout my adult life than die at age 85 in a gold-plated Government hospital. Sanitation and public transport can be directly charged to end-users based on usage. Education can be funded with land value taxes. Feder…

>I'd rather euthanize myself at age 80 and pay much lower taxes throughout my adult life than die at age 85 in a gold-plated Government hospital.

Only it wouldn't probbably work that way, more probably it would be something more like:

Dear Citizen, this is the Government.

Our actuaries determined that you can only live up to 70 years with the tax you paid, so you are kindly requested to present yourself on the morning of the day before your 70th birthday at 9:00 o'clock at [redacted] so that we can proceed to your termination.

We assure you that the procedure will be quick and painless.

Thnks in advance for your cooperation.

Re: Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

#277

Post by _57jb »

ls15 wrote: post #135
_57jb wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am glad we are talking about crypto pro/cons but this article was a huge miss imho. The arguments against are these beaten dead horses that many within crypto know already and frankly not well versed. NFTs were an unenforceable joke, integrating the physical world and the digital world doesn't exist (yet?), there are alternatives to the PoW model in use, legal aspects and oracles in the Ethereum network need to be…

> NFTs were an unenforceable joke "NFT Art" is a stupid implementation of NFTs that probably mostly exists for money laundering. I always thought of NFTs as a good backend for things like concert tickets or other kinds of "club memberships". This would not really have the enforceability problem, at least not more than traditional tickets, while some new features are added.

I agree with you.

NFTs in their current hype cycle with art is a shallowly thought out implementation.

It requires a governing body to source the originals but then you essentially have a coin at this point.

Re: Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

#278

Post by colordrops »

dagmx wrote: post #139
colordrops wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are suggesting that there is an alternative. What perchance might that be? Some authority figure or organization that decides whether something is useful?

The alternative is to say something of actual substance instead of an empty statement saying it's useful because it's useful.

I didn't say it's "useful because it's useful". It's "useful because it's used by many people". Unless you are implicitly agreeing with me that the definition of useful is that many people use something and find value in it.

Re: Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

#279

Post by _57jb »

rvz wrote: post #218
nbzso wrote: post #172

I don’t know. This hype-crypto-machine is not catching up with my “feelings” about the future of the Web. Maybe I am getting old, but aside from some communication protocol usage and some form of authenticity (which is questionable), I don’t see web3. I would go out on a limb and say that if this is web3, I don’t want to have anything to do with it. This is an outrageous waste of resources and energy with awful envir…

OK. I am convinced. The entire cryptocurrency industry is a scam. So rather than saying the same thing over and over on every HN thread about it being a 'scam', let's do something about it then? How do we ban it all to save the planet and stop the scams everywhere then? Or are we going to complain on the next HN thread about cryptocurrencies and web3 once again?

It's no more a scam than the dollar, yuan, or euro.

It's as trusted as the system backing it. Can it be trusted enough that you at least can see when it's being manipulated? Can your current system? Some countries benefit greatly, some maybe little to none.

When every transaction flows publicly that's already a different starting point than what we have today.

Re: Crypto: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

#280

Post by _57jb »

ramazanpolat wrote: post #237
rvz wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK. I am convinced. The entire cryptocurrency industry is a scam. So rather than saying the same thing over and over on every HN thread about it being a 'scam', let's do something about it then? How do we ban it all to save the planet and stop the scams everywhere then? Or are we going to complain on the next HN thread about cryptocurrencies and web3 once again?

People like you helped a lot to make cryptocurrencies born by banning rights and oppressing freedom. Paper money does a lot more, and I mean A LOT more damage to the world, still damaging... You just don't understand what you are talking about. Everything can be abused, but just because it is abused that does not mean it should be banned.

Agreed.

To add to this who is out there quantifying how much energy is used by the data centers, jets, etc, of banking institutions and other institutions driving money to contrast this to? It's almost like some people might want the system that is currently in place to stay that way.

Post reply on HN