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

It’s not still the early days of blockchain

blog.mollywhite.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 1001 posts

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#241

Post by Sparyjerry »

ryandamm wrote: post #119

The central problem in this entire debate is two groups talking past each other. The skeptics say "what is it for?" expecting a detailed answer, and the response from crypto enthusiasts is vague and high level; most of what I hear is heavy on words like "revolutionize" and "decentralize" but very, very short on specifics. Or I get argument by analogy to other technologies. If I heard a single use case where blockchai…

The crux of what makes it popular is decentralization which is a fantastic feature and I'd argue the single feature that it has that regular currencies can't ever have. However, everyone doesn't have a wallet and about 60% of all bitcoin is in the hands of only about 10,000 wallets. It's one of those things, if everyone had it then it would work great but because no one has it, it doesn't work at all. In order to get it you need someone you trust to trade you it, which means a centralized exchange, high fees, and slow transactions. However, if you only ever live in a bitcoin or other decentralized coin economy, meaning you never have to trade out of it into another currency, then it can work for you. Say Tesla accepts bitcoin, and everyonjhe pays in bitcoin, it still has to pay it's suppliers who don't accept bitcoin, this means it has to make a conversion to regular currency, adding an additional step, making things slower and less liquid. It's one of those things that just won't work, until it does.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#242

Post by bbddg »

Mistletoe wrote: post #49
codebolt wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Zooming out and seeing the big picture' seems to mean buying into a libertarian vision of the world where the current money system is horribly broken and blockchain technologies are a viable and superior alternative. I profoundly disagree on all points of that analysis.

I’m not libertarian at all. I see cryptocurrency as a fair and transparent way out of the extreme wealth inequality we see in the world today. Decentralization gets me excited. New ways of using technology gets me excited.

There's no magic bullet for solving a problem like wealth inequality. It's a political problem that requires a political solution.

I'd also imagine that crypto ownership is massively concentrated in the top 10% wealthiest people anyways.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#243

Post by hunterb123 »

mujina93 wrote: post #222
hunterb123 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tipping site owners, BAT token. Incentivizing IPFS content pinning, Filecoin. Allowing censorship-resistant / chargeback free donations, most coins. Enabling private transactions, Monero. Most "dapps" empower decentralization, distributed exchanges, trading, DNS, ownership contracts (DOAs), etc. NFT's for art as silly as it is, more importantly for Handshake domain names and other cases where ownership proof comes in…

You can tip people with normal money. Paying for hosting with extremely volatile and environmental harmful tokens that only a part of population pretends has a real value, that you want to hoard rather than spend, and that might go to 0 at some point? To have basically torrents? Sending deflationary ponzi scheme tokens to people is not helping them. Also, fees are high. Private transactions are great if you are a cri…

> You can tip people with normal money.

If the powers at be allow you to (PayPal, banks, credit card companies)

If Mastercard doesn't like you or your wares (porn or dissent) good luck!

> Private transactions are great if you are a criminal, I'll give you that.

Tired old trope. You don't have to be a criminal to enjoy privacy.

> Tell me one "dapp" (or "extremely wasteful programs that run on a CPU that is orders and orders of magnitude slower than an actual one) that is doing something useful. I haven't found one yet and I've been searching for some years now.

I have, read above. Decentralizing. Exchanges, payment processors, distributed DNS, distributed CDN, distributed royalties.

>With NFTs you don't own anything, unless there's an actual contract that comes with it. Also you buy a hyperlink that points to central storage. Also money laundering and wash trading are rampant.

Tired old trope. It's simply a non-fungible token that can represent your ownership of an asset. You can own a Handshake domain using NFTs. There are other uses other than a hyperlink pointing to artwork. Yes others can access your domain and artwork, but you own it and you can sell it. In regards to your domain that's how you prove you own it and can admin it.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#244

Post by hunterb123 »

foepys wrote: post #175
hunterb123 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tipping site owners, BAT token. Incentivizing IPFS content pinning, Filecoin. Allowing censorship-resistant / chargeback free donations, most coins. Enabling private transactions, Monero. Most "dapps" empower decentralization, distributed exchanges, trading, DNS, ownership contracts (DOAs), etc. NFT's for art as silly as it is, more importantly for Handshake domain names and other cases where ownership proof comes in…

> Please feel free to go and attack all of those ideas and projects, but don't think for a second you can really gaslight people into believing they aren't worth of pursuit. This hostility is completely unnecessary. But if you want I can add one more to the list: funding the North Korean nuclear weapons program. https://www.zdnet.com/article/north-korean-hackers-stole-a-r...

That's subjective, I think the tone was warranted given your dismissive response to GP.

It's annoying to see the constant crypto bashing with tired talking points regurgitated.

Anyways, did my list meet your expectations of valid projects, is that why you started going on about NK, lol?

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#245

Post by pmlnr »

heroiccocoa wrote: post #233
hubraumhugo wrote: post #33

I'm still very opposed to the idea of taking a technology and then searching a problem for it. Why? Back in 2017 during the first hype cycle, blockchain companies raised hundreds of millions with ICOs. I became very interested in the technology too, and some friends still work in this space. 4 years later in the web3 era, there is not a single product aside from trading/finance that got traction. Use cases like stori…

Then you should be opposed to most basic (theoretical computer) science and mathematics research too that doesn't have any immediately apparent application. The scientific research to engineering pipeline is the backbone of our rapid technological progress. Basic research can target unexplored areas in a more organized fashion, allocating resources properly instead of industry's ad-hoc approach. Sort of like breath f…

Pour the same amount of money into math as people poured into cryptocurrencies then.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#246

Post by personjerry »

This article feels like it's just riding the crypto bandwagon for clicks.

The "early days" of something is relative to the lifespan of the thing. If crypto lasts for the next 1000 years then yes we are very much in the early days.

Moreover, a label like "early days" is entirely irrelevant, because really the question that needs to be asked is "Is it still changing, evolving, growing?" Based on what I've seen (I'm not a crypto enthusiast) the answer seems to be yes.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#247

Post by bbddg »

qaq wrote: post #116
cuteboy19 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so if we are depending on a centralized legal framework, why would we need the blockchain (decentralized store)? Wasn't Code supposed to be Law?

so we do not have to go through legal process to resolve anything

Law is not like code. It requires interpretation. You're nuts if you don't think most of these "smart contacts" wouldn't just end up in court anyways.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#248

Post by Dwolb »

spiderice wrote: post #235
Dwolb wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A cool example of NFT innovation is programmable royalty fees. Those fees can be directed back to the creator, the community, a DAO treasury. Configurations are infinite.

If I'm understanding what you're referring to, this is one of the worst part of NFTs. How is it any different than me having to pay Ford a royalty when I sell my used car on Craigslist? It's such a toxic feature for consumers. Sure, when used correctly it could be cool to help creators or whatever. It will absolutely be abused. It already is being abused by scammers who create NFTs that can't be sold.

It can be abused, but it allows the creator or developer to align incentives in different ways.

eg if the royalty goes toward a DAO, maybe that DAO’s charter is to grow awareness for the NFT project. Or the rewards could accrue toward a staked project token that all community members hold, or fees could go back to the creator to fund development for next gen.

I don’t know the best use, but my point is because someone programmed royalties, there’s now another dimension of configuration for NFT projects.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#249

Post by vorhemus »

To me, the most promising use cases for a blockchain would be activities that are today carried out by government agencies, states or lawyers. Anyone who has ever bought a property in central Europe knows how much money has to be spent on trustees and notaries. If such transactions can be carried out in a secure way between buyer and seller without an intermediary, that would be a huge win. However, the lobby of lawyers and notaries is big, the connections to politicians are tight and they will not give up this business easily. Additionally the public sector is not known for its fast technology adoption.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#250

Post by MaxfordAndSons »

betwixthewires wrote: post #15

> All that to say, a lot has changed in the technology world in the past six to twelve years It sure has. But not really that fundamentally, since 2009. A lot has changed in the blockchain space too. Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean it isn't true. A lot of those changes are on par with some of the tech advancements mentioned before my quote in the article. In 2009, you had bitcoin, so basically a dis…

> blockchains that handle incentivized file storage, alternate name lookup systems

It would be a shame if IPFS and Filecoin end up in the dustbin of history if the web3 music stops. They're the only reasonable non-financial applications of blockchain tech that I've been able to wrap my head around to date.

Post reply on HN