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

281–290 of 1001 posts

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

#281

Post by landslide »

smokey_circles wrote: post #197
magicjosh wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a pyramid scheme that certainly holds up. Whoever joins last seems most incentivized to bring others in. Has anyone modeled pyramid scheme dynamics to Bitcoin perhaps at an academic level? (Disclosure I own Bitcoin and Ethereum)

I don't understand how bitcoin is a ponzi scheme. There's no pyramid shape, which is kind of crucial. "Just look at the whales" uh huh, you mean like the dollar? It's just a value store. Debating the efficacy of the value store is fine, labeling it a ponzi scheme seems reductive to absurdity. The real problem (unsurprisingly) is with fiat currencies. These are heavily regulated, nearly made up values. That crash, oft…

I think most people don't get the dichotomy, and misconstrue things by attempting comparisons to a historic precedence. The truth is there is none. The breakthrough is fundamentally a trusted centralised store, which is decentralised in topology. No single person or organisation is in control, a self sufficient network, gamed into existence.

I am still surprised people continue to be still so enamoured by the financial aspects, which is the all important fuel to keep the engine going. Greed is a hell of a motivating factor though.

IMHO this is just the first generation, it will evolve in ways we cannot predict, but it is revolutionary and challenges banks and financial institutions to the core.

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

#282

Post by Thorrez »

jhrmnn wrote: post #220
tintor wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have to trust each other. ie. No need to have a dedicated treasurer.

In the end, someone has power over the things in the real world, like releasing a version of the software or purchasing stuff. So everyone involved has to trust that someone at the least.

If the developer introduces a major change, it'll fork the chain. Everyone on the old version of the software will see one chain, everyone on the new version will see the new chain. If not many people switch, the old chain will be the valuable one. So it's kind of a voting system where the community as a whole votes. If the vote isn't decisive, both chains have value.

As far as purchasing stuff, there's no central purchaser that I can think of.

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

#283

Post by RandomLensman »

neiman wrote: post #259
RandomLensman wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you comply with compliance and reporting requirements? I would naively imagine that interacting with the financial system/fullfilling requirements for cross border payments etc. are still difficult when everyone is anonymous Not saying you are doing something wrong but rather that I see a lot of applications in the wild that have to do with people imagining also a different regulatory landscape - which actuall…

I transfer all my financial actions to my accountant who's reporting it while instructing me what I need to do further. Compliance and reporting really differ from one country to another, and I'm not familiar with the US system (which I heard is one of the most strict). But as far as I checked (I'm not a lawyer, not an accountant and not an expert), where I live in the EU, compliance is something for legal entities (…

Thanks. So pretty traditional in that respect - sounds like a nice example of getting both worlds to work. In my work I also see this kind of "non-maximalist" use cases as the more successful at the moment.

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

#284

Post by yashg »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #37
throwawaylinux wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the big picture then? I've never got anything concrete that doesn't sound like the usual buzz word snake oil. Blockchains solve the wrong problem for a lot of the proposed applications I've seen, like handwaving about "supply chain". The biggest difficulty is not that you don't trust the database, it's that you don't trust the connection between the electronic data and reality. How do you trust a person to ha…

>>So aside from coins, where else is it that you would not trust a central database, but you can verify/trust the entries being added to that database? I would not trust a central database for any application, even those where I have to trust the verifiers of the entries to that database. E.g. I would prefer stablecoins over credit in a bank. With a decentralized database, immutability and permissionlessness are the…

You can't trust a central database but you can trust a central blockchain? A proof of work blockchain which is trustless and permissionless and has many nodes can be trusted to be tamperproof and immutable, but it is also slow and inefficient (thanks to PoW). A PoW blockchain is inefficient by deaign, it's a feature not a bug beucase that is what gives it's trust without trusting.

But when you make that blockchain private, trustful, and permissioned (only designated nodes can add blocks) you are taking away the very properties that make the blockchain immutable. And it has to be done because that is what enterprises would want. So an enterprise blockchain like Corda/Hyperledger is no different than a central database. And no serious business least of all banks would do their business on a public truly distributed open blockchain.

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

#285

Post by qaq »

bbddg wrote: post #247
qaq wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

thats the legal framework in place bit.

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

#286

Post by meotimdihia »

tjs8rj wrote: post #217
ique wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that blockchain tech is somehow invented out of nothing and then we search for a problem to match couldn't be further from the truth. Talk to anyone who works in the industry and they're trying to solve a problem. I used to work in blockchain tech and the main problem I was focused on was "How do we prevent internet monopolies like Facebook and Google?". If you don't see those monopolies as a problem, then y…

How does blockchain tech prevent monopolies exactly? Any environment that respects property rights and has activities that can be done more efficiently with scale and concentration will have centralization. Cryptocurrencies themselves are centralized by almost every dimension because mining exhibits those characteristics. Nearly any interesting on chain technology is centralized in that a minority disproportionately…

how about https://github.com/oneclickdapp/ethereum-auth

And decentralized storage coins for example.

Bitcoin can solve USD monopoly.

And a lot of other examples...

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

#287

Post by usrbinbash »

vorhemus wrote: post #249

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 lawy…

Until the first person gets tricked into signing over his property for free...then suddenly, all these lawyers, agencies and notaries are back on the track again, because it turns out they were there for a good reason the entire time: To make sure its really really really hard to get someone to hand over his home via something like a typo or a misclick.

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

#288

Post by vba616 »

darawk wrote: post #211
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…

> I'm still very opposed to the idea of taking a technology and then searching a problem for it. So, you're opposed to the internet, then?

Maybe you could refer to some history more specifically? Are you saying networking technology was developed in advance of a concept of what it's useful for?

Or is it that a global network of networks was a qualitative step beyond simple networking that didn't have a clear justification?

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

#289

Post by hunterb123 »

erik_seaberg wrote: post #277
hunterb123 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Virtual game currencies, controversial politics, porn, gambling etc. Basically anything Stripe / PayPal locks your account for and considers you high risk or CC companies block.

They are targets for testing stolen numbers: https://blog.sift.com/2016/card-testing-chargebacks-and-nonp... I can also imagine political orgs having foes.

Yup, and crypto nips that in the bud. If you get a confirmed transaction, it's not going to be reversed by some unfair arbitration, you can trust it.

It sucks trying to run a game losing $20+ per chargeback and risking getting funds frozen entirely.

It sucks to be delisted by PayPal over political bullshit.

It sucks Mastercard and other CC companies can decide porn is essentially illegal.

- edit @ notahacker -

The point is you're at the whim of PayPal, Stripe, and credit card company policies for traditional fiat currency.

Have fun trying to sell guns (FFL be damned), porn subs (legal like you mentioned), virtual currency (legal ofc), or anything like that with traditional processors.

Crypto is the only option for those industries and a few others if you want to accept payment online.

Doesn't matter how many billions the industry is worth if you can't accept a credit card on your site for the service.

If all majors processors ban it, it's essentially blocked.

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

#290

Post by rvba »

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…

> web3 era

There is no web3, nor web3 era. It is a marketing buzzword.

Post reply on HN