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

411–420 of 1001 posts

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

#411

Post by freemanon »

rsanheim wrote: post #136
freemanon wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i suggest learning it properly before jumping to conclusions. everything has pros and cons. e.g. cars pollute but would you want to go back to riding horses? judge less, learn more

I actually would prefer riding horses if it were feasible and safe in my community, thank you very much =). I've learned enough at this point to know a scam when I see one, and I definitely don't need to go thru my history w/ software and tech bubbles and cryptocurrencies to explain why web 3.0 is full-on bullshit.

well i guess it's simpler to live with fast and decisive conclusions to new information. personally i try to manage my prejudice and keep giving chances for someone or a new piece of information to change my mind, in case i have the wrong understanding

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

#412

Post by jopsen »

shrimpx wrote: post #325
galaxyLogic wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buying real estate with bit-coin, isn't that close to money laundering?

If you bought your bitcoin with legit money, and then you exchanged the bicoin for a house, and you're doing your taxes correctly, how could that be money laundering?

> If you bought your bitcoin with legit money

How easy is it to actually buy 5M USD of bitcoin? Assuming you have legit money?

And why would you move legit money out of the banking system? Assume you have 5M USD in bitcoin, can you sell it and deposit that in your bank without lots of money laundering questions that are hard to answer?

My two cents is that if you have legit money, you will want to keep in the banking system, and avoid risks of being accused of money laundering.

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

#413

Post by bratwurst3000 »

duskwuff wrote: post #273
axg11 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn’t you say the same thing about the deed for a house?

Physically possessing the deed to a house doesn't make you its owner either.

The law makes me the owner… good we have something to trust that my house is my house… the law and not crypto ;)

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

#414

Post by freemanon »

mohanmcgeek wrote: post #89
freemanon wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i suggest learning it properly before jumping to conclusions. everything has pros and cons. e.g. cars pollute but would you want to go back to riding horses? judge less, learn more

I see more and more of this attitude these days: "Stop spreading disinformation. Educate yourself" A useful contribution would be to point out how exactly the GP is wrong. I can imagine the current international banking system get upgraded with a blockchain like technology such that you don't need a central bank of central banks. But the web3 guys simply want to compare detractors to luddites

my argument isn't that the GP's information is wrong per se, but that gross oversimplification through slapping labels like "scam" and "bullshit" against the merits of a technology is blind, just as blind as people who worship the blockchain.

my argument is for us to make our cases in an enlightened and civilised way instead of calling out names

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

#415

Post by ique »

meheleventyone wrote: post #405
ique wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the answer to killing the ad funding business model was individuals pay directly it’s going to face a steep uphill Indeed, we tried that and it failed, so we need something else. Blockchain will probably fail because the narrative has been taken over by greed and NFTs. But Web3 will fail because the tech world seemingly (as evidenced by the comments here) have no interest in solving the problems of Web2, rampant…

I personally think that all those things won’t be solved by technology but by social measures like regulation.

Then we're all doomed. Regulation has proven they have neither the interest nor capability to do anything about it, GDPR being the perfect example which have achieved nothing more than make Web2 more annoying to use.

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

#416

Post by mirzap »

meheleventyone wrote: post #342
Uehreka wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until 1998, my middle class American family didn’t have internet. I was a rather tech-curious kid, but until we actually had a second phone line run to our house and a new Gateway computer and a modem, there was this huge barrier to what I could learn about on our airgapped Windows 3.1 machine. My Dad was able to navigate the command line because he’d needed to on our previous DOS computer, so I feel like he could’ve…

I totally agree. We got the Internet in the mid-90s and by that point all the utility was totally obvious. Even using services like Wireplay for online gaming showed the potential very clearly. As you note adoption of the Internet is way more tied up in adoption of home computing and the exponential expansion of that. It was a pre-requisite. Blockchain tech on the other hand has no pre-requisites blocking adoption, j…

You have massive hardware pre-requisites for adopting any decentralized technology. Syncing Bitcoin node takes days, Ethereum weeks. Storage is constantly expanding. I think we still don't have hardware requirements to enable end-users decentralized self-sovereignty. You have storage limits, as well as network limits. This needs to improve (and get cheaper) more than 10x to enable blockchain native (meta) world.

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

#417

Post by Galanwe »

gambiting wrote: post #383
Galanwe wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> one day someone steals your private key which represents your car ownership, that person is now the owner of your car. Why take such a naive blockchain as example? You could very well have a proof of authority blockchain so that 3 notary have to sign a car transaction. You could also very well have revocation lists published on the blockchain by a further authority if keys are stolen. There are hundreds of ways to…

And literally none of it, not a single step that you mentioned requires blockchain.

> And literally none of it, not a single step that you mentioned requires blockchain.

Then tell me, where is this wonderful centralized database that tells me who owns which car?

Blockchains are not just about decentralization, it's also about publishing the actual databases in the wild for everyone to see, because you have the guarantee that no-one can fake it.

Sure, a lot of the use cases could be done with centralized databases, but that's the model we had for decades now, and I don't see any effort to make these centralized databases accessible to everyone.

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

#418

Post by Hjfrf »

faeyanpiraat wrote: post #390
traceddd wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fees are based on resource usage. In Bitcoin this is usually the total data size of inputs and outputs that are used to make the sum. This is where the issue of dust arises, when an address holds a mass quantity of low value inputs, but combing them yields a very large and therefore costly transaction. In some other chains, like Ethereum, the accounting is ledger based. With these systems theres is no variety in inpu…

You mean that I can have 1btc in 1 piece, or have basically 0 usable btc if I have 1btc gained in like a 1000 small transactions over time? So when I “spend” that fragmented 1 btc, it all gets eaten up by fees?

There was a update on bitcoin last year ("taproot") to improve that issue.

Prior to that it was absolutely the case that multiple sender addresses caused multiple fees.

Not sure about other cryptocurrency.

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

#419

Post by freemanon »

dmingod666 wrote: post #106
freemanon wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i suggest learning it properly before jumping to conclusions. everything has pros and cons. e.g. cars pollute but would you want to go back to riding horses? judge less, learn more

Read the article by moxie on NFTs. It is so poorly designed that a jr JavaScript developer with 6 months experience would be ashamed of it. Don't "Go-and-lean" us. We are technology people here not your non-tech crowd that'll get scared and silenced by "go and learn"

there is no arguing that the world of crypto is full of scams. just like the internet. we can learn and adopt new technologies while keeping down its externalities by understanding the pros and cons, not by slapping overgeneralised labels of "good" or "bad" on everything to cover for the lack of rounded understanding

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

#420

Post by jopsen »

friedman23 wrote: post #142

Not related to blockchain but just an interesting difference in perspective. Using 2010 to refer to "ages ago" is almost comical. The internet was created in the 60s and I'd say 2000-2010 was still early days for the internet. So saying something is old because it was created 10 years ago is just ridiculous.

2000-2010 internet companies had to actually have revenue, or have users or some value.

Before the dot-com bubble there was hype about anything involving the internet.

Just like today, any business plan involve blockchain is awesome.

Post reply on HN