It’s not still the early days of blockchain • Hacker News Board

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

#931

Post by CRConrad » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 12:46 PM UTC

mattdesl wrote: post #892

antifa wrote: post #861

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they sure do make a lot of noise What, you mean like randomly, unprompted? For no reason? What are they trying to sell you?

basically: adherence to centralized systems of value transfer, rejection of decentralized alternatives.

> rejection of decentralized alternatives.

Assumes facts not in evidence. Show me a "decentralized alternative" that doesn't a) reek to high heaven of Ponzi scheme evangelism or b) burns resources like there's no tomorrow, and I'll be all ears.

But that's not what's being touted here. The current Crypto-"currency" fandango has quite enough downsides as is; notice that it's usually its proponents who claim that any arguments against it are about its "decentralized alternative"-ness.

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

#932

Post by CRConrad » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 12:48 PM UTC

mrelectric wrote: post #567

mattdesl wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it goes both ways – "I used to be religious, now I am an atheist" (I was also against crypto/blockchains when I first learned about them last year)

As usual, truth is somewhere in the middle.

Quite often, it isn't.

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

#933

Post by CRConrad » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 12:49 PM UTC

tomxor wrote: post #899

floodyberry- wrote: post #803

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was no substantial justification given for changing their opinion. IF it was an honest post, it was entirely unconvincing

> But more recently after learning from and interacting with people building in the space my assessment changed.

Yeah, exactly: That's not a reasoned or reasonable justification.

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

#934

Post by CRConrad » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 1:15 PM UTC

bufferoverflow wrote: post #745

nly wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone doing P2P transfer and bypassing traditional banking institutions is a powerful idea... but ultimately everyone needs to agree on a single medium of exchange, otherwise efficient market pricing is too hard. And it's debatable whether fiat will ever whither and die. The Government will ultimately have to endorse a currency for tax purposes, and they'll always seek to control the inflationary environment so th…

> everyone needs to agree on a single medium of exchange No, everyone does not. You can easily exchange the coins you don't like for the coins you do. It's that simple.

Yeah, sure it's that simple. Hey, isn't this all about decentralising power, everyone being their own bank? So let's be really decentralised: Everyone should of course be their own central bank ("Fed"), and issue their own "coin".

So when I want to buy something from or sell something to you, I'm gonna say that a MyCoin is worth ten YouCoin; you'll presumably try to claim the opposite.

How "simple" is that?

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

#935

Post by CRConrad » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 1:28 PM UTC

tim333 wrote: post #846

doomrobo wrote: post #718

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not. The reason bank interest is lower is because the FDIC ensures that you get your money if the bank stops existing. If the company backing your stablecoin stops existing, what are you left with? Nothing, of course This not disruptive. This is just normal investing with all the risks attached

According to Nexo "Disrupting the financial system, one bit at a time." they have 3 million users on their saving platform. ( https://nexo.io/about-us ). I haven't used them and am not recommending them but there seems to be something going on there.

> not recommending them but there seems to be something going on there.

Isn't that exactly what they said about tulip bulbs too?

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

#936

Post by CRConrad » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 1:34 PM UTC

doktorhladnjak wrote: post #820

poof131 wrote: post #98

A few months ago I agreed with her entirely. Tether is an unbacked fraud and NFTs are being front-run [1, 2]. The mid-level marketing Ponzi vibe is crazy. The latency of applications on the blockchain is atrocious. But more recently after learning from and interacting with people building in the space my assessment changed. There is an interesting intersection between tech, communities, and economics. There exists a…

The big question in my mind: is this the internet in 1997 or expert systems in 1982? It could be the next big thing. Or it could be an interesting idea that was oversold and overhyped, that never really disappeared but became irrelevant as its real value became a commodity that found its way into the software of established companies.

> is this the internet in 1997 or expert systems in 1982? It could be the next big thing. Or it could be an interesting idea that was oversold and overhyped

...and then returned a few decades later to be oversold and overhyped some more, this time as "Deep Learning" or "AI".

Seems the alternatives on offer are scam or scam. (Or scam, scam, scam, ham, eggs, and scam.)

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

#937

Post by pyhtel » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 3:07 PM UTC

CRConrad wrote: post #925

zwkrt wrote: post #808

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Web 2.0 and 3.0 are not directly comparable just because they have similar names, a fallacy of equivocation. Web2.0 might have had a silly name, but the idea of the web as something that the average user and company could contribute back to and use to communicate with in real time provided explicit value and convenience over existing alternatives (letter writing, door-to-door sales, in-person self-promotion, calling…

> Web2.0 might have had a silly name … > I don’t see that with web3.0. I do.

Care to elaborate?

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

#938

Post by RustyConsul » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 4:25 PM UTC

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…

Comments like these make me wish hackernews had a follow button.

You leave the article with a certain conception and sometimes it's utterly shattered in the comments; This is one of those times.

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

#939

Post by RF_Savage » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 4:29 PM UTC

landemva wrote: post #877

ricardobeat wrote: post #798

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like giving central-bank levels of power to private entities. Which obviously follow from de-centralization. It’s insane. The only way this could be a reliable replacement for our existing financial systems, would be with strong oversight from.. some kind of central entity that acts on behalf of society’s collective best interests.. staffed by people chosen through popular voting..

I stay away from USDT. The sooner it disappears, the better. We no longer need central authorities to create good trusted products. Centralized can suck (communism, Federal Reserve bailouts of banks they regulate). DAI decisions are decentralized and done by the DAI holders. You may want to check it out.

Wouldn't USDT crashing wipe out most large cryptos as well? 70% of BTC liquidity seems to be in USDT.

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

#940

Post by mattdesl » Mon, Jan 17, 2022, 5:04 PM UTC

CRConrad wrote: post #931

mattdesl wrote: post #892

Earlier quoted context omitted.

basically: adherence to centralized systems of value transfer, rejection of decentralized alternatives.

> rejection of decentralized alternatives. Assumes facts not in evidence. Show me a "decentralized alternative" that doesn't a) reek to high heaven of Ponzi scheme evangelism or b) burns resources like there's no tomorrow, and I'll be all ears. But that's not what's being touted here. The current Crypto-"currency" fandango has quite enough downsides as is; notice that it's usually its proponents who claim that any ar…

there are many non-PoW chains and applications built on top of them that meet your criteria, and are already benefiting from the decentralization of these networks. I wrote about one case here:

https://mattdesl.substack.com/p/hicetnunc-and-the-merits-of-...