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

Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 393 posts

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#331

Post by tim333 »

doedoedoedoe wrote: post #15
abzolv wrote: post #4

From a technical perspective you are correct. However, in the midst of a mania, unfortunately nobody is going to listen to a group of engineers telling them about the dangers of blockchain. The only thing that will, and can, stop the madness is politicians getting off their backsides and implementing related laws and regulations. If you want to talk to anyone, and have any potential effect, talk to the people in gove…

I think that there is still time to inform general consumers so the vast majority are aware of the dangers before cryptocurrencies are made friendly enough to use for the average non-tech or finance folk. We are definitely hitting a point where these scams have to reach out beyond crypto-bros, finance gamblers, and the tech-savvy so that they can sustain the pyramid - and if people are aware before that happens, hope…

Yesterday in Central London there was a van going around with LED displays on the side, I think flogging ape NFTs. They seem to be reaching out.

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#332

Post by pabe »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #118
pabe wrote: post #43

DLTs are not the problem. The problem is idiocracy. Most people don't think anymore. Some people even buy NFTs thinking ownership right come with those - not even asking legal questions... DLTs can indeed be incredibly useful, e.g. when multiple parties use the tech as a trusted pseudonymous data log, e.g. drug tracking from production to pharmacies. Or decentralized certificate wallets which allow you to actually ow…

> Most people don't think anymore. Do you really believe that making mistakes is somehow on the rise, or that as a race we are getting less intelligent? This doesn't seem like a genuine argument other than a generic "people are dumb and getting dumber" statement.

You're right, I didn't provide a single source. Sorry for that! Here is one: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2020/04/29/te...

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#333

Post by pabe »

riskneutral wrote: post #318
pabe wrote: post #43

DLTs are not the problem. The problem is idiocracy. Most people don't think anymore. Some people even buy NFTs thinking ownership right come with those - not even asking legal questions... DLTs can indeed be incredibly useful, e.g. when multiple parties use the tech as a trusted pseudonymous data log, e.g. drug tracking from production to pharmacies. Or decentralized certificate wallets which allow you to actually ow…

> DLTs can indeed be incredibly useful, e.g. when multiple parties use the tech as a trusted pseudonymous data log, e.g. drug tracking from production to pharmacies. Why can't they just use a database? Tracking information isn't a new problem.

* Because traditional databases are owned by a specific party. You have to trust that party.

* Because most traditional databases are not designed to be decentralized.

* Because administrators by default can change data in databases. Of course you can work your way around that and get an audit for your solution. But it is a native feature of blockchains.

Let's say it is law pharmacies have to ensure each drug they sell was produced by a trusted vendor and rules regarding logistics (e.g. temperature) were respected. Nobody must be able to manipulate that data and it has to be available offline for all pharmacies in case the network goes down. It'd be almost trivial to set something like this up using a blockchain. In an early prototype, you'd just give each party one or more wallets (private keys), allow the pharma to mint a token for each package and track how those are sent between wallets, each representing a different state in the supply chain. Pharmacies run a full node to have data available in case anything goes down. I made it a bit easier here than it likely would be in reality, but I hope I can transport the beauty of the approach.

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#334

Post by dns_snek »

riskneutral wrote: post #312
pedalpete wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about international money transfer for a start? I can and have moved money internationally in minutes for less than it would cost through the SWIFT system which would take days. This is all fine and good for me, as I live in a developed country, so I "could" just use SWIFT ,but what about remittance payments? For people who have a mobile phone, but no bank (a large number of people in the developing world), a rel…

The only people who could be making any serious of cryptocurrency for international money transfer is organized crime and money launderers. Sending remittance payments in cryptocurrency does not make sense for people who are sending their hard earned dollars back to their home country to support their impoverished families. The risk exposure to exchange rate fluctuations, and risk of loss of funds in transit (due to…

> The risk exposure to exchange rate fluctuations,

This is true to a degree, but intra-day fluctuation are typically not going to be severe enough to pose a significant risk. The "risk" of the value going up is pretty much the same as the value going down on such short time scales, so any fluctuations should realistically even out after some time.

> and risk of loss of funds in transit (due to fraud, hacking, losing a crypto wallet, sending money to the wrong wallet, etc),

The risk of that happening is minimal to none depending on how well you prepare. Loss of funds is not something that typically "happens" to you, it's something you do. And it's usually pretty hard to do that.

If you're sending funds to someone repeatedly, you only need to get their address once. Send a small, let's say $1 transaction to see if you have the correct address.

Hardware wallets eliminate the risk of hacking, but you can avoid it through other means as well.

> the fees associated with cryptocurrency transfers,

Outside of Bitcoin and Ethereum, fees for cryptocurrency transfers are practically zero. Prime examples of this are Monero and Litecoin where transfers might cost $0.01, but you might get away without paying a fee at all.

> and the extremely slow transfer times,

Both Monero and Litecoin have a block time of around 2 minutes and transactions are usually completed within 5 minutes. Deposits to exchanges might take up to 30 minutes due to stricter requirements.

Traditional banking system usually takes at least 1 working day or more.

> all makes cryptocurrency a totally inappropriate product for the demographic that you are suggesting be targeted.

I'm not going to support or refute that, but I did want to point out that all of your claims above are wrong and don't support the argument you're trying to make.

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#335

Post by 300bps »

brian_cloutier wrote: post #305
300bps wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The word immutable has a meaning. Blockchain does not fit that meaning. Immutable doesn’t mean, “as long as 51% of miners want it to not change”. Immutable doesn’t mean, “doesn’t change unless we get hacked and then we’ll change it”. I could give more examples. Blockchains are not immutable.

Blockchains are not immutable because nothing made of matter is immutable. If you wanted something to be immutably published you probably want to get it into a major print newspaper; it would be extremely difficult to find and destroy every single copy of the WSJ for 2022-01-28. Even that is not immutable though, finding and destroying every single copy is possible . Hopefully you agree that it is nice to have the wo…

You seem to be assuming that I am making the mistake of robotically defining the word "immutable" to some impossible level of unchanging.

I assure you I am not. I am simply pointing out the ridiculousness of someone stating that blockchains are immutable when they are changeable and have changed.

In contrast, your example of snatching up every copy of a major print newspaper for a single day has never happened and will never happen.

But blockchains have changed and once regulators and courts get involved, you'll see just how malleable they are.

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#336

Post by scott_s »

exdsq wrote: post #287
scott_s wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ve described a share in a private company. Not only do you not need an NFT for that, using an NFT provides you no additional guarantees.

Cool! How would you like to open a private company and manage that, including accounts and taxes, for every song?

NFTs don’t do that for you. The company linked still has to do that.

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#337

Post by cuteboy19 »

pabe wrote: post #333
riskneutral wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> DLTs can indeed be incredibly useful, e.g. when multiple parties use the tech as a trusted pseudonymous data log, e.g. drug tracking from production to pharmacies. Why can't they just use a database? Tracking information isn't a new problem.

* Because traditional databases are owned by a specific party. You have to trust that party. * Because most traditional databases are not designed to be decentralized. * Because administrators by default can change data in databases. Of course you can work your way around that and get an audit for your solution. But it is a native feature of blockchains. Let's say it is law pharmacies have to ensure each drug they se…

Why not just have the trusted vendor expose an api for all the info? An append only linked list is ludicrously expensive solution to this problem. To a person with a hammer, everything is a nail.

Also, the problem itself is very convoluted and likely doesn't exist in the real world. You trust the vendors enough to let them do the data entry but distrust them thinking that they will manipulate the entered data somehow? It's a very strange situation

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#338

Post by cuteboy19 »

exdsq wrote: post #287
scott_s wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ve described a share in a private company. Not only do you not need an NFT for that, using an NFT provides you no additional guarantees.

Cool! How would you like to open a private company and manage that, including accounts and taxes, for every song?

An NFT is just a receipt, it doesn't do any of the above. It's only better than a paper receipt in that it can be transmitted electronically.

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#339

Post by cuteboy19 »

thrwn_frthr_awy wrote: post #311
exdsq wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monero is a privacy-focused cryptocurrency. It obfuscates transactions while keeping the technical perks of a decentralized ledger.

Thank you. Would it correct to compare it to using cash in person, but online?

Yes, it is the international cash for drug dealers and the like

Re: Tell HN: We have a responsibility to speak out against blockchain technologies

#340

Post by dns_snek »

timeon wrote: post #322
dns_snek wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, maybe not. If you're worried about the climate change impact, you can start now by charging additional taxes on all energy consumption. Why should cryptocurrency be singled out? Just because some people dislike it? We haven't done much about climate change and the big pollutants in decades, but as soon as cryptocurrencies come up, it's suddenly treated as an existential threat to human kind - I don't buy it.

> Maybe, maybe not. If we are talking about climate change, time is quickly running out. So talking about wishful thinking while reality is actually other way around does not seems to be helpful.

Can you quantify the impact on climate change that PoW is going to have if we don't act against it immediately?
Post reply on HN