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

In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

vitalik.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 234 posts

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#11

Post by game_the0ry »

tgv wrote: post #6
buildbuildbuild wrote: post #3

It's no coincidence that some of the strongest criticism against cryptocurrency happens here, in a community mostly of banked, relatively prosperous people in stable countries. May you never personally experience being unbanked or otherwise financially oppressed.

Perhaps it's because the people on a tech forum see the problems of a tech hammer banging on everything it perceives as a nail better than others?

My friend, I worked in the tech side of a big bank that you might have an account with, so I have seen how the sausage is made. I would trust Google, Apple, and many other tech companies with my money.

A better analogy - tech improves the hammer, it does not have to re-invent it. Example: open your phone and marvel at how easily you can send and receive funds from you banking app; 10+ years ago, you would have to go to a bank to do that.

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#12

Post by phyro »

tromp wrote: post #7

> Blockchains sacrifice privacy, requiring even crazier and more expensive technology to get that privacy back. The Mimblewimble protocol [0] bucks that trend, providing more privacy at the base layer while being less expensive in terms of the historical size of transactions [1]. > a focus on simplicity and deep mathematical purity: a 1 MB block size, a 21 million coin limit A supply of 50/(2^{height/210000}) coins e…

There's also something to be said about extreme design simplicity and resilience to change. Bitcoin is already really good at this, but when the system design is so simple that any change looks invasive, it ossifies even sooner and makes changes even less likely. Removing opportunities for discussion (e.g. scripting support and opcode discussions) also removes opportunity for conflicts regarding a protocol feature. Simpler design may come at the cost of slightly less expressivity, but at the benefit of being naturally more resilient to change.

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#13

Post by game_the0ry »

NoblePublius wrote: post #9

Why is uncensorable money worth the risk of permanently losing your money because you forgot a password or lost a thumb drive?

Trade offs - bitcoin is not a free lunch.

If you want to be fully sovereign with your wealth, you have to accept full responsibility of that wealth. If that is not a responsibility you want bc you believe it is too risky, then do not buy bitcoin.

Or, you can trust centralized authority (a bank) with that responsibility; obviously, the trade off is you lose full control of your wealth.

Additionally, how you approach ownership of your wealth is not binary. Nothing is stopping you from putting some proportion of each in either bank or bitcoin.

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#14

Post by topynate »

NoblePublius wrote: post #9

Why is uncensorable money worth the risk of permanently losing your money because you forgot a password or lost a thumb drive?

That is an inherently subjective question, possibly with different answers for people in different circumstances and with different risk appetites.

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#15

Post by shafyy »

game_the0ry wrote: post #10
zzzeek wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

correct me if I'm wrong but people using bitcoin in oppressed countries will basically be rendered penniless by simply cutting off network access. source: https://lukeplant.me.uk/blog/posts/the-technological-case-ag...

As long as you know your private key and / or seed phrase, you will always have access to your wallet's funds. As soon as you get network access, you can transact. You literally have to cut off the internet to stop crypto - that is part of what makes it so compelling.

No, an authoritarian government can always make it illegal to own crypto and/or to exchange crypto to fiat.

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#16

Post by rideontime »

game_the0ry wrote: post #10
zzzeek wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

correct me if I'm wrong but people using bitcoin in oppressed countries will basically be rendered penniless by simply cutting off network access. source: https://lukeplant.me.uk/blog/posts/the-technological-case-ag...

As long as you know your private key and / or seed phrase, you will always have access to your wallet's funds. As soon as you get network access, you can transact. You literally have to cut off the internet to stop crypto - that is part of what makes it so compelling.

I don't understand your comment. Is there a meaningful difference between having "access to your wallet's funds" and being able to "transact"?

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#17

Post by rtkwe »

game_the0ry wrote: post #11
tgv wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps it's because the people on a tech forum see the problems of a tech hammer banging on everything it perceives as a nail better than others?

My friend, I worked in the tech side of a big bank that you might have an account with, so I have seen how the sausage is made. I would trust Google, Apple, and many other tech companies with my money. A better analogy - tech improves the hammer, it does not have to re-invent it. Example: open your phone and marvel at how easily you can send and receive funds from you banking app; 10+ years ago, you would have to go…

My rule of thumb for tech companies is they're all a mess under the covers so every company looks bad from the inside compared to the outside.

> I would trust Google, Apple, and many other tech companies with my money.

When I have a problem and need to call my bank I can usually get an actual person or even go to a branch where I can annoy someone in person, where as Google acts like categorically opposed to support even to people paying or making them money.

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#18

Post by cinntaile »

rideontime wrote: post #16
game_the0ry wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as you know your private key and / or seed phrase, you will always have access to your wallet's funds. As soon as you get network access, you can transact. You literally have to cut off the internet to stop crypto - that is part of what makes it so compelling.

I don't understand your comment. Is there a meaningful difference between having "access to your wallet's funds" and being able to "transact"?

Well the parent claimed they would be rendered penniless. If you're temporarily unable to transact you're not penniless.

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#19

Post by Cobragri »

tromp wrote: post #7

> Blockchains sacrifice privacy, requiring even crazier and more expensive technology to get that privacy back. The Mimblewimble protocol [0] bucks that trend, providing more privacy at the base layer while being less expensive in terms of the historical size of transactions [1]. > a focus on simplicity and deep mathematical purity: a 1 MB block size, a 21 million coin limit A supply of 50/(2^{height/210000}) coins e…

''Eth fails miserably ''

Ethereum failed already at beginning. A blockchain; Mutable ,premined and ICO is already there. Eth is the target for regulations and censorship sooner or later. And i agree with that scalability is very important part of decentralization. Privacy and scalability well balanced in MimbleWimble.

Re: In Defense of Bitcoin Maximalism

#20

Post by emXdem »

zzzeek wrote: post #5
buildbuildbuild wrote: post #3

It's no coincidence that some of the strongest criticism against cryptocurrency happens here, in a community mostly of banked, relatively prosperous people in stable countries. May you never personally experience being unbanked or otherwise financially oppressed.

correct me if I'm wrong but people using bitcoin in oppressed countries will basically be rendered penniless by simply cutting off network access. source: https://lukeplant.me.uk/blog/posts/the-technological-case-ag...

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN