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

Why I’m Cryptophobic

bvp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 455 posts

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#381

Post by ETH_start »

throwaway413 wrote: post #377
ETH_start wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that is established. Distributed and permissionless systems don't need to handle the overhead of access control. They do have the computational overhead of massive redundancy, but that can be significantly reduced with zk-(SNARK/STARK) cryptography that provides succinct zero-knowledge proofs of validity. With zk-proofs, the redundancy of a blockchain can be significantly reduced without comprimising se…

Do you have any recommended readings on zk-proofs? Familiar with crypto, familiar with zcash, but haven’t looked into this enough and sounds promising. I am going to look into it. It’s been around for a bit already, why is it not more widely adopted compared to BTC/ETH, any thoughts?

This is a good write-up on how zk-proofs can be used to increase the scalability of blockchains:

https://polynya.medium.com/rollups-data-availability-layers-...

zcash initially used zk-proofs only for privacy. It is only now looking to utilize it for scalability.

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#382

Post by faeriechangling »

mjburgess wrote: post #4

There needs to be some basic economics here.. Money has value because of the value of the economic transactions in which its conducted. Government-backed currencies are forced to have value in the sense they force people to use it for their taxes. The US, additionally, forces the world to use it for oil trades. Value is in those economic transactions. A currency is just a "liquifying" of that value, to make it easier…

One of the biggest arguments I've seen for bitcoin is the theory that it's a store of value, and it can be valuable in the same sense less liquid financial instruments are useful. Not as a currency to buy bread and beer, but something to put your savings into.

Further, I've heard people emphasise crypto as being useful for things such as smart contracts and dApps. Even with a Lower transaction value, one could still theoretically do some higher value transactions with crypto.

I am not endorsing this argument, but I have heard of it.

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#383

Post by ludston »

datadata wrote: post #151
ludston wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can verify gold with a vessel of water, an already verified piece of gold and a set of scales. It's taught in story form to primary age children with the famous quote "Eureka I found it!"

For daily transactions at the current gold price, it would be extremely hard to do this sort of measurement that way with any precision without very specialized equipment. A gram of gold (around $60) is a reasonable daily transaction size and has a volume of 0.05ml. In order to distinguish metals of similar densities, you'd have to be able to measure just a fraction of that volume accurately. Maybe there is some clev…

Well one historic way of doing this, was instead of trading directly in minute quantities of gold, people would store larger amounts of gold in a bank and trade contracts that represent certain fractions of what is stored. This was called "currency".

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#384

Post by silentsea90 »

clintonwoo wrote: post #350
silentsea90 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget everything else, simply having an asset that's limited in quantity and almost impossible to seize is significantly better than any other alternative. A cursory reading of the rise and fall of civilizations and currencies will tell you how flawed the current fiat system is and how much better BTC is

Sure but how many people need to worry about their life savings being seized? Out of 300 million in the US for example? Maybe just criminals? Also I don't think civilization falling is really much to worry about. It would take years for civilization to fall, and if it does we can just buy gold or something with a real tangible value. Or maybe we can move to a crypto after it falls, which is something we can do after…

Nothing personal but your view of Govt is very very trust based, while mine is of skepticism. Executive order 6102[1] where the US Govt seized Gold from rank and file citizens is an example of the State's power when they chose to exercise it. This was back in the day when USD was pegged and the Govt didn't have money. So no, not just criminals, in fact, holding gold was criminal. BTC being seizure proof is critical as the power dynamic changes completely.

Moving to crypto or gold after it falls is much too late as your holdings would lose its value, but that's up to you. I can't say what would be used in such a case, but if countries with failing currencies are an example, they moved to buying USD, Bitcoin etc. Ultimately, you move to the best alternative and in the case of fiat, BTC imo is the one but who knows. I don't think you can just create a new blockchain and expect it to all work out after the fact :)

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#385

Post by forum_ghost »

mjburgess wrote: post #4

There needs to be some basic economics here.. Money has value because of the value of the economic transactions in which its conducted. Government-backed currencies are forced to have value in the sense they force people to use it for their taxes. The US, additionally, forces the world to use it for oil trades. Value is in those economic transactions. A currency is just a "liquifying" of that value, to make it easier…

Why then Turkey lira isn't very valuable? Turkey demands the lira for taxes too.

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#386

Post by olalonde »

babypuncher wrote: post #193
mjburgess wrote: post #4

There needs to be some basic economics here.. Money has value because of the value of the economic transactions in which its conducted. Government-backed currencies are forced to have value in the sense they force people to use it for their taxes. The US, additionally, forces the world to use it for oil trades. Value is in those economic transactions. A currency is just a "liquifying" of that value, to make it easier…

Just using BTC to replace all of McDonald's daily debit/credit card transactions would completely destroy the system. I don't know why people think they are refuting your argument by pointing out low-volume examples like porn sites.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Debit/credit card transactions are done through centralized systems. Bitcoin transactions can also be done at scale on those same centralized systems (aka "off-chain transactions").

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#387

Post by lumost »

jrm4 wrote: post #274
babypuncher wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just using BTC to replace all of McDonald's daily debit/credit card transactions would completely destroy the system. I don't know why people think they are refuting your argument by pointing out low-volume examples like porn sites.

But this feels like "Just using Model T's to transport all of the corn in the early 1900's would destroy the Model T system." Doesn't really say anything meaningful about "the impact of cars and trucks." I don't get why this is a useful argument; BTC and/or Crypto is definitely going to evolve. The question is how.

The problem, as with many things from the current tech cycle is that the valuation demands that this techomnology is available today.

DeFi may need to evolve, and it may need to do something other than blockchain - but something pre-product/market fit shouldn’t have a multi trillion dollar market cap.

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#388

Post by engmgrmgr »

aaroninsf wrote: post #371
engmgrmgr wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a rather myopic view. You could look at L2s as a sort of credit card system, and from a systems and technology POV there’s nothing inherently “scammy” about it. For web3 applications of any meaningful large scale, L2 solutions are necessary. For better or worse, the L2 developer platforms that I assume you’re referring to are essentially low-code solutions to abstract away the actual systems software engineeri…

This is as clear and succinct a statement as to why "web3" has nothing to offer as I have read. Translation: we will rebuild existing financial institutions with a bunch of move-fast break-things poorly-regulated "difi" companies which will both intentionally and through ignorance recapitulate every flaw of the existing financial industry. Purpose: as in the Celsius case, to intentionally exploit regulatory response…

I think this has been going on for at least 2000 years…

It doesn’t matter if it’s crypto or gold, there will always be people manipulating financial systems, but that doesn’t mean any system is inherently good or bad.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_33

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeWork

Re: Why I’m Cryptophobic

#390

Post by LtWorf »

olalonde wrote: post #386
babypuncher wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just using BTC to replace all of McDonald's daily debit/credit card transactions would completely destroy the system. I don't know why people think they are refuting your argument by pointing out low-volume examples like porn sites.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Debit/credit card transactions are done through centralized systems. Bitcoin transactions can also be done at scale on those same centralized systems (aka "off-chain transactions").

Then you are back to having a bank… Then what's the point?
Post reply on HN