AWS and Blockchain • Hacker News Board

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#11

Post by acdha » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:49 AM UTC

x86x87 wrote: post #8

I believe that putting the equal sign between a blockchain and a database is fundamentally wrong. I also think that a lot of "cryptos" were just get rich quick schemes. After the dust settles we will see if blockchain is really useful or not.

Note that he wasn’t saying that it was identical to a classic database but rather that the applications being built were treating it like one. I’ve seen a number of hypotheticals batted around and it was clear that most of them could have been a database, perhaps with signatures on certain records, because they didn’t need any of the anonymous aspects.

That could be a sign that developers don’t know how to architect blockchain apps but that’s probably the same as saying most people don’t need blockchains. It seems unlikely that there’s sone widespread benefit still to be discovered rather than maybe some niche applications.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#12

Post by smt88 » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:52 AM UTC

x86x87 wrote: post #8

I believe that putting the equal sign between a blockchain and a database is fundamentally wrong. I also think that a lot of "cryptos" were just get rich quick schemes. After the dust settles we will see if blockchain is really useful or not.

> I believe that putting the equal sign between a blockchain and a database is fundamentally wrong

In what way is a blockchain not a cryptographically-verified, distributed, append-only database? If you added a consensus protocol to git, you'd have a blockchain.

I'd say it's fundamentally right because the fundamentals are the same.

> After the dust settles we will see if blockchain is really useful or not.

Blockchain has been around for more than 10 years. If it had any valid use cases, we'd see them in use already, regardless of what crypto bros are doing.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#13

Post by x86x87 » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:53 AM UTC

yumraj wrote: post #9

x86x87 wrote: post #8

I believe that putting the equal sign between a blockchain and a database is fundamentally wrong. I also think that a lot of "cryptos" were just get rich quick schemes. After the dust settles we will see if blockchain is really useful or not.

In your opinion how long is it before the dust will settle? IMHO, the dust has already settled and been washed away by the rain water..

I think there are 2 scenarios really: 1) btc and eth go to zero or 2) we have btc and eth gaining the full recognition and regulation

Blockchain as a technology is revolutionary and will be used in niche problems outside of crypto.

One thing that most people seem to miss is that money is only as good as our faith in it. No matter what instrument you use this has to apply.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#14

Post by wmf » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:53 AM UTC

legutierr wrote: post #10

> He named a region in Asia and explained that the small farmers there mark their landholdings carefully, but then the annual floods sometimes wash the markers away. Then unscrupulous larger landowners use the absence of markers to cut away at the smallholdings of the poorest. “But if the boundary markers were on the blockchain,” he said, “they wouldn’t be able to do that, would they?” The developed world is distingu…

The real promise of blockchains is that they can provide a technological framework upon which to build new institutions that are alternatives to the types of institutions that are foundational to developed economies.

There's no evidence that this is true. People have been saying this for years and there's nothing to show for it.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#15

Post by toomuchtodo » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:54 AM UTC

legutierr wrote: post #10

> He named a region in Asia and explained that the small farmers there mark their landholdings carefully, but then the annual floods sometimes wash the markers away. Then unscrupulous larger landowners use the absence of markers to cut away at the smallholdings of the poorest. “But if the boundary markers were on the blockchain,” he said, “they wouldn’t be able to do that, would they?” The developed world is distingu…

You cannot replace illegitimate or suboptimal institutions with systems of record or value storage and transfer they don’t have to respect or acknowledge, just as a court who cannot enforce their ruling has no authority. The systems are simply tools, it is the execution layer (ie government very broadly) that determines the outcome.

If your property record is on a blockchain but those whose recognize such rights ignore it, it’s not a property record, for example. It’s an internet comment or public expression of opinion. Similarly, what makes your name typed on a Docusign a legally binding signature? Federal statute recognizing it as such.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#16

Post by l33t233372 » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:54 AM UTC

legutierr wrote: post #10

> He named a region in Asia and explained that the small farmers there mark their landholdings carefully, but then the annual floods sometimes wash the markers away. Then unscrupulous larger landowners use the absence of markers to cut away at the smallholdings of the poorest. “But if the boundary markers were on the blockchain,” he said, “they wouldn’t be able to do that, would they?” The developed world is distingu…

I have some serious problems believing your argument. For example, this:

> Is a smart contract better than a written contract? Maybe it is, if there is no functioning judiciary to adjudicate contractual disputes.

If there’s no functioning judiciary, then who will enforce the contract? Who will decide if one side is not acting in good faith, or if there was coercion, or deception? I claim that smart contracts solve none of the issues actually caused by having weak institutions.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#17

Post by x86x87 » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:55 AM UTC

acdha wrote: post #11

x86x87 wrote: post #8

I believe that putting the equal sign between a blockchain and a database is fundamentally wrong. I also think that a lot of "cryptos" were just get rich quick schemes. After the dust settles we will see if blockchain is really useful or not.

Note that he wasn’t saying that it was identical to a classic database but rather that the applications being built were treating it like one. I’ve seen a number of hypotheticals batted around and it was clear that most of them could have been a database, perhaps with signatures on certain records, because they didn’t need any of the anonymous aspects. That could be a sign that developers don’t know how to architect…

Imho blockchain == distributed consensus in a low trust environment. When you are talking about a database and managing it you are by default outside of the low trust zone (or there exists an authority that everyone trusts)

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#18

Post by Ancapistani » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:55 AM UTC

grogenaut wrote: post #5

obblekk wrote: post #3

It's interesting to read how much research tbray did on crypto back then. Definitely doesn't seem like new entrants today were doing the same level of diligence, on average.

Yes I didn't see a single .com name a stadium or bowl game or have most of the super bowl ads in 1999 at all, none at all. Oh wait yes I did, literally every superbowl ad was a dot com right before the .com bust. https://www.cnbc.com/2010/01/20/The-Stadium-Curse:-Naming-De... puts a nice writeup of all the comapnies that went under after naming stadiums, there's quite a few from the .com bust. Aah WorldCom how I miss…

Playing Devil’s Advocate here a bit: what’s the size of the tech industry today, compared to the heights just before the “.com bust”?

Maybe there is room for one more boom cycle.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#19

Post by l33t233372 » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:55 AM UTC

x86x87 wrote: post #13

yumraj wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your opinion how long is it before the dust will settle? IMHO, the dust has already settled and been washed away by the rain water..

I think there are 2 scenarios really: 1) btc and eth go to zero or 2) we have btc and eth gaining the full recognition and regulation Blockchain as a technology is revolutionary and will be used in niche problems outside of crypto. One thing that most people seem to miss is that money is only as good as our faith in it. No matter what instrument you use this has to apply.

In what sense is blockchain revolutionary? Merkle trees are many decades old.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#20

Post by felixgallo » Mon, Nov 21, 2022, 3:57 AM UTC

legutierr wrote: post #10

> He named a region in Asia and explained that the small farmers there mark their landholdings carefully, but then the annual floods sometimes wash the markers away. Then unscrupulous larger landowners use the absence of markers to cut away at the smallholdings of the poorest. “But if the boundary markers were on the blockchain,” he said, “they wouldn’t be able to do that, would they?” The developed world is distingu…

If there's no functioning judiciary to adjudicate contractual disputes, then who is going to effectively and durably tell someone who won and enforce that with the threat of state-level punishment? If a state agency can be bribed, what's claiming to have an NFT going to do for the holder, besides radically increase their property ownership risk if they actually rely on that to be true?

The problem with all of these cockamamie blockchain arguments is that they talk about a problem, and then they talk about a (bad, expensive, difficult to use) database that might form part of that problem, but in fact the problem is always far bigger and way more complicated than the choice of the database vendor.