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

AWS and Blockchain

tbray.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 724 posts

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#81

Post by timbray »

amluto wrote: post #62

> But the Eth folk managed to get proof-of-stake to work at scale; good on ’em. That’s a bit charitable IMO. It works with at least two major caveats: 1. You can’t unstake staked ETH. (This seems to have all manner of strange effects.). Fixing this is apparently a big deal, and, if nothing else, could enable attacks in which one unstakes and then uses knowledge of old staked private keys to attack other parties. 2. I…

Well, they did manage to cut their energy usage by like 100x. Gotta respect that. Not that I think Eth is currently used for anything but scams.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#82

Post by throwaway290 »

dangero wrote: post #70
tootie wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pornhub was cut off for failing to police child pornography. Why would you want to participate in a financial system that was incapable of excluding evildoers?

why would you want to participate in an internet that is incapable of excluding evildoers?

because internet is not the mechanism that allows distributors and producers of CSAM to get paid?

But good point, with cryptocurrency the internet would obviously have to become capable of excluding evildoers.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#83

Post by nixgeek »

hahnchen wrote: post #79

Unrelated, but > Which was pretty nice, except for it was stinking hot that August and we were on multiple steamy subway trips every day; got back to our hotel rooms pretty well emptied out. Upper level amazon engineers can’t take ubers through new york?

In 2016? It was probably going to take 2-3x longer to Uber around Manhattan. Traffic sucks.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#84

Post by dastbe »

legutierr wrote: post #59
rippercushions wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The technology here is the least of that small shareholder's problems. To register that land, they need to convince a corruptible human to accept their application, get another corruptible human to enter the data correctly in the database and get a third corruptible human to give them an authentic certificate proving that their land holding has been registered. You can already see three points where this can be trivi…

> Finally and most fundamentally, a land registry is by nature a centralized registry of holdings with a legal monopoly. Why on earth would you need to use a blockchain here, when an append-only database does the same job? Records within an append-only database running on a central server can be altered or deleted by whomever has the root password to that server. The only way to guard against that risk is to replicat…

> The only way to guard against that risk is to replicate and publicize the data, make sure all data modifications are cryptographically signed and valid according the logic of the application, and incorporate into each new version of the data a hash of prior versions of the data, in order to guard against data deletions. In other words, to implement a blockchain.

nothing you’ve described here requires the decentralized parts of a blockchain. there exist centralized databases that have all of these properties, and people have mentioned them in the comments.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#85

Post by miracle2k »

throwaway290 wrote: post #76
cypress66 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That should be dealt with by the justice system, not some corporations.

Payment processors saw the writing on the wall. The reason they did what they did and PH made a 180 and disposed of incriminating content all in one month is because justice system has teeth and they did not want to find themselves liable. And justice system has teeth because PH is a proper company participating in a financial system. Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting…

There is no reason for payment processors to be liable. If you have a problem with Bitcoin, you need to support a general, unrestricted right be all persons and orgs to be served by the financial system, except maybe for a narrow and limited set of injunctions through the courts.

No other position is cohesive.

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#86

Post by timbray »

petesergeant wrote: post #48
saimiam wrote: post #2

For whatever reason, SMS operators in India rely on blockchain to validate SMS templates and customer’s do-not-disturb settings. For a sense of scale, SMS is a 12.5 billion dollar business in India.

Do you have a link to more information about this? EDIT: So doing some googling finds that Telecom Regulatory Authority of India implemented “Distributed Ledger Technology” for fighting spam, but roll-out seems to have lasted not long (a week? A month?) because it didn’t work (didn’t scale?) and every so often tech vendors suggest they’re going to re-do it? Honestly there’s a lot of promo articles and conflicting inf…

crickets

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#87

Post by TheDong »

hahnchen wrote: post #79

Unrelated, but > Which was pretty nice, except for it was stinking hot that August and we were on multiple steamy subway trips every day; got back to our hotel rooms pretty well emptied out. Upper level amazon engineers can’t take ubers through new york?

Some people would rather ride a train or subway over an uber in principal, even if the cost is charged to their employer and no different to them personally.

I'm not claiming with certainty that that is the case here, but I know it is for some people.

Also, subways/trains are quicker for some routes, YMMV

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#88

Post by Dylan16807 »

yokem55 wrote: post #71
andreareina wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the full story, certificate transparency logs (and many other applications) achieve that without using a blockchain.

This is true as long as you trust the issuer of the transparency log to not go back and re-write the history of the log. That's a trust assumption that most folks are fine with, but it should be explicitly be understood to be there. A blockchain takes that trust assumption and spreads it out amongst the social consensus of the chain, so re-witing of history could only occur if there is a consensus to do so.

Who is both internal enough to get a copy of your HR database but external enough that their logs can't be changed as easily as a non-blockchain system's?

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#89

Post by throwaway290 »

miracle2k wrote: post #85
throwaway290 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Payment processors saw the writing on the wall. The reason they did what they did and PH made a 180 and disposed of incriminating content all in one month is because justice system has teeth and they did not want to find themselves liable. And justice system has teeth because PH is a proper company participating in a financial system. Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting…

There is no reason for payment processors to be liable. If you have a problem with Bitcoin, you need to support a general, unrestricted right be all persons and orgs to be served by the financial system, except maybe for a narrow and limited set of injunctions through the courts. No other position is cohesive.

Sorry, I do not support your right to be serviced by financial system if it supports your wrongdoing. Your freedom stops where mine begins. My position seems pretty cohesive to me.

If you do not do evil, then you have nothing to fear. If you have something to fear despite doing no evil, let's fix the government. This is a human problem and won't be solved with tech.

(And again, it was pretty clear to anyone that there was wrongdoing in this case and PH was going to get sued. I do think it should have been sued anyway, that it was not may have to do with victims not willing to come forward given sensitive nature of the crime, general disinclination of people to deal with dirt, or a good content cleanup job.)

Re: AWS and Blockchain

#90

Post by unboxingelf »

_Well known tech guy thinks blockchain is dumb because he can’t see its value for a private company._

There’s nothing new here. No, a blockchain isn’t a good replacement for a traditional database. It’s a distributed append only database built on zero trust. It’s extremely inefficient. Very few problems require that solution, especially one where a single party would be running all the nodes.

Post reply on HN