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

Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 91 posts

Re: Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

#41

Post by chrischattin »

eli wrote: post #25
someplaceguy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> those transactions don't count They don't? Then surely you wouldn't mind sending me a few bitcoins over a lightning channel? Pretty please? > no one needs to send 1000 transactions of single penny There is no such "single penny" limit. > then have the exact same problems as everyone else What problems?

I sent them over but I used a third layer network (a spreadsheet on my desktop)

Can't tell if sarcastic or not. But, that's perfectly legitimate. You could do that and if everything is signed correctly, the network will accept it.

I could write down a seed phrase on a piece of paper and hand it to you, and that's a completely offline transaction.

Re: Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

#42

Post by someplaceguy »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #35
someplaceguy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> those transactions don't count They don't? Then surely you wouldn't mind sending me a few bitcoins over a lightning channel? Pretty please? > no one needs to send 1000 transactions of single penny There is no such "single penny" limit. > then have the exact same problems as everyone else What problems?

I actually said: Except that those transactions don't count until they get on the main chain While you quoted me as: > those transactions don't count You lost some of my message. Maybe your are reading it through a lightning node and it went offline half way through. There is no such "single penny" limit. No one said that, but lightning's examples are always these nonsense situations of paying a single party a thousa…

> You lost some of my message.

So what's your point? Your point is that the balance will be reflected in the first layer after some time instead of being reflected after each and every lightning transaction?

What does that have to do with what we were talking about? The point of this thread was how many transactions per time period you could do with Bitcoin, not whether the balance will be public information in real time?

> lightning's examples are always these nonsense situations of paying a single party a thousand times.

It's not a nonsense situation. Micropayments is something you can (trustlessly) do with Lightning but not with traditional payment technologies.

It doesn't mean you can only do micropayments with Lightning.

> A transaction rate that could fit over the bandwidth of a 28.8 modem.

I just told you that Lightning can transact orders of magnitude more than that.

You can do millions of Lightning transactions per Bitcoin transaction.

You are complaining about Bitcoin's transaction rate limit but my whole point is that Lightning allows you to have an effectively limitless transaction rate (under certain conditions, at least), even if it requires occasional Bitcoin transactions to settle balances.

Re: Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

#43

Post by ip26 »

gottorf wrote: post #37
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this surprise you? What is a corporation if not a legal entity designed to launder responsibility? Have a problem with a service and you find out the company you bought from subcontracts to an LLC you've never heard of which in turn subcontracts to four other LLCs one of which is actually liable but only if you can figure out which one, and oh by the way yours has two employees and it's headquarters is a UPS Sto…

> What is a corporation if not a legal entity designed to launder responsibility? Corporations (and other legal entities used for business) are legal fictions that allow people to pool capital for productive endeavors and yes, with limited liability on the parts of the owners, because we as a society decided that encouraging productive endeavors this way is better than the alternative. In a world with no limited liab…

I'd imagine society as a whole would be a lot poorer off, because very few people would take that risk

Oh, people would make risky ventures alright, but you’d see a lot more private security of the Pinkerton variety.

Re: Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

#45

Post by lawlessone »

gottorf wrote: post #37
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this surprise you? What is a corporation if not a legal entity designed to launder responsibility? Have a problem with a service and you find out the company you bought from subcontracts to an LLC you've never heard of which in turn subcontracts to four other LLCs one of which is actually liable but only if you can figure out which one, and oh by the way yours has two employees and it's headquarters is a UPS Sto…

> What is a corporation if not a legal entity designed to launder responsibility? Corporations (and other legal entities used for business) are legal fictions that allow people to pool capital for productive endeavors and yes, with limited liability on the parts of the owners, because we as a society decided that encouraging productive endeavors this way is better than the alternative. In a world with no limited liab…

>In a world with no limited liability, you could happily wring the owner's neck if they screwed up

I'd say more than a few people would like that opportunity with Boeing

Re: Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

#46

Post by [deleted] »

jl6 wrote: post #4

> Question: Anything else besides multicultural tolerance that enabled Singapore's success? > Answer: Air conditioning. Air conditioning was a most important invention for us, perhaps one of the signal inventions of history. It changed the nature of civilization by making development possible in the tropics. https://www.vox.com/2015/3/23/8278085/singapore-lee-kuan-yew...

[deleted]

Re: Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

#47

Post by someplaceguy »

chrischattin wrote: post #41
eli wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sent them over but I used a third layer network (a spreadsheet on my desktop)

Can't tell if sarcastic or not. But, that's perfectly legitimate. You could do that and if everything is signed correctly, the network will accept it. I could write down a seed phrase on a piece of paper and hand it to you, and that's a completely offline transaction.

But just to be clear, unlike the hypothetical "spreadsheet on a desktop" (even with signed transactions), Lightning has more cryptographic assurances than that.

It prevents the parties of a transaction from double-spending balances behind each other's backs.

It also doesn't require trusting the other party once a transaction has (almost instantaneously) completed.

Re: Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

#48

Post by kevincox »

oooyay wrote: post #21
throw0101c wrote: post #3

Seems like more testing is in order: > Upon the outage, both banks immediately activated IT disaster recovery and business continuity plans. > "However," according to Tan, "both banks encountered technical issues which prevented them from fully recovering their affected systems at their respective backup datacenters – DBS due to a network misconfiguration and Citibank due to connectivity issues." Perhaps regularly fl…

Kind of a spicy opinion as a SRE, but if your disaster recovery strategy isn't part of your operational strategy then it's not actually a strategy. It's a moonshot in the face of failure.

That's a strategy. And depending on your downtime tolerance it may be an acceptable strategy. In this case it probably wasn't an appropriate strategy.

Re: Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

#49

Post by snapcaster »

u32480932048 wrote: post #32
someplaceguy wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the heck are you talking about? None of what you just said makes any sense.

Pennies need converted to BTC first, which means many more transactions, which means that Lightning destroys the planet even faster than BTC. It's simple math. BTC has been consuming all of the planets energy since at least 2020[1]. This increased transaction rate of Lightning just means that BTC will soon be consuming over twice the total energy produced by humanity, which is unsustainable. Of course, people who don…

I'm not a bitcoin zealot by any means but none of what you're saying is correct

Re: Overheating datacenter stopped 2.5M bank transactions

#50

Post by nyc_data_geek1 »

oooyay wrote: post #21
throw0101c wrote: post #3

Seems like more testing is in order: > Upon the outage, both banks immediately activated IT disaster recovery and business continuity plans. > "However," according to Tan, "both banks encountered technical issues which prevented them from fully recovering their affected systems at their respective backup datacenters – DBS due to a network misconfiguration and Citibank due to connectivity issues." Perhaps regularly fl…

Kind of a spicy opinion as a SRE, but if your disaster recovery strategy isn't part of your operational strategy then it's not actually a strategy. It's a moonshot in the face of failure.

In the business continuity/disaster recovery space we like to say, if you don't regularly test your DR plan, you don't really have one.
Post reply on HN