11–20 of 93 posts
Is there a crypto voting ring? I understand why most crypto articles reach the top 10 posts but this one has nothing going for it. * Niche website linked / breaking the news * Non-mainstream crypto-fork * No novel interest / features There's nothing to suggest why this would be upvoted, even among this crypto-friendly crowd.
Is there a crypto voting ring? I understand why most crypto articles reach the top 10 posts but this one has nothing going for it. * Niche website linked / breaking the news * Non-mainstream crypto-fork * No novel interest / features There's nothing to suggest why this would be upvoted, even among this crypto-friendly crowd.
Look at all the other stuff on the front page of HN right now:
* Dell made a new monitor. Yay. * An article about salaries in Norway * Emacs compared to alternatives * A map of Ulysses’ journey * People in the UK must register their drones now.
Everyone has different interests but something new is happening with a large, expensive, distributed piece of software that allows anyone to hack on. That's HN's raison d'être.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
....Just to double-check, you're serious right?
Yes, I am. There's also a lot of scam out there, almost every ICO feels like scam, but still. The more serious stuff catches such a huge attention, just the ecosystem around ETH got so big and mature (despite some recent exploits) that it's hard to ignore this space. Just compare: not just few projects raised funds within days a startup would take months. If this is the future? IDK. But I know it's 10x better than ho…
(Also, AI and bots are the same topic, but that's a tangent.)
I would argue we should hear about them less than automated truck driving specifically, based on potential economic impact and current spending levels.
(Which, actually, seems to be about the trend -- we see small bursts of a few stories a day when a major event happens, but otherwise, it's mostly just a low murmur among other things.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I am. There's also a lot of scam out there, almost every ICO feels like scam, but still. The more serious stuff catches such a huge attention, just the ecosystem around ETH got so big and mature (despite some recent exploits) that it's hard to ignore this space. Just compare: not just few projects raised funds within days a startup would take months. If this is the future? IDK. But I know it's 10x better than ho…
I'm not saying cryptocurrencies aren't interesting, I'm just saying you're overstating their case relative to other technologies and the novelty (eg, that it even is novel, as opposed to normal engineering on top of ideas that have been around decades) in saying that it's underrepresented. (Also, AI and bots are the same topic, but that's a tangent.) I would argue we should hear about them less than automated truck d…
Currently the #8 position on the HN front page is an article about Dell releasing a new monitor.
I don't think this is a joke, but it should be. Forking a chain will never result in value-added.
Is there a crypto voting ring? I understand why most crypto articles reach the top 10 posts but this one has nothing going for it. * Niche website linked / breaking the news * Non-mainstream crypto-fork * No novel interest / features There's nothing to suggest why this would be upvoted, even among this crypto-friendly crowd.
Is there a crypto voting ring? I understand why most crypto articles reach the top 10 posts but this one has nothing going for it. * Niche website linked / breaking the news * Non-mainstream crypto-fork * No novel interest / features There's nothing to suggest why this would be upvoted, even among this crypto-friendly crowd.
There is a pretty big subset of the community that believe Bitcoin is a panacea that will replace currencies, payment networks and so on, regardless of how technically inferior the blockchain is to other more mature distributed databases and networks. They believe one day, the blockchain will be just as efficient or even more so. This subset is vocal about the urgency of increasing Bitcoin's block size limit so that we can increase transaction throughput as much as possible and as soon as possible.
On the other hand, most developers who have worked on Bitcoin proper (either protocol development or Core node development) believe that Bitcoin is more about financial sovereignty and censorship resistance, not as an in-place replacement of PayPal or VISA. This group wants to find as many ways to scale the blockchain without increasing the block size limit because increasing the size of blocks puts at risk users' ability to validate the chain. This is because larger blocks means more resources required to transmit, validate and store blocks and if you cannot validate blocks, then you are trusting transaction validators (miners) just like you trust PayPal. Risking the ability to validate the chain is risking the financial sovereignty or censorship resistance they value so much.
Regardless of how well some claim SegWit2x is doing, truth is once SegWit is activated, we still have to face the 2x hard fork which many people in the second camp will simply refuse to support.
Having said all this, Bitcoin Cash represents an earnest understanding that there are two camps in Bitcoin and because of the differing economic visions, they will have different technical visions, so why not have two chains and evolve them independently? Rather than playing tug-of-war and both parties being dissatisfied?