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

The Token Disconnect

stephendiehl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 45 posts

Re: The Token Disconnect

#11

Post by brightstep »

prohobo wrote: post #9
paulgb wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you say is the best example of a concrete, real-world use case for one of those tokens that would refute the article's claim that blockchains are “a solution in search of a problem”? I ask because a lot of these things (exchanging one USD-pegged token for another, borrowing a token for another token) seem like problems that wouldn't exist to begin with, without blockchains.

Autonomous services (similar to vending machines): See PoolTogether, a service which before blockchain would be considered almost certainly a scam, and would be nearly impossible to audit. Because it's on Ethereum the contract is publicly auditable, and the rules are simple: insert currency into a pool, and have a chance of winning a %age of total interest earned once a week. No one owns the service. If the site goes…

The first two are just gambling, which is not very different from the speculation the author talks about. Your idea is interesting and speaks to another desire that seems to me to run beneath a lot of interest in crypto, which is the desire to make social change without political action. My perspective is, we don't need a blockchain to reward that kind of behavior. We could decide as a society to create such a system in myriad other ways. The real problem I see is that we're (especially in the US) very much disconnected from the political process, which leads some to look for technological solutions to the problems they see around them.

Re: The Token Disconnect

#12

Post by 015a »

paulgb wrote: post #4
chrisco255 wrote: post #2

> These days I read a lot of cross-disciplinary commentary on the crypto asset bubble, and what strikes me as particularly strange is the sheer level of disconnect between people’s lived experience of this mania. Rather than do an investigation or analysis of some of the broader trends and successful applications of crypto, this article proceeds to make sweeping accusations devoid of earnest research. Here's what I w…

What would you say is the best example of a concrete, real-world use case for one of those tokens that would refute the article's claim that blockchains are “a solution in search of a problem”? I ask because a lot of these things (exchanging one USD-pegged token for another, borrowing a token for another token) seem like problems that wouldn't exist to begin with, without blockchains.

Helium (https://www.helium.com/); a decentralized mobile internet network operator which enables anyone to host radios and earn tokens for usage, without compromising the connection security of endpoint users.

Filecoin (https://filecoin.io/); an incentive layer on top of IPFS to create a decentralized long-term object storage system.

Tradelens (https://www.tradelens.com/); in development, AP Moller Maersk's enterprise container logistics/coordination blockchain.

Anytime someone says "blockchains don't do anything which centralized systems can't do", I mentally interpret that as someone in 1995 saying "email can't do anything fax machines can't do". In the sense that: its kind of true, in that they accomplish a similar goal of sending a document from one person to another over wire, but it discounts as irrelevant the most critical, foundational thrust of why this new technology is interesting. For email: that it is all-digital. For blockchain: that it is decentralized.

In the 90s, the people who still clung to fax machines didn't understand why an all-digital future was important or would matter. They had spent their entire lives living in physicality, working with paper and file cabinets, and it was fine. The fax machine made sense. Email didn't.

Sure, centralized systems can do many of these things better. But they do so with the sacrifice of being centralized! Some critics inexplicably gloss over this like its an irrelevant, minor part of the argument. They've spent their entire lives among big tech billion dollar centralized multinational conglomerates, and its been fine. More centralization makes sense; email, I mean, decentralization, doesn't.

The point is not to make a better system, in every way; the point is making a functional system that is decentralized, so it can operate in a trustless, geo-distributed, multi-party way.

Re: The Token Disconnect

#13

Post by prohobo »

brightstep wrote: post #11
prohobo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Autonomous services (similar to vending machines): See PoolTogether, a service which before blockchain would be considered almost certainly a scam, and would be nearly impossible to audit. Because it's on Ethereum the contract is publicly auditable, and the rules are simple: insert currency into a pool, and have a chance of winning a %age of total interest earned once a week. No one owns the service. If the site goes…

The first two are just gambling, which is not very different from the speculation the author talks about. Your idea is interesting and speaks to another desire that seems to me to run beneath a lot of interest in crypto, which is the desire to make social change without political action. My perspective is, we don't need a blockchain to reward that kind of behavior. We could decide as a society to create such a system…

The first two are not gambling. There is no mechanism where you can lose your pooled funds. Don't believe me? Read the fucking contracts. How much clearer can this be?

As for the rest of your comment, I think your diagnosis is wrong. This is purely political action, which is why so many people can't see the benefits. They think blockchain tech was supposed to clearly change what's possible - but it doesn't: instead it decentralizes it and removes the requirement of trust, which indirectly enables new possibilities. There is no current system that doesn't degrade over time due to various influences, or is immune from corruption. Blockchain based solutions don't solve the physical aspect of trust, and so would require the buy-in and cooperation of society through politics. What blockchains do is solve digital corruption and codifying rules, which changes the way people interact with systems.

Re: The Token Disconnect

#14

Post by Daishiman »

015a wrote: post #12
paulgb wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you say is the best example of a concrete, real-world use case for one of those tokens that would refute the article's claim that blockchains are “a solution in search of a problem”? I ask because a lot of these things (exchanging one USD-pegged token for another, borrowing a token for another token) seem like problems that wouldn't exist to begin with, without blockchains.

Helium ( https://www.helium.com/); a decentralized mobile internet network operator which enables anyone to host radios and earn tokens for usage, without compromising the connection security of endpoint users. Filecoin ( https://filecoin.io/); an incentive layer on top of IPFS to create a decentralized long-term object storage system. Tradelens ( https://www.tradelens.com/); in development, AP Moller Maersk's enterp…

I'm not actually seeing how this helps decentralization.

At some point if you're a rich-enough party you can just take over these networks with enough money and resources. There aren't that many mining pools for BTC, and the distribution of ownership of most coins still follows a power law. These systems don't really do anything to discourage that.

Also you talk about the benefits of decentralization as if they were more important than the gains you get from centralized systems. They're generally not, except for fringe cases. For the most part I want a centralized system with someone to blame/sue who can use one big database to make my transactions flow fast.

I won't deny that there's value at the fringes to decentralized, robust systems, but that value is at best 2% of what crypto defenders claim.

Re: The Token Disconnect

#15

Post by paulgb »

prohobo wrote: post #13
brightstep wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first two are just gambling, which is not very different from the speculation the author talks about. Your idea is interesting and speaks to another desire that seems to me to run beneath a lot of interest in crypto, which is the desire to make social change without political action. My perspective is, we don't need a blockchain to reward that kind of behavior. We could decide as a society to create such a system…

The first two are not gambling. There is no mechanism where you can lose your pooled funds. Don't believe me? Read the fucking contracts. How much clearer can this be? As for the rest of your comment, I think your diagnosis is wrong. This is purely political action, which is why so many people can't see the benefits. They think blockchain tech was supposed to clearly change what's possible - but it doesn't: instead i…

But it is gambling, it's just that you're gambling your interest foregone rather than the principal.

Back to my original question, though, I don't see what real-world problem it solves to add stochastic variability to interest payments.

Re: The Token Disconnect

#16

Post by paulgb »

Daishiman wrote: post #14
015a wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helium ( https://www.helium.com/); a decentralized mobile internet network operator which enables anyone to host radios and earn tokens for usage, without compromising the connection security of endpoint users. Filecoin ( https://filecoin.io/); an incentive layer on top of IPFS to create a decentralized long-term object storage system. Tradelens ( https://www.tradelens.com/); in development, AP Moller Maersk's enterp…

I'm not actually seeing how this helps decentralization. At some point if you're a rich-enough party you can just take over these networks with enough money and resources. There aren't that many mining pools for BTC, and the distribution of ownership of most coins still follows a power law. These systems don't really do anything to discourage that. Also you talk about the benefits of decentralization as if they were…

The companies making mining hardware are even more centralized. Bitmain has been estimated to control 80% (!) of the mining market[1]. That stat is a few years old now, but if you look at purchase orders for large public miners, the centralization seems even more pronounced.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-05-17/china-s-c...

Re: The Token Disconnect

#17

Post by 015a »

Daishiman wrote: post #14
015a wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helium ( https://www.helium.com/); a decentralized mobile internet network operator which enables anyone to host radios and earn tokens for usage, without compromising the connection security of endpoint users. Filecoin ( https://filecoin.io/); an incentive layer on top of IPFS to create a decentralized long-term object storage system. Tradelens ( https://www.tradelens.com/); in development, AP Moller Maersk's enterp…

I'm not actually seeing how this helps decentralization. At some point if you're a rich-enough party you can just take over these networks with enough money and resources. There aren't that many mining pools for BTC, and the distribution of ownership of most coins still follows a power law. These systems don't really do anything to discourage that. Also you talk about the benefits of decentralization as if they were…

> At some point if you're a rich-enough party you can just take over these networks with enough money and resources.

This is such a concern levied against cryptocurrency; why does no one levy the same concern against traditional publicly traded companies? That someone who is rich and powerful enough could simply take control of Apple, or Walmart (assuming they make >50% of their outstanding shares available for trade on the public markets, which some public companies do)?

The reality is: It is a concern. But its a vanishingly small one. To do so would be, in many cases, suicide; and it would be even more-so with cryptocurrencies. It would take an obscene amount of money and resources, converted into assets which held value under the societal context of the status quo. The status quo doesn't like changing; the assets would probably lose all their value as everyone in the 49% abandons their investment. What would this hostile takeover gain? A few billion in revenue? They'd lose far more in the attempt.

For most newer cryptocurrencies (not Bitcoin), this attack is not a matter of owning 51% of the mining power, but rather 51% of the currency itself (proof of stake). To do so, for any reasonably successful and valuable currency, would be crazy. Its just not a concern, period.

It may be worth elucidating this, but: bitcoin is on the way out. The crypto community has absolutely striated into two groups; the bitcoin traditionalists who build ten acre data centers next to volcanos to farm their digital gold, and those more forward thinking who are actually interested in solving the bigger, more tactile problems with cryptocurrency like real use cases, environmental impact, etc. So, many of the concerns surrounding bitcoin, which evolved in the '10s when it was the fastest growing player on the block, are simply no longer relevant.

Re: The Token Disconnect

#18

Post by BenoitEssiambre »

015a wrote: post #12
paulgb wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you say is the best example of a concrete, real-world use case for one of those tokens that would refute the article's claim that blockchains are “a solution in search of a problem”? I ask because a lot of these things (exchanging one USD-pegged token for another, borrowing a token for another token) seem like problems that wouldn't exist to begin with, without blockchains.

Helium ( https://www.helium.com/); a decentralized mobile internet network operator which enables anyone to host radios and earn tokens for usage, without compromising the connection security of endpoint users. Filecoin ( https://filecoin.io/); an incentive layer on top of IPFS to create a decentralized long-term object storage system. Tradelens ( https://www.tradelens.com/); in development, AP Moller Maersk's enterp…

Email is decentralized. The internet is decentralized. This problem was already solved much more efficiently.

Re: The Token Disconnect

#19

Post by prohobo »

paulgb wrote: post #15
prohobo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first two are not gambling. There is no mechanism where you can lose your pooled funds. Don't believe me? Read the fucking contracts. How much clearer can this be? As for the rest of your comment, I think your diagnosis is wrong. This is purely political action, which is why so many people can't see the benefits. They think blockchain tech was supposed to clearly change what's possible - but it doesn't: instead i…

But it is gambling, it's just that you're gambling your interest foregone rather than the principal. Back to my original question, though, I don't see what real-world problem it solves to add stochastic variability to interest payments.

That's not what my point was about. The point was autonomous services, and I also outlined an idea for one that would have real-world benefit (if properly designed). You can argue that there are no "useful" services yet, but not that there will never be any.

Re: The Token Disconnect

#20

Post by paulgb »

015a wrote: post #12
paulgb wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would you say is the best example of a concrete, real-world use case for one of those tokens that would refute the article's claim that blockchains are “a solution in search of a problem”? I ask because a lot of these things (exchanging one USD-pegged token for another, borrowing a token for another token) seem like problems that wouldn't exist to begin with, without blockchains.

Helium ( https://www.helium.com/); a decentralized mobile internet network operator which enables anyone to host radios and earn tokens for usage, without compromising the connection security of endpoint users. Filecoin ( https://filecoin.io/); an incentive layer on top of IPFS to create a decentralized long-term object storage system. Tradelens ( https://www.tradelens.com/); in development, AP Moller Maersk's enterp…

> In the sense that: its kind of true, in that they accomplish a similar goal of sending a document from one person to another over wire, but it discounts as irrelevant the most critical, foundational thrust of why this new technology is interesting. For email: that it is all-digital. For blockchain: that it is decentralized.

This confuses the real-world benefit with the means of achieving that benefit. The benefit of email wasn't that it is digital, but that it is near-instant, accessible from anywhere, etc. It's able to do those things because it's digital, but the fact that it's digital is an implementation detail, not the thing driving people to use it.

It seems the issue facing blockchain is that it's stuck on the “it's decentralized” message without having a good story for why that matters (and matters enough to be worth the other trade-offs) to something like file storage or an ISP.

Post reply on HN