Live data from Hacker News

The Decentralized Future

blog.ycombinator.com

101–110 of 144 posts

Re: The Decentralized Future

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Raiden is a poor and incomplete implementation of Lightning. Bitcoin has 3 independent implementations and a developing ecosystem of software around it. Proof of stake is a pipe dream. Such a system can’t reliably achieve consensus due to the nothing-at-stake problem. Additionally, randomly selecting a winner in a distributed yet unpredictable way continues to be an unsolved problem. Sharding has the cost of weakenin…

>>Raiden is a poor and incomplete implementation of Lightning. Raiden is a comprehensive implementation that includes Lightning Networks for ERC20 tokens, something that Bitcoin doesn't even have. >>Proof of stake is a pipe dream. Your information is incorrect. Ethereum's proof of stake is close to complete conceptually and the first version, a hybrid PoW/PoS protocol called Casper the Friendly Finality Gadget, is cu…

> Raiden is a comprehensive implementation

Is the lone implementation which is still on testnet and no ecosystem surrounding it.

> ERC20 tokens, something that Bitcoin doesn't even have.

Bitcoin has no interest in implementing an equivalent as a layer-1 feature. This should be a surprise to no one. Off-chain scaling is the official direction of the Bitcoin community. There's no interest in adding bloat to the layer 1 protocol. Ethereum is the "everything including the kitchen sink" approach. Anyways, saying Bitcoin does'nt have ERC20 is factually incorrect: Rootstock implements ERC20 tokens as a second layer network.

> Your information is incorrect. Ethereum's proof of stake is close to complete conceptually and the first version

It's not any where near complete, which is why the difficulty bomb was rolled back (which in and of itself is hilarious -- Ethereum only pretends to be decentralized).

> Vitalik Buterin addressed how the Nothing at Stake problem can be solved in 2014

He described how to solve it 4 years ago, yet they still can't release even a hybrid PoS solution. Slasher does not solve the nothing at stake problem, it merely obfuscates it. Long range attacks are still possible.

I noticed you completely glossed over how PoS systems will agree on randomness. Good luck. I'm sure it's just another 4 years away.

> Bitcoin's lack of Turing Completeness at the base layer is a critical weakness that limits the range of second layer solutions that are possible.

Lack of Turing Completeness is a feature and intentional. If you want a general purpose distributed computer use rootstock. Which, by the way, is 100% compatible with the Eth VM.

> Sharding enables massive scaling while preserving the ability for consumer grade nodes to contribute to validation.

That's cute. Ethereum doesn't even have any "consumer grade" nodes today. Anyways, sounds like you're taking the long way around to agreeing with me: Sharding sacrifices security.

> That is highly misleading. SSDs have been syncing fine. HDDs have been having syncing problems,

Again, taking the long way around to agreeing with me. A full archive node currently requires a 400GB SSD! You're only option is to run a light node, which further contributes to your networks centralization.

> Disingenuous FUD.

Eh, you'll see. The monolithic approach of Ethereum is very naive.

> with 30X more developers working on it than the next most active platform

Easily proved false, anyone reading can take a look at the respective github repos. Bitcoin currently has over 550 contributors, Ethereum only has 200. Bitcoin has over 16k commits. Ethereum has only 9k. This doesn't even take into account the larger ecosystem of software Bitcoin has.

> Ethereum is the primary Dapp platform,

A little early to make any of these claims...the only popular Dapp in recent memory is cryptokitties and it brought the Ethereum network to its knees. Anyways, like I've said, Bitcoin has a fully compatible Ethereum VM running as a layer 2 network.

> It has a multipronged scaling strategy that is in an advanced state of development

I wouldn't call it multipronged -- Vitalik has it all hinging on PoS and that has been officially delayed until late 2018 at best.

> dwarfs that of any other blockchain.

Well, until you look at actual commit and contributor count. Then it's clear Bitcoin has far more development happening.

> It is now the most widely used blockchain in the world, processing 3X more transactions per day than #2 Bitcoin

I mean, bitcoin is operating at capacity. I'm sure Ethereum has more spam transactions though, I agree. Saying Ethereum is the most widely used blockchain in the world his hilarious. People know Bitcoin. A small fraction of those people know Ethereum.

> And in all of these categories, its momentum is growing.

As its network continues to crumble. Best of luck. We'll reconvene when Casper finally launches...hopefully while we're still young.

Re: The Decentralized Future

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you do so, you'll get the "enlightment" you were looking for. Which is what? That the blockchain is a solution in search of a problem? There is very, very little reason to use a cumbersome data structure when better ones exist (eg: just a regular database, or something like git). Worse, the only way the blockchain gets all it's supposed valuable attributes is when you provide a financial incentive to mine. Aka…

Internet was a "solution in search of a problem" too. That said, you're free to believe what you want to believe. Just one thing though, everything you said above I heard hundreds of times before, and there are good explanations for them. I just don't have time to argue here because these are things you can find out on your own if you put your mind into it. (To be honest I don't think I can convince you no matter how…

> Internet was a "solution in search of a problem" too

Eh, the history of ARPANET involved practical use cases (i.e. communication between specific institutions and ballistic missile defense coordination) from the start [1]. If one includes circuit switches, i.e. the telegraph/telephone system, as a blueprint Internet then the practical application reaches back earlier.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET#Creation

Re: The Decentralized Future

#103
post #6

I’ve reacently read the Burnskie book about crypto assets in the hope that I might come away more enlightened about the market and how to assess it. The opposite was the case. After reading the book and looking into it more, it’s very hard to see these things as assets at the moment, or to see much utility in the technology. Don’t get me wrong, there certainly is some and it is certainly ‘cool’, but right now blockha…

Money transfer is still very difficult. As in right now, short of paypal, I cannot send you money easily without leaving my chair in under 1 minute regardless of where you are in the world. Send me your bitcoin address and the problem is solved. The biggest problems with Bitcoin (specifically) are: 1) it is not necessarily a store of value and 2) it fluctuates too much. If someone can solve these two problems then we…

> As in right now, short of paypal, I cannot send you money easily without leaving my chair in under 1 minute regardless of where you are in the world

Venmo. Zelle. During banking hours: e-mail my banker, wire transferred within minutes.

Re: The Decentralized Future

#104
post #27

> traditional banking that takes days and charges high fees Only in the USA. And that is hopefully changing in the next month or two with the upgrade in the ACH system.

I just checked transferwise for £1000 to about us$1400. The cost compared with google's estimate of the interbank rate was $6 and they said it would take one day. I've also recently done £ to Thai baht and most currencies are there. It's quite quick and cheap such that it would be hard for crypto transfers to compete for most stuff.

Re: The Decentralized Future

#105
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you do so, you'll get the "enlightment" you were looking for. Which is what? That the blockchain is a solution in search of a problem? There is very, very little reason to use a cumbersome data structure when better ones exist (eg: just a regular database, or something like git). Worse, the only way the blockchain gets all it's supposed valuable attributes is when you provide a financial incentive to mine. Aka…

> There is very, very little reason to use a cumbersome data structure when better ones exist Do you not see any value in decentralization? In theory with blockchains, you could replace giant companies with open-source programs that pay for their own server costs with transaction fees, without taking any profit margin off the top. That would be very interesting for stuff like cloud storage and social networks. You ca…

> In theory with blockchains, you could replace giant companies with open-source programs that pay for their own server costs with transaction fees, without taking any profit margin off the top

Do you think these applications are viable if the token has significant monetary/speculative value attached to it?

Re: The Decentralized Future

#106

It's not a new asset class. Most cryptocurrencies are junk bonds. Those have been around for ages. If the coiners (what do you call this tribe?) accomplish "Permissionless Innovation" though, they will have did something great.

It's sort of an new asset class - there wasn't anyone transferring crypto in Shakespeare's day. They don't have an iffy promise to pay you money like junk bonds. In traditional terms they are a bit more like assets that can cost something to mine. Whether they end up valued like gold or like sea water we shall see.

Re: The Decentralized Future

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money transfer is still very difficult. As in right now, short of paypal, I cannot send you money easily without leaving my chair in under 1 minute regardless of where you are in the world. Send me your bitcoin address and the problem is solved. The biggest problems with Bitcoin (specifically) are: 1) it is not necessarily a store of value and 2) it fluctuates too much. If someone can solve these two problems then we…

> As in right now, short of paypal, I cannot send you money easily without leaving my chair in under 1 minute regardless of where you are in the world Venmo. Zelle. During banking hours: e-mail my banker, wire transferred within minutes.

> Venmo. Zelle.

If you accept the limitation that the receiver can be anywhere in the world, but must be from the US or have an US bank account...

Re: The Decentralized Future

#108
Blockchain is a real innovation, sure, but I don't think it will bring evolution to how money is used. There are many other uses.

Not surprising that an investor is seeing it as the future. Investing is regulated and libertarians often see bitcoin as a good thing.

The reality is that bitcoin is volatile, and nobody wants an economy that is built on instability.

Re: The Decentralized Future

#109
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Internet was a "solution in search of a problem" too. That said, you're free to believe what you want to believe. Just one thing though, everything you said above I heard hundreds of times before, and there are good explanations for them. I just don't have time to argue here because these are things you can find out on your own if you put your mind into it. (To be honest I don't think I can convince you no matter how…

> Internet was a "solution in search of a problem" too. No, no it wasn't. Close to light speed communication provided about 10 orders of magnitude faster/cheaper communication than before. I cannot even fathom how someone would not immediately realize how that massive increase in communication would not be useful. Contrast this with blockchains which are practically 10 orders of magnitude more COSTLY since every node…

> I cannot even fathom how someone would not immediately realize how that massive increase in communication would not be useful.

Just like you cannot fathom how Bitcoin can be useful in February of 2018, 99.9% of the world population couldn't fathom how Internet would take off back then when it launched. That was why it was not mainstream for a long time until it took off.

Re: The Decentralized Future

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Internet was a "solution in search of a problem" too. That said, you're free to believe what you want to believe. Just one thing though, everything you said above I heard hundreds of times before, and there are good explanations for them. I just don't have time to argue here because these are things you can find out on your own if you put your mind into it. (To be honest I don't think I can convince you no matter how…

> Internet was a "solution in search of a problem" too Eh, the history of ARPANET involved practical use cases ( i.e. communication between specific institutions and ballistic missile defense coordination) from the start [1]. If one includes circuit switches, i.e. the telegraph/telephone system, as a blueprint Internet then the practical application reaches back earlier. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET#Crea…

And Bitcoin doesn't have a practical use case?
Post reply on HN