It is interesting that even in an article like this that they still say things like "for all its potential, blockchain is still in its early days." It is sticking with the unfounded assumption that it will be a success in the future, if only it is given more time. In technological terms, it is old. Innumerable efforts have been attempted, yielding almost no fruit. At what point are the fundamental assumptions going t…
Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
111–120 of 487 posts
Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
#112My question is if your conclusion is that blockchain is a solution in search of a problem, what was all that effort being spent on (not just in finance, but everywhere blockchain is being considered)? I'm not saying that blockchain is not a valid solution to a problem, but as a veteran of the online industry, I can say I've seen a lot of hype around new technology, actual effort being put into it, and then the realiz…
My major questions have always been: where is the business value in blockchain applications? what can a blockchain app do that can't be done by non-blockchain (beyond decentralization - bc I don't think this produces much business value)?
Decentralisation is the selling point of blockchain technology.
Anyone building on a blockchain that doesn't think decentralisation is beneficial in and of itself is a conman.
Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blockchain is a shit database concept. It's use as a currency is one of its best uses. This idea that blockchains are a good database is an absurd myth. Blockchains are useful specifically for doing distributed consensus, and almost nothing else. Currencies are one of the best applications of distributed adversarial consensus. There are others, but currency is pretty near the top of the list.
But irrespective of its conceptual quality, why should anybody care, outside of compsci? Why doesn't the doubly linked list get to be a household name or a hotly tipped investment buzzword?
The reason is that the institutions that created these things are extremely well insulated from competition. They are well insulated from competition, in part, because they have acquired the public's trust, through a long track record of not stealing everyone's money.
Solutions to the distributed adversarial consensus problem provide a way to give new businesses access to the same, or even greater, levels of public trust. Now - obviously there are still scams in this space. When I say 'trust', what I mean is, in the sense that two counterparties can transact in a way that doesn't require intermediation to ensure the completion of the transaction.
This really is a fundamentally novel and socially significant innovation. It really does reshape the competitive landscape of a number of industries. At least, it has the potential to. But it is also true that there is an enormous amount of greed and hype floating around. And this isn't in any way intended to justify the ICO scams, or the sky high prices of the existing currencies. It's not clear that anyone has yet figured out the right interface and set of practices for actually realizing all these economic gains. Nobody has yet made the iPhone of blockchain.
But the basic technical problem - distributed adversarial consensus was indeed solved by Satoshi. And that really does have substantial, positive social implications for the future. And I fear that people here are losing sight of that because of the gyrations of these silly markets.
Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
#114Of course banks can do it better with the traditional technologies. They operate in a centralized, trusted and regulated environment. Their consensus algorithm is "settling disputes in courts". And still, it takes up to 5 days to receive a payment from USA in the EU and the sender pays 40$ for the wire transfer. The blockchain technologies will disrupt the banks themselves, because they are the intermediaries in this…
> it takes up to 5 days to receive a payment from USA in the EU and the sender pays 40$ for the wire transfer U.S. dollar Fedwires are “immediate, final, and irrevocable“ [1] regardless of from where they are initiated. If your EU bank takes 5 business days to swap between the world’s two most liquid currencies, you have a uniquely shitty bank. [1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/fedfunds_about...
seems like maybe the crux of this discussion is that, all of the sudden the features of banking have been automated. that’s definitely not the same as “the features of banks, regulation, etc...” have been automated.
But certainly, we can see that the Fedwire is not a consumer product, where BTC clearly is
Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin needs blockchain to verify that a bitcoin is authentic. I have no idea why a company would use blockchain for logistics or file storage considering how its massively expensive to constantly pay miners for transactions. My centralized server can do everything needed for logistics or file storage. Benefits of blockchain are overblown. There are uses, but centralized servers are really good.
You can have a blockchain without miners. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-stake Now I agree that a lot of ideas for how blockchain will be used are just unnecessary and stupid, but there are some good ones as well. You mentioned file storage but actually I think blockchain could be useful for this. Allow me to elaborate. I don’t want to rely on Dropbox or Google or any other single company for the long-term st…
Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blockchain is a shit database concept. It's use as a currency is one of its best uses. This idea that blockchains are a good database is an absurd myth. Blockchains are useful specifically for doing distributed consensus, and almost nothing else. Currencies are one of the best applications of distributed adversarial consensus. There are others, but currency is pretty near the top of the list.
Can you elaborate why you think it’s a terrible DB?
hackernoon.com/ten-years-in-nobody-has-come-up-with-a-use-case-for-blockchain-ee98c180100
Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
#117Ron Conway, early investor in the internet, said recently that the Blockchain is internet 3.0
I mostly hear it described as Internet 2.0, or Web 3.0. However, analysts are starting to talk about Blockchain 2.0 now; this could probably fill the role of Internet 3.0. None of these people have any idea what they're talking about.
Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the fundamental assumption is that "Satoshi invented a useful solution to decentralized consensus". What people don't realize is that Satoshi's solution only works if two assumptions hold true: 1. Mining is decentralized: If mining is centralized than relying on proof-of-work for consensus is waste since the centralized entity controls the blockchain anyway. 2. Consensus rules don't change: If you see the thr…
No, the fundamental assumption is that distributed consensus in itself is useful. So far, there are some applications (databases), but for the stuff they are using the blockchain for, not so much.
The principle value of Bitcoin as a protocol is its incredible (even detrimental, from a technical perspective) simplicity.
Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin needs blockchain to verify that a bitcoin is authentic. I have no idea why a company would use blockchain for logistics or file storage considering how its massively expensive to constantly pay miners for transactions. My centralized server can do everything needed for logistics or file storage. Benefits of blockchain are overblown. There are uses, but centralized servers are really good.
You can have a blockchain without miners. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-stake Now I agree that a lot of ideas for how blockchain will be used are just unnecessary and stupid, but there are some good ones as well. You mentioned file storage but actually I think blockchain could be useful for this. Allow me to elaborate. I don’t want to rely on Dropbox or Google or any other single company for the long-term st…
What's the point of the blockchain?
Re: Wall Street rethinks blockchain projects as euphoria meets reality
#120> The project, which had successfully tested with startup Digital Asset Holdings (DA), was shelved because banks and other potential users believed the same results could be achieved more cheaply using current technology, he said. This is more or less the curse of the almighty blockchain; it's very hard to think of a plausible, actually useful, application which can't be accomplished far more cheaply and simply using…