Coinbase acquires Earn.com • Hacker News Board

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#111

Post by hndamien » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 1:02 AM UTC

loceng wrote: post #62

wakeywakeywakey wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic, it would be fair to say: 'When I get my paycheck, I earn my salary MINUS whatever "profit" my employer made from my work.' This is disingenuous by ignoring risk and presupposing that (in this case) I have the same reach/clout/contacts/sales and marketing channels as my employer.

I don't think that's a fair comparison at all. The profit your employer makes from your work isn't coming from an increase in demand [in the use of a transactional layer] causing the perceived value of a crypto-asset [USD] to go up, and therefore they also are profiting from that increased value -- that'd be "double-dipping" profit in a sense if that's the case, if they're also making money on the increase in demand…

It seems you have a problem with other people having large pieces of pie, rather than the more important point that all people that have pie have it grow.

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#112

Post by wpietri » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 1:04 AM UTC

jMyles wrote: post #104

wpietri wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you be so kind as to show a few of those technologies in some practical use where they're sufficiently better than existing technologies that they are displacing existing businesses? > But I just don't see how anybody can think that these are uninteresting times for this tech. Really? For me it's the almost-a-decade of hype but seeing very little in practical utility beyond speculation, ransomware, and some lig…

I'm head-down in writing NuCypher as we speak, but it's obvious to me how to do what we're doing without a distributed consensus mechanism, and I do think that the real world use cases will be pretty rad. Our system allows an actor (Alice) to select any number of recipients (Bob) in a Policy. Alice can disappear from the network forever, and subsequently, any DataSource can encrypt data, using Alice's public key, whi…

So I'm sure you mean well this is an exact example of my problem with the cryptocurrency/blockchain space.

For years and years I've said, "Yes, that is a pretty cool technology, but what real-world value is it currently providing?" One common answer is, "But it's a really cool technology!" No argument, but that seems to miss the point. Another is, "I'm sure it will be amazing!" Which again, misses the point. A third is, "It might be great for X," but without any real proof that people doing X want the technology, without demonstration that the current alternatives are inadequate, and without apparent recognition that a future hypothetical does not in any way satisfy somebody looking for traction.

Plenty of technologists think they have a good thing going. Right up until the investor money runs out and customers have failed to show up.

As an example, look at 3D movies and TV. 3D has been about to change the way we see things since the 1950s. There is no denying the technology is very neat to technologists. Early adopters even get excited! And then it turns out once again that customers don't really care. This pattern goes at least as far back as the Brewster stereoscope in the 1850s.

So please, don't be shocked that people are tired of blockchain/cryptocurrency hype. That you find the technology interesting does not mean that anybody else will find the (lack of) actual deployed use interesting.

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#113

Post by wpietri » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 1:06 AM UTC

CryptoPunk wrote: post #102

wpietri wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at their home page, they say, "Paid email is already one of the first truly useful applications of the blockchain." Does that make any sense? If I wanted to set up paid email, how does a blockchain help? It seems technically unnecessary. And if I really wanted user adoption, why woulnd't I just pay people in their local currency instead of trying to get them to take part in something much less directly useful…

>>Does that make any sense? If I wanted to set up paid email, how does a blockchain help? It seems technically unnecessary. By accepting cryptocurrency payments, you can accept email from anyone in the world. With the traditional finance system, there are legal obstacles to where a payment system can operate. Also, using a traditional financial intermediary would mean that all the users of the winning paid-email serv…

This is a solution in search of a problem. Most people barely want to accept email from people they are likely to do business with. What American is excited to get email from some stranger who literally doesn't have two nickels to rub together?

Also, you're just wrong about traditional financial intermediaries. It's easy enough to provide a few different ways to transfer funds. Or to do it over a relatively open network like e-check or wire transfer, where there's no lock-in possible.

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#114

Post by wpietri » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 1:11 AM UTC

45h34jh53k4j wrote: post #100

wpietri wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at their home page, they say, "Paid email is already one of the first truly useful applications of the blockchain." Does that make any sense? If I wanted to set up paid email, how does a blockchain help? It seems technically unnecessary. And if I really wanted user adoption, why woulnd't I just pay people in their local currency instead of trying to get them to take part in something much less directly useful…

ahh, thats the trick isnt it -- blockchain provides universal currency. No need for local currency handing, banks, cc processors, forex transfer providers, and all the things associated with local payment processors. While i dont think this is the first or is it truely useful, but yes, blockchain (specifically bitcoin) is providing a decentralized universal currency for use in decentralized systems like email. Its a…

In theory, perhaps. In practice, it provides a universally inconvenient currency. If somebody wants to send me money to read an email, then I want to be able to spend that money. If they send me bitcoin, I can't spend it directly: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/16/nyregion/new-york-today-l...

Ergo, I am right back in need some way to convert it into my local currency. Except far less conveniently than just letting my bank take care of the exchange, as they would with an international wire transfer.

Also, as I explain elsewhere, the forex thing is a solution looking for a problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16854526

The reason I'd pay somebody to read an email is so that I can do business with them, and for a fair bit more money than I pay for the email. That involves one of us paying the other. Which in practice will mean a real currency, not cryptotulips.

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#115

Post by jonnydubowsky » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 1:13 AM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #92

jMyles wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did this become religion on HN? Interesting things in crypto-blockchain tech, today: * Origin * NuCypher (disclaimer: I'm on this team) * Loki * New version of web3.py / other python tooling becoming mature * Trustless Quorums * Distributed validation I can go on and on. But I just don't see how anybody can think that these are uninteresting times for this tech.

Would you be so kind as to show a few of those technologies in some practical use where they're sufficiently better than existing technologies that they are displacing existing businesses? > But I just don't see how anybody can think that these are uninteresting times for this tech. Really? For me it's the almost-a-decade of hype but seeing very little in practical utility beyond speculation, ransomware, and some lig…

I've been using my bitpay card for over a year to handle every type of payment that you would want to make using fiat money. I know this isn't viable as a total replacement for dollars yet, due to the sometimes wild fluctuations in the price, but that is stabilizing over time. It is reasonable to think that the price of btc will eventually reach a more stable base, as more money (including institutional money) enters the space and options for shorting become more accessible. The NY times writer just didn't do enough research to figure out how to spend bitcoin. It's not that hard. These are early days, and this is still experimental technology, but is becoming more practical by the minute.

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#116

Post by Retra » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 1:47 AM UTC

hndamien wrote: post #111

loceng wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's a fair comparison at all. The profit your employer makes from your work isn't coming from an increase in demand [in the use of a transactional layer] causing the perceived value of a crypto-asset [USD] to go up, and therefore they also are profiting from that increased value -- that'd be "double-dipping" profit in a sense if that's the case, if they're also making money on the increase in demand…

It seems you have a problem with other people having large pieces of pie, rather than the more important point that all people that have pie have it grow.

Let's hear you say this next time you try to run a political campaign against someone who can outspend you a thousand times over.

You'll lose, and they'll have everything they need to take whatever scraps of pie you have on your plate.

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#117

Post by acjohnson55 » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 2:07 AM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #112

jMyles wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm head-down in writing NuCypher as we speak, but it's obvious to me how to do what we're doing without a distributed consensus mechanism, and I do think that the real world use cases will be pretty rad. Our system allows an actor (Alice) to select any number of recipients (Bob) in a Policy. Alice can disappear from the network forever, and subsequently, any DataSource can encrypt data, using Alice's public key, whi…

So I'm sure you mean well this is an exact example of my problem with the cryptocurrency/blockchain space. For years and years I've said, "Yes, that is a pretty cool technology, but what real-world value is it currently providing?" One common answer is, "But it's a really cool technology!" No argument, but that seems to miss the point. Another is, "I'm sure it will be amazing!" Which again, misses the point. A third…

> A third is, "It might be great for X," but without any real proof that people doing X want the technology, [...]

It often seems to me that the mathematical purity of many crypto techs are a poor match for the fuzzy real world requirements. The result ends up being a big pile of abstractions with poor usability and major holes. After all this time, this still applies to basic payments for tangible goods.

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#118

Post by wdewind » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 2:31 AM UTC

jonnydubowsky wrote: post #89

hudon wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is your comment not a mid-brow dismissal? There are so many projects that promised the world and did not deliver, as well as so many projects that ended up being outright scams, that it's not surprising that when someone says "but what about Blockchain X, Blockchain Y and Blockchain Z projects?", we all roll our eyes and think "I'll believe it when I see it." It's not as if any blockchain project has provided a l…

Ethereum is still essentially in its "live demo" phase. The release of dApps and user-friendly-ish products in the blockchain space has had about 2 years of traction. Your application of skepticism is appropriate, the burden of proof is on the developers to show the value of these projects, but it typically takes a decade or so for disintermediating technology to reach the point of ready adoption. We are in the singl…

What's the dApp equivalent of the space shuttle?

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#119

Post by wdewind » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 2:38 AM UTC

jonnydubowsky wrote: post #93

jMyles wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, needless to say, I see it a bit differently. Drug prohibition is not the future of humankind. If blockchain tech can more quickly undermine it, then I don't think it's reasonable to say that it has no role in making the world a better place. Additionally, if blockchain tech can substantially undermine a policy entrenched with corruption and enforced by violence, I think it's reasonable to surmise that it has ot…

Jmyles, your reasoned and compassionate tone and plea to consider the benefits of blockchain which might effect those less fortunate is right on. How about the thousands of people who have already sent millions of dollars back home to developing nations where they previously had to rely on western union and their exorbitant commission fees. For the unbanked, blockchain provides significant savings in remittance costs…

> How about the thousands of people who have already sent millions of dollars back home to developing nations where they previously had to rely on western union and their exorbitant commission fees.

Sorry to be that guy but do you have a citation for this? I hear it all the time but it makes no sense to me. Can you explain what happens when people receive the bitcoin? For one thing there are frequently 20% spreads in countries that do not have good ways to export their fiat currency, like India, so bitcoin actually doesn't usually end up being cheaper when you consider conversion costs.

> On the opposite side of the spectrum, for the ultra-wealthy, cryptocurrencies offer the ability to place a portion of one's capital in accounts which are not seizable by any means. This is a significant feature of the technology, and coupled with the level of encryption, already represents a small, yet sizable place in the world banking system.

I don't have a dog in the fight of whether or not this is a Good ThingTM, but a lot of people would call this a bug not a feature.

Re: Coinbase acquires Earn.com

#120

Post by loceng » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 2:53 AM UTC

hndamien wrote: post #111

loceng wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's a fair comparison at all. The profit your employer makes from your work isn't coming from an increase in demand [in the use of a transactional layer] causing the perceived value of a crypto-asset [USD] to go up, and therefore they also are profiting from that increased value -- that'd be "double-dipping" profit in a sense if that's the case, if they're also making money on the increase in demand…

It seems you have a problem with other people having large pieces of pie, rather than the more important point that all people that have pie have it grow.

I really don't see how you could make either of those assertions from what I wrote.

If I steal $100 from you, and now I have $100 and you have $0 - would you have a problem with that? That's a generally asinine accusation to make..

Isn't the most important part that something happens fairly - or is your argument that collaboration at all costs is okay?

All people having the pie and wanting it to grow (it's what we technically have now, except capitalistic for-profit structures suffocate distribution of and capture the majority of the value), that may be the case in the initial stages because of everyone "profiting" from the increase in value because of demand, however then that's totally forgetting or ignoring the long-term impact once you reach the "tipping point" - that everyone after "50%" now are subsidizing all of the previous "profits" that will want to be realized by the earlier adopters --- and the value can't keep going up unless you have unlimited people to scale it to, which there isn't. Late adopters won't be incentivized to collaborate, as they're not earning "profit" from the incentivized crypto-assets.

Also, your statement seems to be a straw man fallacy, whether you meant it to be or not.