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

Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

as1ndu.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 330 posts

Re: Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

#111

Post by lottin »

jcfrei wrote: post #77
nexthash wrote: post #11

I think the #1 reason blockchain doesn't work is very simple - the technology is broken beyond fixability. This article is two years old, but the same variations of these excuses always come up when the crypto ideologues are grilled on why their utopiaic vision hasn't come about, for all of blockchain's existence. Blockchain is awful for most things compared to a centralized or distributed database: it is inefficient…

This is the typical argument on a very technical board such as HN where blockchain is synonymous with a specific implementation. But that's an outdated way to think about blockchains. Yes, Bitcoin's implementation is a huge resource hog and slow. But for most newer projects "blockchain" just means an auditable trail of state changes. Whether you implement this with the shiniest newest db paradigm or some simple SQL d…

> ownership of digital assets that's something new and valuable

Doubtful, because ownership only makes sense in a context of scarcity whereas digital assets are in infinite supply.

Re: Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

#112

Post by ignoramous »

I genuinely think HN is subject to what Clay Christensen put as "disruptive innovation" when it comes to Blockchain and friends (strange to say that for a community as opposed to a company).

I understand that many on HN think of the many ICOs as Ponzi schemes, and other tech (like identity, DBs, VPNs, apps, or even alternate WWW) built on top as smokes and mirrors; but the industry being built around it is very real even if niche. There's a lot going on (including research) and it seems to me like, one fine day, like how ARM sneaked up on x86, Blockchain is going to take HN by surprise. And then, the disruption would have truly arrived.

It isn't like the best sounding tech wins anyways.

Re: Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

#113

Post by cblconfederate »

ignoramous wrote: post #112

I genuinely think HN is subject to what Clay Christensen put as "disruptive innovation" when it comes to Blockchain and friends (strange to say that for a community as opposed to a company). I understand that many on HN think of the many ICOs as Ponzi schemes, and other tech (like identity, DBs, VPNs, apps, or even alternate WWW) built on top as smokes and mirrors; but the industry being built around it is very real…

Would be nice to have a decentralized HN . I m sure it exists

Re: Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

#114

Post by hannob »

jcfrei wrote: post #77
nexthash wrote: post #11

I think the #1 reason blockchain doesn't work is very simple - the technology is broken beyond fixability. This article is two years old, but the same variations of these excuses always come up when the crypto ideologues are grilled on why their utopiaic vision hasn't come about, for all of blockchain's existence. Blockchain is awful for most things compared to a centralized or distributed database: it is inefficient…

This is the typical argument on a very technical board such as HN where blockchain is synonymous with a specific implementation. But that's an outdated way to think about blockchains. Yes, Bitcoin's implementation is a huge resource hog and slow. But for most newer projects "blockchain" just means an auditable trail of state changes. Whether you implement this with the shiniest newest db paradigm or some simple SQL d…

So Blockchain is a fancy word for something like a Git repository?

Re: Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

#115

Post by throw0101a »

nexthash wrote: post #11

I think the #1 reason blockchain doesn't work is very simple - the technology is broken beyond fixability. This article is two years old, but the same variations of these excuses always come up when the crypto ideologues are grilled on why their utopiaic vision hasn't come about, for all of blockchain's existence. Blockchain is awful for most things compared to a centralized or distributed database: it is inefficient…

> a huge resource hog

One observation that I recently saw:

> Bitcoin is such an environmental disaster it really is a crime against humanity. So what does Tesla do with their $1.5B in revenue last year from clean car credits sold to other automakers? Put it into “Destroy the Planet Inc”

* https://twitter.com/ncweaver/status/1358780808144723968

Re: Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

#116

Post by mikegreenberg »

lottin wrote: post #111
jcfrei wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the typical argument on a very technical board such as HN where blockchain is synonymous with a specific implementation. But that's an outdated way to think about blockchains. Yes, Bitcoin's implementation is a huge resource hog and slow. But for most newer projects "blockchain" just means an auditable trail of state changes. Whether you implement this with the shiniest newest db paradigm or some simple SQL d…

> ownership of digital assets that's something new and valuable Doubtful, because ownership only makes sense in a context of scarcity whereas digital assets are in infinite supply.

How are blockchain assets, whose scarcity is defined by the protocol and agreed upon by all participating node operators, infinite in supply?

Edit: Arguing in good faith... you could suggest changing the protocol, sure, however you would need follow that particular blockchain's rules for gaining consensus about changing the rules first.

Re: Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

#117

Post by throw9017000 »

Melting_Harps wrote: post #60
rorykoehler wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just recreated consumer banking.

> I think that's their point. There's a lot of discussion that 'banks will become obsolete with crypto' that forgets that banks are not the currency, they just manage it. If crypto becomes widespread banks will keep on existing, they'll just move to manage cryptocurrencies. > You just recreated consumer banking. While I personally detest the notion of such a model, and things like GME show why that is: I realized tha…

Not everyone ignore Bitcoin because they love fiat or can't handle the disruption. Some do it because enabling a stronger uncontrolled brand of capitalism sounds like replacing a weaker poison with a stronger one.

Re: Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

#118

Post by throwaway9980 »

hannob wrote: post #114
jcfrei wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the typical argument on a very technical board such as HN where blockchain is synonymous with a specific implementation. But that's an outdated way to think about blockchains. Yes, Bitcoin's implementation is a huge resource hog and slow. But for most newer projects "blockchain" just means an auditable trail of state changes. Whether you implement this with the shiniest newest db paradigm or some simple SQL d…

So Blockchain is a fancy word for something like a Git repository?

Yes. See the sibling comment about Merkle trees.

Re: Why blockchain is not yet working (2018)

#120

Post by [deleted] »

ItsMonkk wrote: post #106
EGreg wrote: post #74

No, blockchains are not the future, they are really the reason why one transaction can happen at a time in the whole world. Even Ethereum 2.0 will have shards which will do away with this anomaly. The only reason flash loans even work with no collateral is because you can be sure nothing else is running on the “world computer” while your transaction runs, so you can roll it back with no risk except gas fees. Vitalik…

You touched on something that I have been trying to work out but don't nearly have the expertise to create. Bitcoin requires PoW because it's implemented as back-pointers, where the global software states that everyone coalesces behind the tallest chain. But why not just implement a linked list, where the next link is written into the current block, and whomever writes to that next block wins? You would end up with e…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN