Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#131

Post by easymodex » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:37 PM UTC

nutjob2 wrote: post #71

hello_1234 wrote: post #45

I really wish they succeed. It takes 3 to 5 business days to transfer money using ACH in the US if you don't want to shell out 25$ for wire transfer. Transferring money is just about transferring a few bytes of data. Why does it take 3 business days? Why are customers still forced to shell out 25$ for instant transfers?

The US is the US, but in places like the EU and Australia, consumer level inter-bank transfers are now taking a few hours, minutes or seconds, at a price between free and less than $1. It's sort of a constructive proof that you don't need crypto currency, if that's the justification for its existence.

"I can get from A to B on foot. I can even ride a horse and be there 10x faster. It's sort of a constructive proof that you don't need cars."

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#132

Post by russdpale » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:41 PM UTC

dralley wrote: post #117

thecupisblue wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're using cryptocurrency because - off the top of my head in no particular order: 1. Hype 2. It gives "credibility" to their currency 3. they can be regulated as a crypto-currency that way. 4. It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency. 5. It locks the users in to their partners because it's more friction to get money. 6. Easier to obtain the data on how users spe…

>It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency. This is only true in the US, where the inter-bank financial system runs on mainframes and 40 year old code. The British banking system decided a while ago that they were going to update their bank communication system, and now they can send sums between bank accounts at different banks within 10 seconds.

This is what I have been saying, its not enough to be a payment system anymore, banks are catching up and people will always sacrifice security for convenience, it is simply human nature.

I think where is messing up is by not allowing more nodes. The brave project is dispensing enough money for people in third world countries to pay for their internet connection.

The true value of crypto currencies is exchanging computational abilities into social mobility, and I don't see where facebook coin does that. Telegram's coin won't, either, but payment/messaging system is big business right now.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#133

Post by hanniabu » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:41 PM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #40

hanniabu wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's a fork then it's not BTC

By that definition ETH doesn't exist. Yet, clearly when someone says "ETH" we all know what they're talking about.

If it is known as ETH then it is the main chain, not the fork.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#134

Post by russdpale » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:42 PM UTC

empath75 wrote: post #41

GenerocUsername wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would result in a fork, split adoption, and is not nearly as easy as you imply.

There have been multiple forks.

Yeh and they all fuckin suck. I wonder why? Its because they compromise on the quixotic properties that make bitcoin valuable.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#135

Post by EthanHeilman » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:43 PM UTC

dralley wrote: post #117

thecupisblue wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're using cryptocurrency because - off the top of my head in no particular order: 1. Hype 2. It gives "credibility" to their currency 3. they can be regulated as a crypto-currency that way. 4. It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency. 5. It locks the users in to their partners because it's more friction to get money. 6. Easier to obtain the data on how users spe…

>It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency. This is only true in the US, where the inter-bank financial system runs on mainframes and 40 year old code. The British banking system decided a while ago that they were going to update their bank communication system, and now they can send sums between bank accounts at different banks within 10 seconds.

10 seconds is still an two orders of magnitude too slow given many use cases and the technology which is currently available. I should be able to tap my card on a subway turnstile and have it open immediately such that the subway faces zero fraud risk.

A centralized system should be limited only by RTT and there are ways to overcome even that via caching layers or cryptographic techniques. You want something sub 250ms.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#136

Post by root_axis » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:45 PM UTC

hanniabu wrote: post #133

root_axis wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that definition ETH doesn't exist. Yet, clearly when someone says "ETH" we all know what they're talking about.

If it is known as ETH then it is the main chain, not the fork.

Right. That's my point. Even though ETH hard forked to undo transaction history, the fork is still considered "ETH" because that is what the leaders decided (and the community agreed to that decision). If Vitalik had made a different decision then the "ETC" chain would still be called "ETH" today.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#137

Post by EthanHeilman » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:47 PM UTC

tomc1985 wrote: post #124

hackinthebochs wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd much rather buy a virtual currency (pegged or not) than values in Facebook's database. A cryptocurrency gives you a certain baseline level of reliability over value and function that values in a centrally controlled database do not. It remains to be seen how much control Facebook will ultimately have over their cryptocurrency, so this point may be moot.

So... values in a decentralized database are worth more or something? You don't actually hold anything with cryptocurrency, it's all still line-items in a DB. E.g. the bitcoin you hold is only as good as the decentralized ledger says it is

There is a big difference between your money sitting in a single file under the control of a single party and your money sitting in three files under the control of three parties.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#138

Post by russdpale » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:49 PM UTC

grey-area wrote: post #127

throwawaylolx wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>payment networks like Visa/Mastercard/Paypal should be most worried by this I don't think they're worried seeing that they're some of the biggest investors in the project https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebooks-new-cryptocurrency-ge...

I’d be concerned if dealing with Zuckerberg. If it fails they lose lots of money, if it succeeds FB has huge leverage over them which it didn’t have before. Can’t really see an upside for these companies to this.

The point is that its "trustless", they don't have to trust zuckerberg, they can see the code themselves and where the payments fee's break way to, he isn't the only one running nodes from what I understand, I believe the partners are as well, which I imagine is the only way they agreed to this.

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#139

Post by jbusma » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:53 PM UTC

nosuchthing wrote: post #42

jbusma wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's take a vote! Who votes to increase the 21M cap, devaluing your own holdings? Sir, it appears the nays have it..

It only takes one veto (bug) to nullify the entire network, CVE-2018-17144 for example. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Common_Vulnerabilities_and_Exposu...

this is actually really cool!

thank you for sharing I didn't know something this critical had been found in recent years

Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns

#140

Post by tomc1985 » Mon, Jun 17, 2019, 6:56 PM UTC

EthanHeilman wrote: post #137

tomc1985 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So... values in a decentralized database are worth more or something? You don't actually hold anything with cryptocurrency, it's all still line-items in a DB. E.g. the bitcoin you hold is only as good as the decentralized ledger says it is

There is a big difference between your money sitting in a single file under the control of a single party and your money sitting in three files under the control of three parties.

I'm not so sure. Sure you can prevent one party changing the data in the DB but the decentralized model seems to carry a lot more risk. I can't wait for the day when todays encryption can be cracked by tomorrow's commodity hardware...