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

Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 225 posts

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#141

Post by CryptoPunk »

mannykannot wrote: post #66
TTPrograms wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The important question is if you think it's possible to create impervious functions of ~100 lines of code. I tend to think that with modern formal verification systems this is a feasible goal. Otherwise you have to stick with closed-source security-through-obscurity and rely on legal reversal. This seems pretty weak to me, though - ex, if a stock exchange was hacked, sure you could reverse it legally, but the market…

I am not sure what your position here is: that you can do whatever you want, or at least a lot of useful things, in ~100 lines of code? That if your software is broken down into functions no bigger that ~100 lines of code, and they have each been individually verified, then their composition has also been verified? Or something else? There is also the matter of verifying the platform itself.

Regarding your last point, the platform itself can be fixed if it has any malfunctions. The issue is only with an application built on top of the platform malfunctioning while the platform operates exactly as it's supposed to.

In that case there is no redress as the platform is for all intents and purposes immutable when it's working correctly.

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#142

Post by joe_the_user »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #44
cornholio wrote: post #32

There is some truth in the slides but it's well mixed with falsehoods and misunderstandings. * Distributed consensus schemes are not useful only for monetary applications. When they are used as such, there exist mechanisms to commit to a certain fiat price and minimize market exposure to the point where transactions are almost free, in fiat terms. * The disbursement of tokens and the distributed consensus rewards do…

> smart contracts and distributed algorithms enable control mechanism and hard guarantees that have no old world equivalent, they can eliminate counterparty risks, guarantee solvency and fair arbitration etc. The required nexus between the blockchain and the tangible and legal worlds means every limitation that exists today will exist for a "smart contract". It's the same plumbing with a paint job.

The required nexus between the blockchain and the tangible and legal worlds means every limitation that exists today will exist for a "smart contract". It's the same plumbing with a paint job.

It's that plus a whole new crop of perverse incentives which arise with any "smart contract". Especially, no smart control can reach out to the "real world" and get data, more less facts. A smart control would essentially be limited to some data-stream in on Internet. And anything like that can be subverted seven ways from Sunday. Do you really want billions riding on THAT?

(and, yes, give us some Rube Goldberg scheme of averaging six different weather stations for your result. I'm sure nothing can go wrong with any of those ideas. Yeah, World finance then gets to be hoisted on the lpad petard).

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#143

Post by jmeyer2k »

jwilliams wrote: post #136
cornholio wrote: post #32

There is some truth in the slides but it's well mixed with falsehoods and misunderstandings. * Distributed consensus schemes are not useful only for monetary applications. When they are used as such, there exist mechanisms to commit to a certain fiat price and minimize market exposure to the point where transactions are almost free, in fiat terms. * The disbursement of tokens and the distributed consensus rewards do…

> That being said, 95% of the times the word "blockcahin" is uttered these days, what follows is most likely bullshit. This is true -- it's also true the 5% is pretty damn interesting. There are plenty of interesting tokens out there. Some of them are tackling real problems. That's pretty exciting. I don't begrudge someone who's trying to solve something. The historical analogs are lazy in my view. The financial and…

One of the coolest things about cryptocurrency right now is the insane amount of money being invested in decentralization. With all of the Facebook privacy issues in the news right now, decentralization offers an interesting alternative where users control their data.

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#144

Post by mikekchar »

jacques_chester wrote: post #112
TTPrograms wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic so is every financial software system, though.

Bugs in financial software can typically be unwound by the parties involved, or by courts, or both. This is less true for a scheme designed to be irreversible in itself.

Traditional finance isn't any easier to unwind than bitcoin. If I give you $5 I can't magically "erase" that transaction. The $5 bill doesn't materialise back in my pocket. Instead, I get the police to force you to give the money back. As an accountant, if you erase a transaction (even if it was a mistake), you can go to jail. What you do it make a balancing transaction to correct the mistake. Nothing is stopping you from doing the same thing with bitcoin. Making it so you can't erase or hide the previous transaction just enforces rules that already exist -- and it a great feature.

The main difference is that it is infeasible to hold large amounts of cash, and so we usually allow a third party to hold on to our money. That third party will usually hand over your money if requested by the government (some overseas banks are notable exceptions!!). With bitcoin I can hold on to it myself and not have to worry about the actions of a third party. Secondly, even if you horde cash, it's hard to secure it. It's basically impossible to make it so that only you can access it. With Bitcoin, it is easy to secure a large amount of value and ensure that only you can access it. Bizarrely, a large number of people totally ignore this advantage...

This is the entire point of bitcoin. With the hype, fraud and what not, people often assume that bitcoin must have been developed as a scam. But I really do believe that the purpose was to allow people to have access to money and not have to rely on a third party who probably doesn't have your best interests at heart. It's not really surprising that criminals will be interested in this kind of system. They are the ones with the highest need. The government can't freeze your account.

The interesting question is: do we need that kind of security? Do we trust the banks and government to act appropriately with our money?

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#145

Post by zodiac »

asfgjadfgionoin wrote: post #85
mjamesaustin wrote: post #2

Isn't he discussing cryptocurrencies in particular rather than blockchain in general? There are many uses for blockchain other than as a cryptocurrency. Correct me if I'm wrong - I'm not an expert in blockchain by any means.

>There are many uses for blockchain other than as a cryptocurrency. Name one.

Opentimestamps

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#146

Post by zodiac »

KirinDave wrote: post #109
fruitzome wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2B+ people do not have access to banking or trade. They are poor because we do not trade with them. I couldn't pay someone in South Africa rural area for something worth $2 without bitcoin. Many other people are censored. Billions more have their wealth devalued via inflation. Bitcoin is a way for people to be free without any state taking their money (see Greece)

Bitcoin is sooooo important that everyone has devised an alternative off-chain protocol that actually does peer-to-peer scaling and in no way actually needs bitcoin except as a reconciliation strategy. Yeah wow, we're all impressed.

What's wrong with off-chain scaling?

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#147

Post by zodiac »

logicallee wrote: post #46

That's not why blockchain is bs. Let me tell you a little story you might want to remember, so you can tell your grandchildren. This is how you might tell them: "You think algorithms are hard, little children? You don't want to stay up to date? Well gather round, gather round, let gramps give you a sense of human folly and just how far we have come. Maybe that will let you appreciate how lucky you have it. "Way back…

Go on, how do you "prove node's aren't colluding"?

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#148

Post by zodiac »

logicallee wrote: post #73
wellboy wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blockchains are moving away from PoW to PoS, which requires a millionth of the energy use, so that's not really an argument.

Kindly elaborate. Which ones? To what extent? What is the state of the art here? This was my only issue with bitcoin when I evaluated it several years ago.

The casper-ffg paper is a pretty good spec for a hybrid PoW-PoS system, and is IMO a good place to start before looking into full PoS systems

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#149

Post by drngdds »

TTPrograms wrote: post #45
kbenson wrote: post #16

Ethereum smart contracts are million dollar bug bounties? That sounds about right to me, and seems historically accurate.

By this logic so is every financial software system, though.

The big difference is that you'll probably lose everything you stole and also go to prison if you exploit a bug in a regular financial service. You probably won't be able to make legitimate users of that service lose all their money.

Re: Why “blockchain” is BS in 4 slides

#150

Post by drngdds »

mikekchar wrote: post #144
jacques_chester wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bugs in financial software can typically be unwound by the parties involved, or by courts, or both. This is less true for a scheme designed to be irreversible in itself.

Traditional finance isn't any easier to unwind than bitcoin. If I give you $5 I can't magically "erase" that transaction. The $5 bill doesn't materialise back in my pocket. Instead, I get the police to force you to give the money back. As an accountant, if you erase a transaction (even if it was a mistake), you can go to jail. What you do it make a balancing transaction to correct the mistake. Nothing is stopping you…

How do you secure large amounts of Bitcoin? Keeping it all in a hardware wallet is a lot like keeping all your money in a safe in your closet, and keeping it on your computer or in an exchange is even worse.
Post reply on HN