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

Coinbase Cloud

coinbase.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 176 posts

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#161

Post by idiotsecant »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #155
permalac wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Complete agreement with this comment. What should a founder do? Focus on their product, the better they become more scamers will attract, but is for the user to use some basic logic. Otherwise, should they tell people that there is no such thing as Nigerian Prince? Because Nigeria is a Republic but some people don't even check the basics, they tend to just refuse their responsibility.

I think a good solution would be to allow users to flag a wallet interaction as a scam (akin to a down vote). Then, after enough votes, you could get a warning analogous to what Safari does when you are about to go to a known scam website. People here forget that the average person (especially as they age) will at some point fall for a scam. Insurance companies are starting to recognize that, because as you approach…

If this system existed it would immediately cause all scammers that aren't already doing it to make a new wallet address for each 'lead' and make a reputation system worthless. I would be very surprised if this wasn't already common practice.

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#162

Post by knownjorbist »

ionwake wrote: post #153
knownjorbist wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look more specifically into what happened, you might have your answer.

It was a failure in the oauth implementation in coinbase I like the way shills don’t even try to justify their untrue stances. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

Okay. Anyone can look and see that it was not that. But I guess that carries farther than an honest assessment.

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#163

Post by knownjorbist »

calciphus wrote: post #83
Underphil wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unrelated, but nothing reminds me I'm getting old more than an entire sentence of words I don't understand.

When someone versions the internet it is safe to disregard the other terms in the sentence.

With that hard and fast rule, I'd argue that you'll be confused about what's happening for years to come.

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#164

Post by mensetmanusman »

idiotsecant wrote: post #161
mensetmanusman wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a good solution would be to allow users to flag a wallet interaction as a scam (akin to a down vote). Then, after enough votes, you could get a warning analogous to what Safari does when you are about to go to a known scam website. People here forget that the average person (especially as they age) will at some point fall for a scam. Insurance companies are starting to recognize that, because as you approach…

If this system existed it would immediately cause all scammers that aren't already doing it to make a new wallet address for each 'lead' and make a reputation system worthless. I would be very surprised if this wasn't already common practice.

Nothing is ever a solution, only a hurdle.

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#165

Post by jcliff »

dogman144 wrote: post #150
jcliff wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

without a way to resolve the canonical version without trusting a singular maintainer, git is not a blockchain. blockchains enforce consensus in a decentralized way, at least public blockchains do or should.

Well no, blockchain plus consensus algorithm does what you’re describing.

it's not a blockchain without a consensus algorithm. it's a linked list of hashes.

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#166

Post by dogman144 »

jcliff wrote: post #165
dogman144 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well no, blockchain plus consensus algorithm does what you’re describing.

it's not a blockchain without a consensus algorithm. it's a linked list of hashes.

While I get what you're referring too, you're drawing from a community wisdom definition vs. any clear technical spec deeming it such, which is what I'm highlighting here. Even the whitepaper calls it "a timestamp network."

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#167

Post by ionwake »

knownjorbist wrote: post #162
ionwake wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a failure in the oauth implementation in coinbase I like the way shills don’t even try to justify their untrue stances. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

Okay. Anyone can look and see that it was not that. But I guess that carries farther than an honest assessment.

Let me do more research and get back to you as this is the first time I’ve been accused of being a liar - I must have got some seriously wrong let’s see

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#168

Post by hestefisk »

reedjosh wrote: post #142
hestefisk wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are setting up a Lightning node? For?

> You are setting up a Lightning node? Yes. > For? To learn, and for myself and friends to use. Vague question. I want the Lightning network to be the BTC solution to transaction throughput and privacy, but I don't know that it is. Figure best way to find out is to get my hands dirty.

Ok. I’m interested in monetising modern crypto mining so I’m always interested in hearing about people’s ideas.

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#169

Post by lallouz »

arthur_sav wrote: post #106

Seems they forgot to write the documentation lol https://docs.cloud.coinbase.com/exchange/reference/market-fe...

Hi Joe here, leading up Cloud at Coinbase. Thanks for pointing this out, as a new product there's bound to be some quirks! Really appreciate the feedback. we'll get things like this fixed.

Re: Coinbase Cloud

#170

Post by lallouz »

babgev wrote: post #152
barmstrong wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coinbase CEO here. Thx for mentioning it, we’ll get that fixed. This is an early release from us and I would expect there to be a few quirks. Please keep sharing any feedback.

Is there any way to get support regarding the API? We are trying to increase the send limit of our application, but can't get any support for over 3 months. No one's monitoring the SO tag as is mentioned in documentation.

Thanks for pointing this out, we're working on ramping up support and a dev rel team. Appreciate the feedback.
Post reply on HN