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

Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

currentaffairs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 341 posts

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#211

Post by ipv4dhcp »

ephbit wrote: post #149

> WEAVER: Yes. So let’s take the cost of a transaction. The cost of a transaction in cryptocurrency systemically is the amount being used to protect it. I could build a system that would have the same throughput as Bitcoin, three to seven transactions per second, but with a centralized trusted entity. In fact, not even a centralized trusted entity. Ten trusted entities, only six of which need to be honest, because I…

the problem is that those "trusted entities", ie: banks have a high cost in terms of infrastructure, opportunity cost of all employees doing something else other than signing transactions, and the environmental costs associated with each bank employee's entire life. so while crypto energy costs are high, they arent as high as having humans existing somewhere hitting buttons for so called 'trust' and dealing with regulatory cruft.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#212

Post by ur-whale »

edent wrote: post #49
lordofgibbons wrote: post #10

I will gladly stop using Monero if someone can tell me how to privately transact over the internet without CC companies (and others) spying on me and selling my data. Until there is a better solution, I'll keep using it.

I understand this privacy argument - but I'm wondering what the practical downside is of this "spying"? I've been using credit cards online for decades and I am yet to encounter anything negative from doing so. I get that my credit card provider knows that I'm buying £X of goods from merchant Y. But unless that merchant is very specific, the card company doesn't know what I've bought. And, if it did... so what? Perha…

>I understand this privacy argument - but I'm wondering what the practical downside is of this "spying"?

Other than the fact that "why do I need privacy, I'm not a criminal" (the battle cry of people who are lucky enough to have been raised in the 5 places on earth ruled by non-abusive governments) has been debunked a million times, you need to consider the fact that - just like the oodles of information gather on you by big tech - this gathering transforms you into a product, not a citizen.

Now, if you don't mind being treated like a shearable beast of burden, then, you're correct, that's not a problem.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#213

Post by tejohnso »

wlll wrote: post #104
Havoc wrote: post #44

>help me make it die in a fire I'm rather mistrustful of people that are this forthy about being against a new technology. If it really is that devoid of merit it'll die on its own. I also think it is a rather fundamental failure to see the big picture. Not efficient? Well neither was the Ford model T. Newer generations are getting better. Similarly somehow existing systems seem to get a free pass for things that are…

> I'm rather mistrustful of people that are this forthy about being against a new technology. I don't really give a crap about what people do or don't do with new technology, ultimately what people want to spend their time and money on is up to them. However, "Crypto" is different. If all it was was just the unbelievably irritating crypto bros rug pulling, ponzi scheming, wash trading, ugly NFT shilling and hacking a…

> But "Crypto" (specifically the energy intensive kind) has a different problem, and that's that it has /massive/ externalities that it simply ignores, forcing us, the people who want nothing to do with it, to now deal with it

Grossly inefficient personal transportation and industrial farming have massive externalities forcing people who want nothing to do with it to deal with it. That doesn't seem to be a concern that matters to most people. And they're exacerbating the same climate and energy issues.

Public blockchain can be powered by renewable energy, using its own value to pay for it, and can harness power in areas where it is not feasible to harness that power for other purposes.

Here's a podcast[1] episode with Saifedean Ammous, if you're interested in the value proposition. He claims Bitcoin actually saved his life, so obviously incredibly valuable to him. Lex does a pretty good job at pushing back on his evangelism.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gp4U5aH_T6A

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#214

Post by samatman »

yashg wrote: post #86
lordofgibbons wrote: post #10

I will gladly stop using Monero if someone can tell me how to privately transact over the internet without CC companies (and others) spying on me and selling my data. Until there is a better solution, I'll keep using it.

Exactly where do you use Monero?

Pretty cool that you can ask that question but no one else can answer it without his private key, which you don't have.

Not even vaguely true of "exactly how does yashg use their credit cards", which many people can answer in as much detail as they care to purchase.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#215

Post by wlll »

fartcannon wrote: post #173
PaulHoule wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not on HN.

I spend a lot of time on the internet but I have never bumped into a cursed crytpo bro without seeking them out. Where are you being accosted by them?

Perhaps, fartcannon, you have just been lucky. They pop up in my twitter feed pretty regularly.

However, the main point was that I don't want to deal with them, and under normal circumstances I could just ignore the relatively minimal interactions I have with them.

But because I am effectively fighting back against /their/ externalities affecting me I have to seek them out. To learn about their hobbies, to find out about what it is they are doing.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#216

Post by polygamous_bat »

stepanhruda wrote: post #207
thawaya3113 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every other way is better. 1) Crypto is easily traceable. Far more than any other means of funds transfer if you exercise even modest efforts to hide the source of funds. And to the extent crypto provides a modicum of privacy it’s because it’s too small for governments to have put any restrictions on it. 2) There is absolutely no guarantee the money will reach Wikileaks. At best, the money will reach the holder of Wi…

You are answering like it’s 2015 and all you know about is how Bitcoin works. All 3 problems that you mention are solved with 1. zero knowledge proofs 2. multisigs 3. stablecoins.

Ah yes, stablecoins that are very well known to keep their values stable over a long period. It's not like one of the top five stablecoins is just going to evaporate into thin air over a week, right?

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#217

Post by samatman »

latchkey wrote: post #31
ogogmad wrote: post #13

Blockchain cryptocurrencies rely on the economic incentives of PoW (or something similar) in order to function correctly. Has anybody modelled how the miners might behave under varied circumstances? So far, the incentives seem to be working correctly, with no double-spend attacks happening.

Yes, there are a ton of papers up on arxiv on all sorts of topics around mining and PoW [1]. There have been plenty of double-spend attacks that have happened. For example, ETC has a 6.5 day deposit time on Kraken. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=arxiv+mining+pow [2] https://support.kraken.com/hc/en-us/articles/203325283-Crypt...

Double-spend attacks on ETC serve to demonstrate the effectiveness of proof of work.

Forked minority chains aren't expected to be safe, and this is for sure reflected in the market value of the coin. Any time ETH miners want to gang up on ETC, they can.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#218

Post by jrm4 »

While the vast majority of today's anti-crypto articles are generally accurate, always bet against articles like this, in favor of first principles.

"Anonymous-ish cash, but on the internet" is a very attractive proposition. I'd also add to that "Locking up your money to get more money later" is as well. So much so that I'd strongly bet in favor of "people figure out how to make it more efficient, safer, and less destructive" against "It's just going to fail and go away."

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#219

Post by polygamous_bat »

jeffrwells wrote: post #142
chalst wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see any cryptocoins that I regard as a success, but I am watching three that might be a success: 1. Filecoin: It was well-motivated from the start, to provide a cheap way to get counterparties (by default, a multiple of six) to pin content in IPFS. I don't regard it as a proven technology yet, but it's usable as it stands; 2. Brave's BATs: Brave annoys me with its cryptocoin boosterism, but in principle this…

In the case of Brave, genuinely curious: Is there any reason this needs to be on a public blockchain? What are the benefits? Why is this a better solution than Brave keeping points/payments data in their own database?

What if the Taliban downloads and starts using your browser? Do you want to keep their ledgers and start processing payments for them using your centralized DB?

The use of crypto here has the same reason as use of crypto almost anywhere else, to sidestep regulations and liabilities. Doesn't matter whether those regulations are there for very good reason.

Re: Why All Cryptocurrency Should Die in a Fire

#220

Post by wlll »

Schroedingersat wrote: post #188
wlll wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm rather mistrustful of people that are this forthy about being against a new technology. I don't really give a crap about what people do or don't do with new technology, ultimately what people want to spend their time and money on is up to them. However, "Crypto" is different. If all it was was just the unbelievably irritating crypto bros rug pulling, ponzi scheming, wash trading, ugly NFT shilling and hacking a…

The model T is also a bizarre example because the negative externalities of the private automobile are so extreme that you are materially worse off now owning a car in a city designed around cars than not owning one in a city designed to minimize their use.

Yeah. I left this out for the simplicity of the argument, but something we really didn't have a good idea of at the time (especially because it largely hadn't happened yet, and we might not have been able to measure if it had) was that climate change exists, and cars are a huge part of it.

We know that now, but are stuck in a world with cars, we're trying to dig ourselves out of that hole.

We know that crypto[1] uses massive abouts of power when we're struggling to move off fossil fuels. We know that now, at the genesis of the crypto.

[1] the crypto I care/talk about, the power hungry kind.

Post reply on HN