Live data from Hacker News

The Problem with Ethereum

tomerstrolight.medium.com

271–280 of 321 posts

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#271
post #265
post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should probably read the the whole post not just one part and then assume something I never said. The power is split between miners and user. A majority from both parties are required to determine where the network goes the rest are somewhat forced to follow. If no such majority can be found the network can fork and both chains can be profitable for miners. I never said miners are in control, I disagreed with the…

What I am saying is that only users can determine which chain is profitable for miners. Miners only have a choice in the sense that they can choose to sacrifice profits on principle, which is not really a choice in the same sense as the kind of choice that users have.

No, this is wrong. And the reverse is also wrong. A user can chose by principle too and scarifies cost if he has to overpay to attract miners to that chain. Does that mean its "not really a choice"? No, its exactly what choice means. Also even at zero user if the token has value mining can be profitable.

But anyway these edge-cases are irrelevant. There is and will never be a situation where all miners and all user chose a different chain. Just the fact that some miners are users at the same time makes it impossible. The only thing important is that power is shared between the 2 groups and its a constant fight because of different interests. Even without miners when its fully PoS there will still be misaligned interests between the parties (users, hardware operators, stakes etc.)

Its an inherent flaw in the system because it relies on incentives which one party wants to maximize.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#272
post #251

Who the hell cares. Crypto people were warned repeatedly, since 2017 (and arguably even sooner), that this is all a scam and they should not put their money there. They ignored those messages for years, put the money there anyway (because the number goes up), so, tough luck. Articles "network XY is more decentralized than network YZ" are boring.

Because at some point the banks will fail and one of these ‘scams’ is going to be necessary for you to get along in life. I’m sorry that this is the case; I really wish that the system we live in was sustainable, but it’s not, and it probably won’t be reformed before it’s too late. Maybe this is a matter of opinion, but it happens to be the most common opinion of people that have studied the matter without incentive…

I'm generally optimistic about cryptocurrencies, but these kind of catastrophe scenarios where cryptocurrencies play the role of savior have always seemed pretty silly to me.

If the US dollar collapses or experiences hyperinflation, and/or US banks all collapse, pretty much everything is going to be fucked everywhere, most likely. Especially because whatever's driving that catastrophe is probably disrupting lots of other things, as well. (A major war, for example. The global Bitcoin/Ethereum/etc. networks might become disconnected and fragmented in those scenarios. Let alone infrastructure for fiat exchanges or paying for things with cryptocurrency.)

I think these events are very unlikely to begin with, yet a lot of cryptocurrency maximalists speak as though they're likely or inevitable in the mid-term or near-term. But if they do actually happen, I think digital currencies are going to be the least of almost everyone's concerns at those times.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#273
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure we should treat the base money of the internet the same way we do tech startups - to "move fast and break things". I would like to know that my BTC is stored in a network backed by code that is secure with slow and steady progress.

> the base money of the internet You can't. Be serious. What percentage of internet transactions are performed in Bitcoin? 1%? 0.1%?

Way less than that.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#274
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Etherium, and most crypto-currencies for that matter, were initially made to fix a broken financial system No? Buterin argued to the bitcoin core developers that Bitcoin and blockchain technology could benefit from other applications besides money and needed a more robust language for application development that could lead to attaching real-world assets, such as stocks and property, to the blockchain.[15] It's lik…

But the only kind of application that would even theoretically benefit of running on the Blockchain is a finance application, and it's not better at that than the current system. In fact, it's worse. The whole idea of "code is law" is deeply flawed, and I think the hard forks prove that. The problem then is that smaller financial injustices that do not get the attention of the core Devs, will go unchecked and unfixed…

> But the only kind of application that would even theoretically benefit of running on the Blockchain is a finance application

People have lots of theories of what other kinds of applications benefit from running on a blockchain. These are at various stages of being proven out. One that seems promising is attributing ownership to digital assets. But there are other theories too. This is all very new and speculative and it might all go nowhere, but it definitely isn't accurate that only financial applications would theoretically benefit.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#275

Everything wrong with crypto is the notion you can make a global reserve currency impervious to special interests. It’s going to be gamed by the people at the top, they will use all and any leverage to change the code to favor them more. They will extract the value from the system like they have every other system and the easiest part is that stakeholders like you and me don’t get any vote. You can’t decouple monetar…

Nobody* is trying to make ether a global reserve currency. People are trying to do useful things with the ethereum blockchain.

* Ok not nobody. But this is not the focus of the project at all.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Everything wrong with crypto is the notion you can make a global reserve currency impervious to special interests This ain't binary. Ain't yes or no. Also.. why do you assume crypto is gunning for 'global reserve currency'? Crypto enables all types of experiments toward reducing the insider-asymmetry nature of central control control (e.g. political whim money printing, political whim monetary policy) >Fiat will alw…

The only reason Michael Saylor is telling people to mortgage their house and sell their stonks to buy BTC is because he and a bunch of other whales are gunning to make BTC the world reserve currency. You see this mentality everywhere and it is the only way these coins are going to go to the moon. Not to mention a lot of these people are libertarians who see this as their way to “fix” the problems of central banks. Ce…

This article is about ethereum, not BTC.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#277
post #2

This article actually explains certain aspects of Crypto way better than actual articles that try to explain Crypto. E.g., I've been wondering why a certain Bitcoin podcaster, who is very popular, has never mined a Bitcoin. He/she talks all day about "stacking Sats", but he/she only buys them. Reading this article made me realize that he/she might see him/herself as a member of the ruling class.

It's actually the opposite: even that podcaster is probably not wealthy enough to successfully mine a bitcoin. Bitcoin mining requires a big business and not even one that is easy to start wherever you happen to be; you have to have access to cheap electricity.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#278
post #237

Long story short - hype and broken promises. About security. About scalability. About proof of stake. About code is law. About the world computer. About deadlines and timetables. All the way to the very beginning of the project, although the author doesn't go there. Make the thing so damn complicated few can reason about it or see the time bombs hidden behind the marble pillars. That's a recipe for a high priest clas…

My prior with respect to the ability for ethereum to deliver "the merge" to switch to proof of stake was recently reevaluated dramatically upward, after the recent London hard fork went through without a hitch. I was following it for awhile and there is (in my view) really no way to look at it except as an example of an extremely well run very large update to an enormous and complex system. The communication was good, the cadence of test rollouts was good, the testing setup with multiple testnets was good, the upgrade itself was a total non-event, which is honestly unbelievable to me, as someone who has worked on upgrading complex (but significantly less so) systems.

I still have a lot of questions about ethereum as a project (like: what are blockchains actually good for?), but this software project management stuff is way down the list of concerns for me. I certainly don't understand why people care about arbitrary deadlines and timelines. One advantage of open and permissionlessly developed software like this is not being beholden to a boss breathing down your neck about deadlines and timelines. Just build the software, it will be done when it's done.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#279
post #12

I emphasize with the arguments here but I differ in my conclusion for two reasons. 1. I don't own just Ethereum, its not a boat that I'm riding in, its one of many gambles I'm making. 2. The Ethereum network has generated a ton of really good stuff (Smart Contracts, DEFI, NFTS, IPFS, ENS, etc) despite whatever governance problems it has. Cryptocurrencies are far from mature. There is no guarantee eth and btc will sti…

10 years ago I didn't think bitcoin would be here today. Yet, here we are. If we waited for everything to be mature, then we wouldn't have used web browsers in the early days. I remember when people were afraid to put a credit card into a website. Bitcoin and ETH won't get replaced for the same reasons we ended up with Hacker News, Facebook, Google, Apple, Ebay, Amazon... network effects are amazingly strong. Bitcoin…

It's hard to know when something is Facebook, Google, Apple, or Amazon vs. when it's MySpace, AOL, Palm, or pets.com!

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#280
post #123

> Excuses are made and explanations are given as to why in this particular case an exception needs to be made to the “Code is Law” promise I really wonder what Ethereum investors think of this. A "precedent" was made. Crypto has yet to come to the real test with governments, courts and the physical laws of humans. With Bitcoin, it can be stipulated that changing the network is impossible or unheard of; but that's not…

Why would that require a hard fork? It doesn't seem like it would need to be done on chain at all...
Post reply on HN