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

It’s not still the early days of blockchain

blog.mollywhite.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#381

Post by notahacker »

hunterb123 wrote: post #289
erik_seaberg wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are targets for testing stolen numbers: https://blog.sift.com/2016/card-testing-chargebacks-and-nonp... I can also imagine political orgs having foes.

Yup, and crypto nips that in the bud. If you get a confirmed transaction, it's not going to be reversed by some unfair arbitration, you can trust it. It sucks trying to run a game losing $20+ per chargeback and risking getting funds frozen entirely. It sucks to be delisted by PayPal over political bullshit. It sucks Mastercard and other CC companies can decide porn is essentially illegal. - edit @ notahacker - The po…

Porn isn't "essentially illegal", it's an industry worth billions of dollars, virtually none of which involves blockchains.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#382

Post by gambiting »

chucke wrote: post #356
tomputer wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Use cases like storing the history of a car on-chain, transparent supply chains, public voting... this all sounds interesting but never made it to product-market fit. Anything that does not exist natively on the blockchain doesn't need a blockchain at all. If a token on the blockchain would represent you as the owner of a car and one day someone steals your private key which represents your car ownership, that pers…

Not to say your completely wrong, just that the purpose of car tokens on the blockchain is to replace perhaps your insurance, but not the keys.

But....why. What problem does it solve. How is it better than existing insurance policies that are perfectly fine being bound to my name and address

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#383

Post by gambiting »

Galanwe wrote: post #271
tomputer wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Use cases like storing the history of a car on-chain, transparent supply chains, public voting... this all sounds interesting but never made it to product-market fit. Anything that does not exist natively on the blockchain doesn't need a blockchain at all. If a token on the blockchain would represent you as the owner of a car and one day someone steals your private key which represents your car ownership, that pers…

> one day someone steals your private key which represents your car ownership, that person is now the owner of your car. Why take such a naive blockchain as example? You could very well have a proof of authority blockchain so that 3 notary have to sign a car transaction. You could also very well have revocation lists published on the blockchain by a further authority if keys are stolen. There are hundreds of ways to…

And literally none of it, not a single step that you mentioned requires blockchain.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#384

Post by RandomLensman »

ulfw wrote: post #302
neiman wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. "Remotely send money" is a super hard thing to do. I literally just struggled for a month with a transfer that included 3 countries, none of them is English speaking. It required letters from banks, accountants, plenty of forms of different countries, translations, stuff which is lost in translation (the bank was unhappy with the word selection of a non-English speaker accountant, for example), different format…

But none of that needs Blockchain as a technical solution. E.g. my bank allows worldwide free SWIFT transfers in many many currencies. It's not hard to find out someone's name, bank account number and SWIFT code et voila... money sent. There's plenty of other solutions from Paypal to (Transfer)Wise etc. Saying "it can be done in 20 seconds with crypto" is really only half the truth. At the end of the day we all need…

Using some kind of crypto as a more internal transfer and accounting unit seems like a fair use case. And then on/off ramps to traditional when needed.

Could likely be done simpler, but then why not (there are payments solution providers that keep everything internal etc.).

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#385

Post by ique »

democracy wrote: post #361
ique wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that blockchain tech is somehow invented out of nothing and then we search for a problem to match couldn't be further from the truth. Talk to anyone who works in the industry and they're trying to solve a problem. I used to work in blockchain tech and the main problem I was focused on was "How do we prevent internet monopolies like Facebook and Google?". If you don't see those monopolies as a problem, then y…

I am trying to solve world's hunger with my OpenGL game using 8080 assembler. I think I am getting somewhere...

Good luck! I hope you succeed, it’s certainly a goal worth pursuing!

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#386

Post by shlurpy »

tinco wrote: post #260
galaxyLogic wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. Maybe the big problem is not the lack of solutions, but the fact that we don't really understand the problems?

There's no big problem, science and technology are progressing at a great pace. The whole marketing of snake oil solutions is just a nuisance, they're not really affecting anything of value significantly. People are annoyed by Blockchain the same way people were annoyed by Justin Bieber, it's a whole lot to do about a person who is just a kid, a cool kid maybe, and he did make some good songs when he got older, but h…

People hated Justin Bieber because he appealed to young girls, and tons of men automatically hate everything young girls like as some kind of twisted self defense of their masculinity.

People hate bitcoin because it appeals to people they find really annoying.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#387

Post by meheleventyone »

tiluha wrote: post #344
clairity wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

close to? sounds exactly like money laundering, since people who can move money legitimately wouldn’t do so through a relatively risky instrument like bitcoin. tax evasion is a likely entry-level reason, but often coupled with other sketchy illegalities.

Why would you use bitcoin for tax evasion where everyone can see the source of the money? Isn't laundering supposed to hide the origin of funds?

The pseudo-anonymous nature of Bitcoin makes it easier to hide transactions. It’s for example why online games that let you cash money out (or have rampant RMT) have issues with money laundering and credit card fraud.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#388

Post by shlurpy »

yunruse wrote: post #85
systemvoltage wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is literally how research in the Universities makes it to the world. Spin-offs like Boston Dynamics are essential to building things that may not have immediate use but payoff can potentially be huge. We need to do more of this. Don’t throw the baby with the bathwater. I really don’t think generalizations of certain jaded experience and then seeing the entire world with the same broken lens does any good. Probab…

From my very (admittedly very inexperienced) perspective, both views here are valid: it's foolish to scour the world for nails, but it doesn't hurt to make a hammer. Build the technology, think of how it could help, and if you can't find a niche in the world that it fits, don't force the issue. Move onto new things: perhaps re-use some old ideas, of course, but actively get a wider experience, so that you increase yo…

Anything with billions in capitalization will never stop looking for customers, and will bend and break the world to find them if needs be.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#389

Post by ique »

meheleventyone wrote: post #354
ique wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are using a very different meaning of centralisation and decentralisation than blockchain people do. That's neither here nor there though. The way you kill Facebook, Google and any Web2 company is to kill their business model. These are all 100% ad-funded businesses. Kill the advertising funded internet and these monopolies categorically die with it. The only _attempt_ I've ever seen at addressing the issue that…

The question is how does additional fund sources prevent people from also using advertising or collecting data? For example subscription services for newspapers often still show ads. Usually additional revenue streams are used to capture more revenue. If the answer to killing the ad funding business model was individuals pay directly it’s going to face a steep uphill battle because right now for most people the cost…

> If the answer to killing the ad funding business model was individuals pay directly it’s going to face a steep uphill

Indeed, we tried that and it failed, so we need something else.

Blockchain will probably fail because the narrative has been taken over by greed and NFTs.

But Web3 will fail because the tech world seemingly (as evidenced by the comments here) have no interest in solving the problems of Web2, rampant privacy violations, predatory business models and advertising. The answer to all these problems by HN is ”no one cares about privacy so it’s not worth solving”.

Re: It’s not still the early days of blockchain

#390

Post by faeyanpiraat »

traceddd wrote: post #365
3825 wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Using bitcoin I can send money to someone in Chi no a who's social rating was degraded by the CCP and who is forbidden from using banks How will they convert it into something they can use to pay rent and buy groceries? > Crime will exist forever and criminals will find ways to finance themselves anyway, so the use of cryptocurrencies for their operations is not really a factor. Does this make it easier for the wea…

Fees are based on resource usage. In Bitcoin this is usually the total data size of inputs and outputs that are used to make the sum. This is where the issue of dust arises, when an address holds a mass quantity of low value inputs, but combing them yields a very large and therefore costly transaction. In some other chains, like Ethereum, the accounting is ledger based. With these systems theres is no variety in inpu…

You mean that I can have 1btc in 1 piece, or have basically 0 usable btc if I have 1btc gained in like a 1000 small transactions over time?

So when I “spend” that fragmented 1 btc, it all gets eaten up by fees?

Post reply on HN