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

Ethereum 2.0 launches

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 639 posts

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#561

Post by lasagnaphil »

hnick wrote: post #507

This might be as good a place as any to ask, since I'm completely out of the loop on the scene: Are there any successful crypto schemes that use human effort (labour) instead of capital/computing effort? Something like Captcha or Mechanical Turk, hopefully something generally useful to society at large. Solving problems that computers can't (yet). It would seem to be a way to avoid the rich-get-richer aspect because…

But then you're basically describing normal currency backed by the nation state. The state can basically print its own money because it backs up its currency with state power - whether it be enforcing laws and governmental institutions, enforcing taxation to force citizens to use its currency, funding military defensive/offensive operations, provide various welfare services to citizens to create a safety net for the economy, and using monetary policies to modulate its growth. And every one of the activities I've listed above is achieved through human labor.

Obviously there is no nation that backs its currency value for an objectively "good" common cause - every nation probably only thinks within her interest for most of the time. If you want to create such an institution which can print money backed by the values you like - then the answer is much more political than technical, and the crypto algorithms alone wouldn't help you in achieving that.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#562

Post by konschubert »

whiskyant wrote: post #452
konschubert wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't solve the fundamental cost problem with Proof of Work: - If people pay high effective tx fees, it's shit because, well, it's expensive. - If people pay low effective tx fees (through lightning or block size increase or whatever) then, as soon as inflation ends, the money won't be enough to pay for a sufficient hash rate.

Writing to the block should be expensive. But there won't be a problem because it'll only be used to settle Lightning Network transactions very infrequently, and could be massive amounts... not for small transactions.

Sure, but that’s a scenario where the usage of bitcoin is high and the total amount of money on tax fees is small compared to the market cap of bitcoin.

This means hash rate will be low compared to the market cap, and the necessary capital for a double spend attack may be worth it.

Maybe it’s all less of an issue because bitcoin will develop a network of trust that can replace the block chain.

But then, why not go with something like Stellar right away.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#563

Post by hnick »

lasagnaphil wrote: post #561
hnick wrote: post #507

This might be as good a place as any to ask, since I'm completely out of the loop on the scene: Are there any successful crypto schemes that use human effort (labour) instead of capital/computing effort? Something like Captcha or Mechanical Turk, hopefully something generally useful to society at large. Solving problems that computers can't (yet). It would seem to be a way to avoid the rich-get-richer aspect because…

But then you're basically describing normal currency backed by the nation state. The state can basically print its own money because it backs up its currency with state power - whether it be enforcing laws and governmental institutions, enforcing taxation to force citizens to use its currency, funding military defensive/offensive operations, provide various welfare services to citizens to create a safety net for the…

I don't see the direct connection sorry. With currency, gold, etc, it can be stolen or controlled in ways a blockchain currency cannot.

I was merely talking about replacing proof of work with a human step rather than something computed. Intellectual labour (such as to plug our gaps in AI) moreso than physical. Answer a quiz when you buy a coffee or sit there for a few hours to mine coins while analysing a corpus. Something like that.

I saw that some exist, I don't know how relevant they are.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#564

Post by rhlsthrm »

ForHackernews wrote: post #201
TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To trust a currency, you must trust the institutions that manage that currency. You have no control over it. To trust a cryptocurrency, you must trust the algorithm that runs it. It's fully auditable and predictable. It still takes me several business days to complete an ACH transaction in the US, and requires I trust the banking system. Transferring cryptocurrencies happen much faster and don't require the same kind…

The US ACH system is extremely slow and still involves nightly batch jobs. Many other countries have systems that allow for nearly immediate person-to-person money transfer without blockchains: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faster_Payments_Service This is not a good argument for cryptocurrency. Regarding "trusting" an algorithm: in the real world you also have to trust the implementation, and the configuration, and e…

> Very rarely has any cryptographic algorithm been broken, but often one of the other links in the trust chain has broken.

The whole point of Ethereum is to reduce/eliminate those links in the trust chain.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#565

Post by KSteffensen »

Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #433
gnarcoregrizz wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No KYC Offline account creation Instantly liquid programmable assets Programmable banking Financial censorship resistant Micro finance Anyone can use it, it’s surprisingly simple You could create your own company+shares if you want and they can be instantly available on any market. Ever tried trading a penny stock, or an international stock? It takes forever to open an account at a brokerage where they may or may not…

>Instantly liquid programmable assets Since nobody really answered this one I'll explain it. Let's say you create 1,000,000 Blah-Tokens. Problem: your new asset has 0 liquidity. Right? Because there isn't a market for it. If you get it listed somewhere, there still won't be a market until people start placing buy and sell orders. So, can ethereum fix this? Yes! With an automatic market maker like uniswap. Put your 1M…

So liquidity here means whether there is a demand for my Blah-tokens, whether people are willing to buy it for their hard earned cash, gold bars, coffee beans or whatever.

How does Ethereum help create a demand for my Blah-tokens? I can already open a web-shop that sells Blah-tokens. I'm fairly sure the demand will be very low, though. Please explain further how an 'automatic market maker like uniswap' will create demand for my Blah-tokens.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#566

Post by SamBoogieNYC »

downandout wrote: post #501
kgin wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the loan and the return is a single "transaction" (in db terms)? What sort of situation could this be used in? I'm having a hard time truly imagining use without any risk of transaction rollback.

They are primarily used for arbitrage transactions. Token swaps on decentralized exchanges are instant - there is no order book. So you can compose a single transaction that involves many exchanges, swaps involving different tokens, flash loans, etc. If the transaction ends with a profit after the loan is paid back, at the market prices that exist at the time the transaction is executed, the flash loan occurs, and pr…

Wow this sent me down a rabbit hole.

How are the transactions composed, with a smart contract/s, in combination with Dex API’s?

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#567

Post by dmitriid »

kgin wrote: post #503
dmitriid wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ethereum is also built on the assumption that: - people aren't assholes - all involved parties can audit blockchain transactions - all involved parties are programmers and can audit a contract written in an esoteric programming language - all involved parties voluntarily agree to be bound by these contracts despite the fact there's no way they can be enforced

> all involved parties voluntarily agree to be bound by these contracts despite the fact there's no way they can be enforced Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I don't think ETH contracts count on humans doing anything.

If you "don't have humans doing anything", then Ethereum is just a very slow and inefficient API and protocol layer.

However, if you want to use services or exchange goods, then people are involved.

A simple example: person A requests goods or services from person B. According to Ethereum website, "Customers have a secure, built-in guarantee that funds will only change hands if you provide what was agreed." Person B provides goods/services. Person A says no goods or services were provided. The assumed guarantees turn out to be fiction.

Here's a real world example. A typical contract between a supplier and a chain store common in many parts of the world goes something like this:

- supplier provides goods on a continuous basis

- the chain store pays for goods once every three months

In the real world this contract is enforceable by, well, centralised laws of the respective countries. If the chain store reneges on payment, it can be taken to court and forced to pay.

In case of "smart" contracts, well, keep sending goods for three months in the hope that you get paid.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#568

Post by alexmat »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #411
companyhen wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin is the gateway into crypto. Check the marketcap, and all the pairs are tied to BTC on most major exchanges. It's also the most secure and has the largest community. It's use case is different than Ethereum's.

>>It's also the most secure and has the largest community. Ethereum's mining fees exceed Bitcoin's: https://cryptofees.info/ That would mean it has better long-term security prospects than Bitcoin, as security is proportional the revenue earned by validators.

That's misleading. If you factor in mining rewards, Bitcoin has much higher fees per transaction. A total of $18,000,000 more per day spent on validating Bitcoin transactions than what that website claims.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#569

Post by KSteffensen »

sickygnar wrote: post #322
KSteffensen wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No KYC I don't know what KYC is but I'm not US based. Sounds like some fee that's peculiar to US banking environment (which I have heard is extraordinarily bureaucratic). >Instantly liquid programmable assets Another example of opaque blockchain jargon. Maybe it makes sense, but not as a way to convert the sceptical. >Programmable banking I can currently program transfers to happen regularly every month on a certai…

KYC = know your customer = anti money-laundering. Yes, it is bureacratic, and it can be a pain for regular, non-money-laundering customers. With crypto, you can instantly create an account offline and trade around the globe. As far as programmable banking, I meant it in the sense that people can create "bank apps", aka contracts. It goes way beyond simple routing of funds, since it's turing complete. Financial censor…

Anti-money laundering regulations are a good thing to me. I want this, even though it means I had to get a passport made for my 4-year old son so that the bank could see he actually existed and his account total of $50 was not being used by some ukrainian oligarch.

I also think it's ok to put in some speed bumps and force a tiny bit of due diligence before allowing people to gamble away their savings. I'm assuming there is a different risk profile to trading Kazakstani stocks as compared to German stocks, and I think people should be made aware of what they are getting into.

Post reply on HN