Web3? I have my DAOts • Hacker News Board

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#561

Post by diveanon » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:02 PM UTC

zepto wrote: post #525

diveanon wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been the victim of chargeback fraud and major banking errors that resulted in major losses that took months to recover. Irreversibly transferring funds and having complete ownership of them once they are in your possession is a huge feature.

I don’t know if you realize this but you proved my point perfectly. Someone defrauded you, and you were able to recover the money . With crypto, when you get defrauded, you will never see the money again. If you think there is no fraud in crypto, I have some things to sell you.

They never would have been able to access my funds in the first place if this was on a blockchain.

Your argument amounts to the same as relying on the police to return your car after it has been stolen and then declaring that as security.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#562

Post by diveanon » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:10 PM UTC

ElKrist wrote: post #398

diveanon wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dollars via aave

Do you mind sharing the details like amount of crypto(s) / USD, interest rates, repayment terms etc. You could scale all money numbers (not durations please) by a factor if you prefer. I'm interested to see a real-life example

It was on Aave polygon.

There are no repayment terms per say, just interest charged on the loaned amount.

Aave has variable interest on stables that varies between 7-4% and they offer an incentive bonus of about 3% MATIC, making the effective rate 1-4%.

My loan to value rate is around 35%, which gives me a very healthy liquidation buffer in case the market gets even more volatile.

My collateral is mostly BTC and ETH, with smaller holding of MATIC and AVAX.

It’s a really nice system, I get to keep my crypto holdings and extract real world value. Paying 1% interest on a loan backed by assets that are appreciating 100% a year feels really good.

As an additional safety precaution I wrote a smart contract to liquidate some of my other positions if I am ever at risk of being liquidated by Aave to avoid the liquidation penalty.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#563

Post by Animats » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:16 PM UTC

virgilp wrote: post #321

digitailor wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, I understand that can appear to be tightening, but the IRS guidance is exactly the same since 2014, as are the penalties. They're now more actively alerting US taxpayers they need to pay taxes on their "virtual currencies." But the US taxpayer has always had that obligation, and the IRS is now starting to more visibly enforce it. They've been doing so less visibly as well. With so much more digital asset econo…

Rules don't matter. Enforced rules do. If IRS only started tightening their grip in 2020... Their statements prior to 2020 didn't have any effect, yet. I'm not saying "it's doom and gloom for crypto". I'm saying it's fair to claim things didn't fully play out yet.

Yes. It's pretty clear that forward looking NFTs are securities under US law, per the Howey test. The NFT community is in total denial about this.

The SEC is basically reactive. They wait until people complain about losing money in a scam. Then they bring the hammer down. This avoids complaints about over-regulation.

(A "forward looking NFT" is something like land in a virtual world that doesn't exist yet. You're funding an enterprise run by others to build the thing. That's an investment contract, which the SEC regulates. An NFT that represents "art" that exists at the moment of sale is probably just a collectable.)

By the way, none of this is new. See "Swampland in Florida" on Wikipedia for the 1950s version of the same concept.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#564

Post by Animats » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

codebolt wrote: post #426

digitailor wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Barring value judgements about the subject, there are some large chronology and fact checking problems with this post. The federal scrutiny of Bitcoin happened a long time ago now. The China crackdown was this year. The US agencies mentioned all started examining bitcoin in 2012 at the very latest, and had a decent grip by the next year. Left off the list is the agency with the most impactful jurisdiction- the DHS- w…

Regardless of Bitcoin itself, it seems the US has started looking at Federal regulation of stablecoins only this year. The way it looks to me, the existence of wildcat stablecoins are an important pillar keeping the crypto economy afloat. Just this week Tether was seen printing billions again, just as Bitcoin started going south.

Tether has a lot of people worried. It's a big enough issue to have reached Cabinet level. Tether now has US$76 billion outstanding. This can't end well.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#565

Post by lottin » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #518

lottin wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already know what "enforce" means. You said blockchains can enforce "digital" whatever that means. The only thing blockchains can "enforce" is that data are added to the chain according to some rules. There isn't any type of property right, digital or real, that can be enforced in this way.

I already explained what enforcement means in this context giving you a very concrete example. Why don't you show how that example is not what I claim it is. Instead of just repeating what you already said. I can't help you see something you don't want to see.

> Why don't you show how that example is not what I claim it is.

Because, quite honestly, I don't what your claim is. You're saying that a blockchain can "enforce DIGITAL" which is a meaningless sentence. Are you claiming that you can write a program and execute it on a blockchain? Sure. I can do the same on my computer. This is not an example of enforcing property rights, which was what we were talking about.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#566

Post by shiohime » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:25 PM UTC

xmprt wrote: post #243

_gf4m wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ETH's current scalability problems are beyond terrible, but there are alternatives. You can use chains like Polygon or Avalanche that are EVM, so you get all of the capabilities of Ethereum, but without insane gas fees. There are non-EVM solutions as well like Solana, which has substantially higher throughput while transactions cost a fraction of a cent. Try out other chains than ETH before ruling out web3 imo. There…

I've looked into some of the engineering that goes into Web3, and while I'm incredibly impressed, I can't quite shake the feeling that all we're doing is getting really good at counting paperclips. What real world problems does Web3 solve? It seems like Web3 has a ton of great solutions to problems that Web3 creates. Most problems that Web3 claim to solve can be solved through non blockchain solutions and even decent…

Personally I've been exploring the concept of proof of ownership in the NFT space. I think there is a lot of potential in the technology that helps benefit creators and cuts out the middle man. I know we are quite a ways out from doing something like this, but it is feasible to do something like self-publish a video game and distribute as tokens, then sell it on a decentralized platform. It would cut platforms like Steam who take a large percentage out of the equation. Of course, Steam as an ecosystem is incredibly valuable, but it's just the first example that came to mind.

Really, the way I look at this is that in the past few years we have had a lot of engineering talent to explore the space and come up with unique products and ideas that the web3 toolkit enables, and we'll continue to see growth in the space.

My first proof of concept dapp I made earlier this year was a scheduling application that allows for you to arbitrarily schedule something on another ethereum address' calendar, assuming that they have initialized their profiles and set their rates, using an escrow to handle all monetary interactions. I could then host my dapp on a file storage system like arweave or IPFS, paying one time for hosting instead of a perpetual hosting fee. It wasn't perfect but it was a fun proof of concept.

But yeah, I think we'll continue to see a lot of innovation in the space, and see some really cool products over the next few years. If you have any doubt, the fact that a company the size of Facebook decided to pivot their company, brand and all, towards metaverse development (which will directly be utilizing NFTs), that should be a signal that web3 is going to continue to evolve.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#567

Post by chipotle_coyote » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:30 PM UTC

koonsolo wrote: post #396

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The critique being made in the original article, I think, is that it's extremely hard to find a hypothetical use case for blockchain technology that can't be done without blockchain technology. A wine exchange seems to pretty clearly fall into the "things we can do pretty well without crypto" category, so one needs to explain what crypto is bringing to the party that makes it a marked improvement. In this particular…

The difference is that you can pick the exchange where you trade your token. Because the ownership of the token is really yours. If the central party charges 1% transaction fee, it's a 1% transaction fee. If they only open on weekdays, you can't trade in the weekend, etc. When it's your token, you can trade it wherever you want.

Maybe, but there's some assumptions buried in here, I think:

- first, the token has to be usable by any exchange it's traded on. Different blockchain technologies may not be compatible. (For instance, you can't move an NBA Top Shot NFT from Flow to Ethereum.) This is a solvable problem from a technical standpoint, but given how fiercely ideological different blockchains are, there may be non-technical stumbling blocks that arise here.

- second, there has to be an "off-the-blockchain" legal connection between the token and the object the token represents, something that's recognized legally as a "bill of sale." This isn't a huge hurdle and I'd assume the purchase of the token includes language that covers this, but that legal language might include arbitrary limitations, such as stipulating that if you don't use their preferred exchange they'll charge you extra fees, or even restricting the token to specific exchanges entirely.

This is an issue that I think a lot of "smart contract" proponents just haven't come to grips with yet: when you read "contract" in terms of a blockchain, think "API contract" rather than "legal contract". A cursory search suggests there are Flow to Ethereum NFT converters out there, but if you run your NBA Top Shot NFT through one, does the NBA still consider it valid?

- third, this example is specifically tying the token to a physical object, which adds other complications. You may be able to successfully trade your token on Sunday, but the wine store may still only be open on weekdays.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#568

Post by lottin » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:42 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #560

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're not answering the question though. the only thing the system can do is ask more and more from their users, but there is no way to know if the transaction is good: if it looks good, it is good. so it can't enforce anything on its own. a CC payment can look good, but it can be reversed because there other other channels, outside of the CC circuit, to prove those transactions are to be considered fraudulent. Ther…

I have answered it and again you are answering it ex. here: "A CC payment can look good, but it can be reversed because there other other channels, outside of the CC circuit, to prove those transactions are to be considered fraudulent. There is no such mechanism in the crypto space, so basically they are good unless you have an issue that can't be solved by the chain itself." This is a feature NOT a bug. It comes wit…

This is a complete FAILURE to enforce property rights. If by stealing your car, I automatically own it, that means there are no property rights whatsoever.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#569

Post by vvpan » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:42 PM UTC

dmitriid wrote: post #548

vvpan wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read my comment? AMM's were impossible without blockchain. And they are more efficient than real-world counterparts.

> Did you read my comment? AMM's were impossible without blockchain. I did. Let's see: Me: "no one can provide even a single one that... isn't relying on circular references" --- start quote --- The most basic to me is the Automatic Market Maker system. For example Uniswap is a system with only a few (relatively speaking) lines of a code at its core and a team of a couple of dozen. --- end quote --- Oh, look. A thing…

So if Goldman Sachs ran an AMM for stock trading then that would make it all legitimate?

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#570

Post by vvpan » Tue, Dec 07, 2021, 7:45 PM UTC

mbesto wrote: post #474

vvpan wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguments about blockchain here on HN are frustrating. There are plenty of good examples of where it works very well but the mental gymnastic people go through to deny the obvious are incredible. The most basic to me is the Automatic Market Maker system. For example Uniswap is a system with only a few (relatively speaking) lines of a code at its core and a team of a couple of dozen. The system does billions of dollar…

> The system does billions of dollars worth of trades every day. Billions of dollars? Ha. Uniswap does none of this. Uniswap allows you to convert one cryptocurrency to another. Example: Bill creates a coin called $FOO, it has 1,000,000 tokens and I give Mary one token in exchange for $100 My friend Josh creates a new coin called $BAR, it has 1,000,000 tokens and I give Steve one token in exchange fro $100. Josh now…

What if one of the big banks ran AMM for stock trading?