Live data from Hacker News

Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

nytimes.com

61–70 of 112 posts

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#61
The money part of the technology is not important for central banks. Underlying technology allows more useful solutions than cryptocurrency.

What Fed and others in banking want is new forms of distributed accounting and settlement processes. You can apply the cryptographic technology for verifying and connecting database rows across institutions in a way that is both transparent, private and secure. If there is a public ledger online, it can be audited by anyone.

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#62

How about fedDigitalCash? It's crazy that I pay a few percent of every transaction to visa for no reason every time I buy anything in 2018

Yes, paying a few % on every transaction to move kilobytes of information over a network is absurd. The true cost is less than pennies but the EMV cartel led by VISA has successfully kept the price many orders of magnitude higher, employing anti-competitive tricks like: hiding the cost to consumers by contracually preventing retailers from increasing prices for VISA payments.

Free/cheap digital payments exist (eg. EU SEPA credit transfers); for credit cars, however, the majority part of the cost (and thus price) is not just making the payment but ensuring that payments are reversible in case of fraud and other disputes, and that customers can get their money back even if the money can't be recovered from a fraudster.

If you'd add a reputable escrow service, dispute resolution system and fraud insurance on top of any cryptocurrency, these features will drive the cost up just as high or more.

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#63
post #19

What is a "blockchain"? To me, a blockchain is a way of solving double-spend problems in a Merkle tree maintained by open distributed consensus, by using some scheme to resist Sybil attacks. The scheme is not necessarily proof-of-work, but the fact that there's a double-spend problem and you're solving it is key to the idea. If you don't have a double-spend problem because all your transactions commute (e.g., Certifi…

> What is a "blockchain"? I am always curious, blockchain was not defined in Nakamoto's work. So, where did the word actually originate from? And what did it meant for the word's inventor.

> blockchain was not defined in Nakamoto's work

However the whitepaper does use the phrase "chain of blocks". https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf, page 7.

So probably the word "blockchain" came about because someone read or heard someone else say "chain of blocks" in the paper and they said "oh, so a blockchain", and thus the word was born.

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#64
Not sure why NYT is taking some "former governor's" opinion on this. Let's take a look at what the Fed itself (themselves?) think. Quite recently (2018-04-16): "The Case for Central Bank Electronic Money and the Non-case for Central Bank Cryptocurrencies" at https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/2018/02/...

In a nutshell, the St. Louis Fed thinks there's no good case for central banks to get involved in creating cryptocurrencies (though there is a case for fiat electronic money). ISTR that the Swiss National Bank expressed pretty-much the same opinion, too, not more than a few weeks ago.

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#65
post #19

What is a "blockchain"? To me, a blockchain is a way of solving double-spend problems in a Merkle tree maintained by open distributed consensus, by using some scheme to resist Sybil attacks. The scheme is not necessarily proof-of-work, but the fact that there's a double-spend problem and you're solving it is key to the idea. If you don't have a double-spend problem because all your transactions commute (e.g., Certifi…

> What is a "blockchain"? I am always curious, blockchain was not defined in Nakamoto's work. So, where did the word actually originate from? And what did it meant for the word's inventor.

[deleted]

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#66
post #19

What is a "blockchain"? To me, a blockchain is a way of solving double-spend problems in a Merkle tree maintained by open distributed consensus, by using some scheme to resist Sybil attacks. The scheme is not necessarily proof-of-work, but the fact that there's a double-spend problem and you're solving it is key to the idea. If you don't have a double-spend problem because all your transactions commute (e.g., Certifi…

This really misses the picture of what's going on. Fedcoin could be coordinated by the federal but live on or be connected to a public smart contract platform where that, now digitised asset, could be used programmatically and interdependently with many other systems in a much more efficient and easy to assemble way than can now be done. This may not sound like a good idea to most on hn but it's at least new.

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#67
post #19

What is a "blockchain"? To me, a blockchain is a way of solving double-spend problems in a Merkle tree maintained by open distributed consensus, by using some scheme to resist Sybil attacks. The scheme is not necessarily proof-of-work, but the fact that there's a double-spend problem and you're solving it is key to the idea. If you don't have a double-spend problem because all your transactions commute (e.g., Certifi…

This really misses the picture of what's going on. Fedcoin could be coordinated by the federal but live on or be connected to a public smart contract platform where that, now digitised asset, could be used programmatically and interdependently with many other systems in a much more efficient and easy to assemble way than can now be done. This may not sound like a good idea to most on hn but it's at least new.

The Fed can create unlimited money out of nowhere and doesn't have to answer questions about it from anybody. I don't think they dream is a transparent blockchain and money supply limited by an algorithm.

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We tried the "anyone can issue money" model in the 1800s, all it led to was bank runs and scams. The current system exists for a reason. If the blockchain crowd wants to relearn those lessons, they are welcome to, as long as they keep their shenanigans out of the real economy and away from people who don't want anything to do with the experiment.

> We tried the "anyone can issue money" model in the 1800s, all it led to was bank runs and scams. And now it's back with technology behind it. A lot of people call ICOs scams. What's the equivalent bank run? Perhaps a panic flee from fiat reserves?

> What's the equivalent bank run?

Bitconnect is sure to be one of the first of many examples. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitconnect

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#69
post #19

What is a "blockchain"? To me, a blockchain is a way of solving double-spend problems in a Merkle tree maintained by open distributed consensus, by using some scheme to resist Sybil attacks. The scheme is not necessarily proof-of-work, but the fact that there's a double-spend problem and you're solving it is key to the idea. If you don't have a double-spend problem because all your transactions commute (e.g., Certifi…

> which meant that it would have been straightforward for China to (globally!) freeze a Bitcoin address

No. It's not like all the Chinese miners are controlled by the government. It's not some monolithic agency.

And then, there are many other coins.

Re: Former top official says Fed should ‘Maybe’ create ‘FedCoin’ to rival Bitcoin

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be reasonable to somehow have control over things like the difficulty of mining or to be able to spawn new currency at a reduced cost via some sort of master certificate while still allowing transfer without communicating with a central coordinator system. A distributed system is a lot less likely to go down or become completely compromised.

The properties of "unlikely to go down" don't require a trustless blockchain; the attributes of being resistant to a node being compromised don't require trust beyond consensus. git is unlikely to go down and verifiable. Copies of a git repo verified by gpg signatures and repos that only accept commits that pass verification requires only as much distribution as running three instances. The fed can do all of this wit…

There is a tremendous difference between "we have three servers so our stuff probably won't go down" and "the system could theoretically remain in use forever even if we disappeared from the world".
Post reply on HN