Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin Is Time

dergigi.com

631–640 of 1001 posts

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#631
post #624

The earlier points in the piece about the distinction between information and physical matter got me thinking. I only have a bachelor's in computer science and not much cryptography knowledge, so please excuse if this question has a simple answer: What fundamentally prevents us from creating a digital analog of gold? Gold (partially) has value because it is scarce, and it's scarce because it's difficult to create--nu…

> What fundamentally prevents us from creating a digital analog of gold?

You can infinitely copy information. It's in the article.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#632
post #401

Let me fix that title. Happy to be downvoted into negative territory. I only have 11 points. Go ahead. "Bitcoin Is A Waste of Time (and Resources)" What Bitcoin has done is that it taught people they can come together in a sustained flash mob (like an on-the-fly hedge fund operation) and manipulate the price of speculative assets by creating artificial short-term pump-n-dump type demand. Bitcoin has trained our colle…

I'm genuinely amazed at how you're able to take such an in-depth, thoughtfully written article, and reduce it into a mere "bitcoin is a waste of time, people are gamblers".

It's easier to parrot a tired critique than it is to contribute a useful thought.

What's concerning is its the top comment on this HN thread.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#633
post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Bitcoin is onto something What if it "was"? The "hate" people express against bitcoin especially here on HN is often towards the implementation. People clearly see the flaw in PoW if they are not emotionally attached to it because they have no money at stake. You should not misinterpret that as hate because they missed the train to richness. Objectively PoW does not scale. Objectively we have DLTs (blockchains) with…

But did you really include Lightning Network in your mental calculations? If so, care to elaborate on what exactly would stop it from working? (I mean it already works now, there is nothing technical that is going to stop it from scaling)?

LN fundamentally changes nothing. Its still uses bitcoin Tx it just combines many Tx and does the on-chain settlement at a later point thus reducing the number of on-chain Tx increases speed and reduces fees. But if we reduce Tx on the chain we dont solve scalability we just bump into the limits a little later. LN on a global scale would still need orders or magnitude more on-chain Tx then possible.

And if LN would actually reduce on chain Tx to a level where we would no longer need to worry about on-chain limits then we rendered bitcoin useless because we literally reduced the need for Tx to basically zero. Whos gonna pay for mining if block rewards vanish and LN makes on-chain Tx vanish as well?

Bitcoins "goal" is that on-chain Tx should always be near the max so the fee per Tx is the lowest possible and reward are the highest While LNs "goal" would be to reduce the on-chain Tx to near zero because every on-chain Tx is extremely expensive.

It probably meets somewhere in the middle. which means its still gets worse and worse the more Tx are made even if they are made over LN. Thats the definition of "not scaling well".

LN and bitcoin are supposed to by a symbiosis but LN is the parasite that works best when it almost kills is own host. You can see it though the actions of large miners. They are not supporting LN. They could pour millions in the development and advertisement of LN but they dont want it, it reduces their profit.

Its just very very deeply flawed overly complex system that only exist because some people would not accept that the layer 1 has deep flaws. Is rather obvious that building on top is not the right way forward. An since changing layer 1 is not possible in any meaningful way the only way forward is to abandon it. Which wont happen as long as people make money with it.

>what exactly would stop it from working?

The absolute end state is that hashrate drops or stops increasing due to the fact that it isn't profitable anymore which leads to double spend and essentially destroys any trust in the system and renders it useless.

No one know at which point hashing will no longer be profitable for a long enough time to cause this cascading effect. But once it started the price crashes > pushes more miners out of businesses > further reducing hash rate > panic > price drop more > repeat

All while mining hardware becomes cheap because demand goes to zero and supply increases, which makes a double spending attack cheaper. Then once a double spend has been observed its game over. There inst even a theoretical plan how to move on at that point. In simple words it would move the requirement for block conformations to infinite so there is no point in doing any Tx anymore. Everyone just has to wait which further reduces any rewards for miners.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#634

Let me fix that title. Happy to be downvoted into negative territory. I only have 11 points. Go ahead. "Bitcoin Is A Waste of Time (and Resources)" What Bitcoin has done is that it taught people they can come together in a sustained flash mob (like an on-the-fly hedge fund operation) and manipulate the price of speculative assets by creating artificial short-term pump-n-dump type demand. Bitcoin has trained our colle…

What's the correlation of people who hate on crypto who lost money or missed out on it?

There's a whole subreddit of them at /r/buttcoin.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#635

Let me fix that title. Happy to be downvoted into negative territory. I only have 11 points. Go ahead. "Bitcoin Is A Waste of Time (and Resources)" What Bitcoin has done is that it taught people they can come together in a sustained flash mob (like an on-the-fly hedge fund operation) and manipulate the price of speculative assets by creating artificial short-term pump-n-dump type demand. Bitcoin has trained our colle…

Financially aligning people through greed, speculation, is certainly one way to gain "consensus" - however that ignores, attempts to circumvent the harder work - which takes healthy individuals who have genuine community via regular, conversations that go deep - of building trust; Bitcoin is a virus that has spread because our immune system isn't working, we're currently weak due to a lack of real connection, interconnection.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I almost typed a snarky remark, but then realized that you make a valid point with that analogy. However the analogy feels a little weak to me: > We even had to go to war to make sure we have enough oil I don't see countries going to war over BTC (or the mining pool) as they already have cornered all the fiat currencies in a tight system. All they could do is sabotage the BTC system and make it less lucrative for nor…

Yet! Taking over mining power or electricity resources could certainly propel wars of the future if Bitcoin becomes the reserve currency of the world.

I'm sensing a small nuance missed here, I'll clarify pro-actively: Adding more energy to your mining operation won't result in more bitcoin for you, you will only make the network more secure. Mining bitcoin is mostly about securing the bitcoin network and there is a small reward for doing so.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#637
post #210

I'm ready to be downvoted to oblivion, especially by all the Bitcoin purists, but I hope my message sparks at least some curiosity. Bitcoin is getting "weaker" every year for several reasons: - emerging centralization due to economies of scale. If this trend continues the mining power will be so consolidated that a 51% attack will be likely. The Nakamoto coefficient is already at 4, and tending towards 3. - energy us…

> energy usage due to Proof of Work is growing astronomically, and the higher the price of bitcoin

Not true. The energy used to power the bitcoin network has been stable for a few years.

https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been saying the same damn thing about automobiles man, horses already have self driving even! and they don't pollute like cars. Look at the mess we're in now! who's laughing?? Cars pollute and need roads, we had to build so many roads and gas stations. We even had to go to war to make sure we have enough oil.

As much as it's funny, this is a false analogy. Horses don't travel as fast as cars, or as far. They also can't pull/carry as much as a car, let alone a truck. How many horses are needed to carry the same load as one 18 wheeler? Would Amazon be possible without trucks? How about Walmart?

> Would Amazon be possible without trucks? How about Walmart?

Not Walmart, but Amazon makes even more sense in a horse-driven economy: First, you don't have to ride to the store and back -- mailing a small item is much cheaper than that. Second, with the price of shipping per mile per pound being higher, there would be more of an incentive to ship items directly from the manufacturer to the consumer. Mail-order catalogs existed before the age of cars.

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#639

Let me fix that title. Happy to be downvoted into negative territory. I only have 11 points. Go ahead. "Bitcoin Is A Waste of Time (and Resources)" What Bitcoin has done is that it taught people they can come together in a sustained flash mob (like an on-the-fly hedge fund operation) and manipulate the price of speculative assets by creating artificial short-term pump-n-dump type demand. Bitcoin has trained our colle…

What's the correlation of people who hate on crypto who lost money or missed out on it?

I just posted this in another comment: "Convincing yourself that someone commenting negatively about Bitcoin is simply jealous is also a common thing I've seen many Bitcoin owners use to justify ignoring legitimate counter-narratives of a lot of propaganda."

Re: Bitcoin Is Time

#640
post #210

I'm ready to be downvoted to oblivion, especially by all the Bitcoin purists, but I hope my message sparks at least some curiosity. Bitcoin is getting "weaker" every year for several reasons: - emerging centralization due to economies of scale. If this trend continues the mining power will be so consolidated that a 51% attack will be likely. The Nakamoto coefficient is already at 4, and tending towards 3. - energy us…

"The Nakamoto coefficient is a way to quantify the decentralization of a blockchain or other decentralized system. It's the number of entities you need to compromise at least one essential subsystem."

If a 51% attack occurs, the bitcoin full nodes are still fundamentally in control. Full nodes decide whether or not to accept a blockchain, they socially decide whether to accept a 51% attack. They can hard fork and change the hashing algorithm, firing all current miners.

How does Nano prevent me from setting up two servers, sending the money to different nodes, and double-spending the money?

Post reply on HN