Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency • Hacker News Board

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#91

Post by maksimum » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 5:15 PM UTC

vernon99 wrote: post #54

CPLX wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not decentralized if one organization owns 52% of it.

Not necessarily. This is actually orthogonal to decentralization question. Very much depends on their proof of stake implementation.

> Very much depends on their proof of stake implementation

Exactly, if someone with >50% power can essentially double spend it makes the currency as a whole almost worthless. As a result it's very much in the creator's interest to either not have >50% or to come up with a distributed consensus algorithm where a majority party can't double spend (very hard).

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#92

Post by zeveb » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 5:16 PM UTC

cantrip wrote: post #62

This is a disaster, as it will likely succeed and in doing so make the entire world less secure. Telegram is not a secure messaging platform, despite marketing themselves as such. Signal has built a simple, seamless, and beautiful messaging platform whose security is based on solid cryptography, not marketing, bug contests, or chasing the latest tech fad.

> Signal has built a simple, seamless, and beautiful messaging platform whose security is based on solid cryptography, not marketing, bug contests, or chasing the latest tech fad.

I love Signal, but it really could use non-phone-number identifiers (this could be easily implemented e.g. with tel: & mailto: URLs) and federation.

One place where Signal falls down is visible with the recent Haven app[0], which uses the Signal network to send messages. This is wonderful, but unfortunately it requires a second phone number to register the Haven device.

[0] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.havenapp.m...

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#93

Post by pera » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 5:17 PM UTC

meri_dian wrote: post #80

The ability of a cryptocurrency to overcome attack is based on the amount of computational power expended on hashing. As more and more standalone cryptocurrencies are launched, the total amount of computational power expended on each will decrease and therefore make each more vulnerable to a 51% attack. This problem is especially pertinent to niche currencies like Telegram's which are tied to a specific company servi…

This "cryptocurrency" will probably be centralized (although they claim some level of decentralization). Most of these ICOs for niche currencies are created just to try to take money from the current market frenzy, and most of them don't need decentralization at all, they just want to say that their company is investing in "blockchain technology" to get a piece of the cake.

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#94

Post by goodside » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 5:17 PM UTC

Maro wrote: post #48

goodside wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes it possible for the asset to be traded on third-party markets without the knowledge, consent, or control of the organization that issued the tokens. It also helps you trust that movement of the asset will not be hindered by the issuer's inability to keep servers running in the face of potential DDoS attacks.

That's a good point. It assumes they don't control the miners, and don't demand "registration" to participate, which would void anonymity. It still sounds like they could use an existing coin though, no?

I'm not sure what you mean by "control the miners" — they're building this on OmiseGo, which isn't mineable.

All of the substantial ICOs require some level of KYC/AML registration for direct public sales and pre-sales. Tokens later become available to everyone else through independent exchanges, which happens quickly these days.

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#95

Post by maksimum » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 5:18 PM UTC

imustbeevil wrote: post #36

Maro wrote: post #30

What's the value of the in-app currency being a cryptocurrency (putting aside hype/pr), vs calling it a virtual currency, a Mysql database with a API on top? Dropping to a technical level, if the miners are all run by Telegram, then I think it's just a pointless overhead over Mysql. On the other hand, if anybody can run miners, I don't comprehend what value that adds, what it means.

They can't make a cool 500 million from adding a row in their Users table for currency.

I don't know if you've heard of the d2jsp forum. But the site's owner (he's essentially a 1-man operation) made a probably $10M+ by doing just that. Not sure whether this is possible (or optimal in terms of growth rate) at Telegram's scale.

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#96

Post by sah2ed » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 5:23 PM UTC

mtgx wrote: post #59

I suggested about six months ago that Signal should have its own ICO/cryptocurrency. Good way to get an open source project funded. Look at Brave, IPFS, and others.

MobileCoin: A New Cryptocurrency from Moxie Marlinspike [0]

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15935583

[1] https://www.mobilecoin.com/whitepaper-en.pdf

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#97

Post by zeroxfe » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 5:52 PM UTC

lakechfoma wrote: post #42

Maro wrote: post #30

What's the value of the in-app currency being a cryptocurrency (putting aside hype/pr), vs calling it a virtual currency, a Mysql database with a API on top? Dropping to a technical level, if the miners are all run by Telegram, then I think it's just a pointless overhead over Mysql. On the other hand, if anybody can run miners, I don't comprehend what value that adds, what it means.

I see this same thing happening at some corporations now trying to create blockchain as a service. If one corporation, or just a few, are the only ones participating in the chain then why not just use traditional DBs?..

It's primarily because large corporations within an industry don't trust each other (and IMO, shouldn't.) This is especially so when the corporations cross national boundaries.

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#98

Post by mistermackle » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 5:52 PM UTC

goodside wrote: post #94

Maro wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good point. It assumes they don't control the miners, and don't demand "registration" to participate, which would void anonymity. It still sounds like they could use an existing coin though, no?

I'm not sure what you mean by "control the miners" — they're building this on OmiseGo, which isn't mineable. All of the substantial ICOs require some level of KYC/AML registration for direct public sales and pre-sales. Tokens later become available to everyone else through independent exchanges, which happens quickly these days.

Where did you see that they are building on OmiseGo?

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#99

Post by donkeyd » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 6:17 PM UTC

lakechfoma wrote: post #42

Maro wrote: post #30

What's the value of the in-app currency being a cryptocurrency (putting aside hype/pr), vs calling it a virtual currency, a Mysql database with a API on top? Dropping to a technical level, if the miners are all run by Telegram, then I think it's just a pointless overhead over Mysql. On the other hand, if anybody can run miners, I don't comprehend what value that adds, what it means.

I see this same thing happening at some corporations now trying to create blockchain as a service. If one corporation, or just a few, are the only ones participating in the chain then why not just use traditional DBs?..

Because blockchain is cool. The other arguments, however true, are not relevant for 90% I've seen it be proposed for. It's mostly about buzzword bingo in large organizations, where people want to be 'the one who proposed [insert bleeding edge technology here]'.

Re: Telegram plans multi-billion dollar ICO for chat cryptocurrency

#100

Post by fastball » Mon, Jan 08, 2018, 6:32 PM UTC

cantrip wrote: post #53

fastball wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if Telegram ever goes under as a company, your "virtual currency" doesn't disappear overnight.

Just like if the US Government ceases to exist we'll still have all these dollar bills.

You can't send people dollar bills on Telegram... otherwise yes, that would be a great solution.