3 ms·
As a huge proponent of Bitcoin and other decentralized currencies, I really don't understand this. The entire point of going through the rigamarole of using a b
by wyager 10y ago
As a huge proponent of Bitcoin and other decentralized currencies, I really don't understand this. The entire point of going through the rigamarole of using a blockchain is to attain a large degree of byzantine fault tolerance in an adversarial, trustless, and most importantly unprivileged environment. That is, there are no "master nodes" or any sort of centralized hacks like that.
If you're Senegal, presumably you want control over your national currency, so you're going to need some sort of centralized authority anyway. Since you've already done away with decentralization, why waste the time and effort on using a blockchain? There are any number of simpler architectures you can use when you have a central authority.
- pierre_d528 10y agoDid you get downvoted as I did? Are you guys seriously proponents of centralisation and useless intermediaries?
- RobertoG 10y agoI'm a proponent of centralization in money. Not so much of useless intermediaries. But I up-voted the grandparent because his question makes total sense. What is the point of this except, as another commentator say, to keep a registry of all the transactions? When the Internet started we all though that it was the start of the age of freedom through anonymity, but instead is the age of "I'm only a click away of knowing everything about you". It seems that blockchain technologies are going to follow the same pattern.
- CyberDildonics 10y agoI don't think that is the WHOLE point. An anonymous currency based on private keys, even if centralized, allows you to use electronic money without banks, which means without permission.
- notahacker 10y agoBut if they're having the centralised authority anyway, can't they just allow anonymous accounts to transact through a more traditional secure electronic payments system provided by that central clearing house, without the resource consumption overheads and limits on concurrent transactions associated with blockchains? I can't see true anonymity being a goal of a system introduced by governments either, though I can see why they wouldn't want an electronic payments system to rely on financial intermediaries in an economy where many people don't use banks.
- CyberDildonics 10y agoA public blockchain, even if it is just readable by citizens if far more difficult to manipulate. > without the resource consumption overheads and limits on concurrent transactions associated with blockchains? I'm not sure what this is about, do you have a source? Volume of transactions should be easily large enough to satisfy their currency - all that's needed is some hashing.