7 ms·

At this time, there are 78 comments to this post, none of them addressing technical concerns. Quite unusual for HN. I've devoted my life to cryptocurrency sinc

by abrkn 9y ago

At this time, there are 78 comments to this post, none of them addressing technical concerns. Quite unusual for HN. I've devoted my life to cryptocurrency since 2011 and still question whether or not this system even makes sense. It seems too expensive with the technology we have today. Once privacy, such as zk-SNARK, is added, it becomes unreasonable. Perhaps this is what a bubble looks like. I wasn't there for the dotcom boom. Loss of critical thinking.

vm 9y ago
Really intrigued by your comment! Could you elaborate on what drives the high cost? Or what would need to change for this to viable?
- Jessica- 9y ago
  Annie replied I didn't even know that any one able to earn $8091 in four weeks on the computer ====http://cutt.us/7N2sG http://cutt.us/7N2sG
- hudon 9y ago
  Decentralized validation and ordering of transactions is expensive. In Bitcoin, it requires: 1. Miners to validate 1MB of transactions every 10 minutes 2. Users to be able to confirm that the entire chain of transactions was properly validated by the miners Some ways to make #1 more efficient make #2 more difficult, so they are somewhat at odds with each other. For now, we're looking at a write throughput of between 1tps to 20tps for Bitcoin and Ethereum. If you don't care about #2, then you don't need the mining model anymore, or even a blockchain. You can just put all your transactions in MySQL, Cassandra, R3 Corda or whatever and you can subsequently crank up your transaction throughput. You can get >10,000tps with MySQL.
keyle 9y ago
It'd be great if you could expand on that. Why doesn't it make sense, why is it too expensive, why unreasonable?
- Laforet 9y ago
  Not the poster above, but I think the main issue is with the cost to provide proof of work in a trustless network. For example, bitcoin is already at or close to the point where the most efficient mining operations have a hard time turning profit without a major bubble drawing in outside capital. 3 years from now it may well be unsustainable.
  - kristofferR 9y ago
    Ethereum is planning a switch away from proof of work.
    - Animats 9y ago
      Who, exactly, gets to decide that?
      - Laforet 9y ago
        The short answer: The developers gets to decide. The longer answer can be found here[0] [0]:https://www.cryptocompare.com/coins/guides/what-is-the-ethereum-ice-age/ https://www.cryptocompare.com/coins/guides/what-is-the-ether...
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - cslarson 9y ago
        The users of the platform get to decide what software they want to use.
    - joosters 9y ago
      It's unclear whether or not the alternative 'proof of stake' technique will be more efficient than proof of work. It is susceptible to abuse, and is likely to require an arms race of CPU power to prevent attackers from abusing it.
52-6F-62 9y ago
I think there is little technical to discuss at the moment, because a lot of these companies have not made their direct technicals known. In fact a few of them have been patenting development[0] they've done with blockchain expressly to protect it from the public (and as one would assume, any potential for gain). We can only speculate on the technical problems if we don't really know for certain what the application is that they have in mind. Everybody seems to see value in blockchain tech, though nobody seems certain what the best applications of it are. I admired the UN's use of Ethereum as a tokenized payment method for refugees to 'purchase' relief supplies at camps in Jordan[1]. Problem is, scale that up to consumer-level transactions and we have a problem (at present, anyway). If you want to go back to discussing the root viability of Ethereum's tech, sure -- but I think that's another subject than the main one in this thread. [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-21/who-owns-blockchain-goldman-bofa-amass-patents-for-coming-wars https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-21/who-owns-... [1] https://www.wired.de/collection/tech/blockchain-fluechtlinge-gefluechtete-camp-azraq-jodanien-wfp-iris-scan https://www.wired.de/collection/tech/blockchain-fluechtlinge...
vitaIikbuterin 9y ago
> At this time, there are 78 comments to this post, none of them addressing technical concerns. Quite unusual for HN. https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/6o3hev/link_to_eea_announcement_1_post_on_hacker_news/dkeaqge/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/6o3hev/link_to_e...
f4rker 9y ago
"Perhaps this is what a bubble looks like." Exactly. People trying to get on the easy money train.
sharemywin 9y ago
as long as it doesn't go to 0 than I would say there is something to cryptocurrency. Having a way for early adopters to partake in the value creation of metcalfe's law is also an innovation.

by abrkn 9y ago

vm 9y ago

Really intrigued by your comment! Could you elaborate on what drives the high cost? Or what would need to change for this to viable?

Jessica- 9y ago
Annie replied I didn't even know that any one able to earn $8091 in four weeks on the computer ====http://cutt.us/7N2sG http://cutt.us/7N2sG
hudon 9y ago
Decentralized validation and ordering of transactions is expensive. In Bitcoin, it requires: 1. Miners to validate 1MB of transactions every 10 minutes 2. Users to be able to confirm that the entire chain of transactions was properly validated by the miners Some ways to make #1 more efficient make #2 more difficult, so they are somewhat at odds with each other. For now, we're looking at a write throughput of between 1tps to 20tps for Bitcoin and Ethereum. If you don't care about #2, then you don't need the mining model anymore, or even a blockchain. You can just put all your transactions in MySQL, Cassandra, R3 Corda or whatever and you can subsequently crank up your transaction throughput. You can get >10,000tps with MySQL.

keyle 9y ago

It'd be great if you could expand on that. Why doesn't it make sense, why is it too expensive, why unreasonable?

Laforet 9y ago
Not the poster above, but I think the main issue is with the cost to provide proof of work in a trustless network. For example, bitcoin is already at or close to the point where the most efficient mining operations have a hard time turning profit without a major bubble drawing in outside capital. 3 years from now it may well be unsustainable.
- kristofferR 9y ago
  Ethereum is planning a switch away from proof of work.
  - Animats 9y ago
    Who, exactly, gets to decide that?
    - Laforet 9y ago
      The short answer: The developers gets to decide. The longer answer can be found here[0] [0]:https://www.cryptocompare.com/coins/guides/what-is-the-ethereum-ice-age/ https://www.cryptocompare.com/coins/guides/what-is-the-ether...
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - cslarson 9y ago
      The users of the platform get to decide what software they want to use.
  - joosters 9y ago
    It's unclear whether or not the alternative 'proof of stake' technique will be more efficient than proof of work. It is susceptible to abuse, and is likely to require an arms race of CPU power to prevent attackers from abusing it.

52-6F-62 9y ago

I think there is little technical to discuss at the moment, because a lot of these companies have not made their direct technicals known. In fact a few of them have been patenting development[0] they've done with blockchain expressly to protect it from the public (and as one would assume, any potential for gain). We can only speculate on the technical problems if we don't really know for certain what the application is that they have in mind. Everybody seems to see value in blockchain tech, though nobody seems certain what the best applications of it are. I admired the UN's use of Ethereum as a tokenized payment method for refugees to 'purchase' relief supplies at camps in Jordan[1]. Problem is, scale that up to consumer-level transactions and we have a problem (at present, anyway). If you want to go back to discussing the root viability of Ethereum's tech, sure -- but I think that's another subject than the main one in this thread. [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-21/who-owns-blockchain-goldman-bofa-amass-patents-for-coming-wars https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-21/who-owns-... [1] https://www.wired.de/collection/tech/blockchain-fluechtlinge-gefluechtete-camp-azraq-jodanien-wfp-iris-scan https://www.wired.de/collection/tech/blockchain-fluechtlinge...

vitaIikbuterin 9y ago

> At this time, there are 78 comments to this post, none of them addressing technical concerns. Quite unusual for HN. https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/6o3hev/link_to_eea_announcement_1_post_on_hacker_news/dkeaqge/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ethtrader/comments/6o3hev/link_to_e...

f4rker 9y ago

"Perhaps this is what a bubble looks like." Exactly. People trying to get on the easy money train.

sharemywin 9y ago

as long as it doesn't go to 0 than I would say there is something to cryptocurrency. Having a way for early adopters to partake in the value creation of metcalfe's law is also an innovation.