3 ms·
This is blockchain/crypto delusion. Blockchain does not exceed existing systems in any dimension: * In the long run, any valuable blockchain will tend towards
by discodave 9y ago
This is blockchain/crypto delusion.
Blockchain does not exceed existing systems in any dimension:
* In the long run, any valuable blockchain will tend towards centralization so long as there is such a thing as "economic returns to scale". The largest miners will make more profits that they can re-invest in becoming big enough. This has already happened with bitcoin. Eventually, if they become big enough, they (individually or as a cartel) can just take all property rights recorded on the blockchain.
* Blockchain is not cheaper than other ways to commit globally distributed transactions. The per-transaction cost of Bitcoin is way higher than something like DynamoDB, Spanner, AWS Aurora et al.
* Blockchain is not more efficient than existing database technologies, and will never be. Why do we need to use the electricity consumption of a small-medium country to move bits around?
I could go on.
I think it's notable that the serious cloud providers like Amazon and Google have not even pretended to care about bitcoin or blockchain. If they really thought it was the currency of the future, they would just kick all the customers of their public clouds and use their resources to takeover any blockchains of value.
- bitL 9y agoI think you are conflating cryptocurrency with blockchain-based DApps; they are different animals. See e.g. here advertised Origin protocol's whitepaper to understand threat vector for Amazon's dominance. Cryptocurrencies are IMO just a neat alpha version of what could be possible, a testing playground somebody took way too seriously; their current implementation is seriously underwhelming (i.e. <30tx/s). While neither Amazon nor Google take blockchain seriously publicly, their VC arms do.