3 ms·

No, you didn't comprehend what I said. I said that it doesn't work as a payment system, so they should name something else where it's good at. Can you name anot

by foepys 8y ago

No, you didn't comprehend what I said. I said that it doesn't work as a payment system, so they should name something else where it's good at. Can you name another application in any sector?

lawn 8y ago
It works well as a payment system. Some other applications: provably fair gambling, decentralized voting and an uncensorable twitter (ex memo.cash).
- foepys 8y ago
  Payment system: The corresponding blockchain would nearly instantly overload and reach data sizes beyond good and evil for everyone to handle. The result would be middlemen (aka banks) that are able to save the whole blockchain and handle your trust requirements. Today's light wallets require trust as well and every user of those can potentially be fed fraudulent blocks without them noticing. Gambling: why is that better than a non-blockchain, regulated solution? The results have to come from somewhere, so that is a centralized point of trust you inevitably need. Unless you mean that the odds are decided "fairly" then I question why you would bet your money at a place where you can't trust the odds, or why you don't bet elsewhere where the odds are more in your favor. Decentralized voting: I don't know why anybody would want that. If you don't control who votes, you end up with rigged votes. Unless you mean that only the block producers (miners) vote, then you will end up in an oligarchy. Uncensorable Twitter: If by "uncensorable" you mean immutable: nobody sane wants that. Once somebody posts child pornography to the blockchain, you will have to explain to the police why you have child pornography on your computer.
  - lawn 8y ago
    I like how you easily you dismiss any counterpoints or examples. Even with full 100MB blocks you're only looking at ~5TB of storage for a whole year. This is easily attainable for many people, including myself, today. The point isn't to have everyone run full nodes you know, some trust is acceptable. The fact is cryptocurrencies work very well as a payment system today. > then I question why you would bet your money at a place where you can't trust the odds Obviously here you wouldn't need to trust the odds as they are verifiable. > I don't know why anybody would want that. If you don't control who votes, you end up with rigged votes. You can have a voting scheme where you give out unique votes, centrally, which you can then yourself without trust verify that your vote is correctly counted. Why anyone would want that should be clear. > you mean immutable: nobody sane wants that Many people would want that. There are of course drawbacks. You can also store hashes of content which you can store elsewhere which you can verify. Like many torrent sites work.
    - foepys 8y ago
      My mother will be very pleased to hear that she needs to buy terabytes of disks every year instead of using her credit card. Very user friendly. You missed the point about gambling. Please re-read what I said about the odds. You need to trust the service anyways to input the correct result. Voting requires anonymity. By giving out unique votes, you jeopardized this. Storing content elsewhere doesn't require a blockchain because it doesn't guarantee that it will still be there. Thus it's not censorship resistant.
      - omarchowdhury 8y ago
        Why exactly does your mother need to run a full node? You imply incorrectly that to perform a Bitcoin transaction, one needs to have run a full node.
        foepys 8y ago
        Because if you don't run a full node you need trust and if you need trust, you can simply use a credit card. This whole crypto currency thing is so stupid because nobody can answer me these very basic questions.
        omarchowdhury 8y ago
        You could also do some basic research. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Thin_Client_Security https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Thin_Client_Security
        lawn 8y ago
        You really don't need to run a full node, that's just decentralization fetishism. Decentralization is just a means to an end: permissionless p2p digital payments. You don't need to personally run a full node for that.
- paulie_a 8y ago
  In the case of Bitcoin it's incredibly slow and had high transaction fees. It's an outright terrible payment system.
  - lawn 8y ago
    Yes, luckily Bitcoin isn't the only cryptocurrency. For example Bitcoin Cash is a great payment system.
    - paulie_a 8y ago
      And in reality not actually used as a payment system at scale. Genuine payments are the edge case of all crypto currency.

by foepys 8y ago

No, you didn't comprehend what I said. I said that it doesn't work as a payment system, so they should name something else where it's good at. Can you name another application in any sector?

lawn 8y ago

It works well as a payment system. Some other applications: provably fair gambling, decentralized voting and an uncensorable twitter (ex memo.cash).

foepys 8y ago
Payment system: The corresponding blockchain would nearly instantly overload and reach data sizes beyond good and evil for everyone to handle. The result would be middlemen (aka banks) that are able to save the whole blockchain and handle your trust requirements. Today's light wallets require trust as well and every user of those can potentially be fed fraudulent blocks without them noticing. Gambling: why is that better than a non-blockchain, regulated solution? The results have to come from somewhere, so that is a centralized point of trust you inevitably need. Unless you mean that the odds are decided "fairly" then I question why you would bet your money at a place where you can't trust the odds, or why you don't bet elsewhere where the odds are more in your favor. Decentralized voting: I don't know why anybody would want that. If you don't control who votes, you end up with rigged votes. Unless you mean that only the block producers (miners) vote, then you will end up in an oligarchy. Uncensorable Twitter: If by "uncensorable" you mean immutable: nobody sane wants that. Once somebody posts child pornography to the blockchain, you will have to explain to the police why you have child pornography on your computer.
- lawn 8y ago
  I like how you easily you dismiss any counterpoints or examples. Even with full 100MB blocks you're only looking at ~5TB of storage for a whole year. This is easily attainable for many people, including myself, today. The point isn't to have everyone run full nodes you know, some trust is acceptable. The fact is cryptocurrencies work very well as a payment system today. > then I question why you would bet your money at a place where you can't trust the odds Obviously here you wouldn't need to trust the odds as they are verifiable. > I don't know why anybody would want that. If you don't control who votes, you end up with rigged votes. You can have a voting scheme where you give out unique votes, centrally, which you can then yourself without trust verify that your vote is correctly counted. Why anyone would want that should be clear. > you mean immutable: nobody sane wants that Many people would want that. There are of course drawbacks. You can also store hashes of content which you can store elsewhere which you can verify. Like many torrent sites work.
  - foepys 8y ago
    My mother will be very pleased to hear that she needs to buy terabytes of disks every year instead of using her credit card. Very user friendly. You missed the point about gambling. Please re-read what I said about the odds. You need to trust the service anyways to input the correct result. Voting requires anonymity. By giving out unique votes, you jeopardized this. Storing content elsewhere doesn't require a blockchain because it doesn't guarantee that it will still be there. Thus it's not censorship resistant.
    - omarchowdhury 8y ago
      Why exactly does your mother need to run a full node? You imply incorrectly that to perform a Bitcoin transaction, one needs to have run a full node.
      - foepys 8y ago
        Because if you don't run a full node you need trust and if you need trust, you can simply use a credit card. This whole crypto currency thing is so stupid because nobody can answer me these very basic questions.
        omarchowdhury 8y ago
        You could also do some basic research. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Thin_Client_Security https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Thin_Client_Security
        lawn 8y ago
        You really don't need to run a full node, that's just decentralization fetishism. Decentralization is just a means to an end: permissionless p2p digital payments. You don't need to personally run a full node for that.
paulie_a 8y ago
In the case of Bitcoin it's incredibly slow and had high transaction fees. It's an outright terrible payment system.
- lawn 8y ago
  Yes, luckily Bitcoin isn't the only cryptocurrency. For example Bitcoin Cash is a great payment system.
  - paulie_a 8y ago
    And in reality not actually used as a payment system at scale. Genuine payments are the edge case of all crypto currency.