3 ms·
> And what if a lowly peasant like me wants to synchronize with the big trading firms' feeds? It's all pretty highly regulated, and you'd need a license before
by bunderbunder 8y ago
> And what if a lowly peasant like me wants to synchronize with the big trading firms' feeds?
It's all pretty highly regulated, and you'd need a license before you're allowed to even think about hooking directly into an exchange. If you've got lowly peasant money to work with, it would be much more cost effective to go through the retail channels, just like every other person who isn't a corporation.
> Blockchain does exactly this without everybody having to sort out discrepancies.
No, it doesn't. The nature of the discrepancies that cause trouble in practice, and the ways they sneak in, are simply not things you can solve by chaining hashes and throwing a proof-of-work algorithm into the mix. The very suggestion puts you one blue suit and some pointy hair away from being able to star in a Dilbert strip about trying to use buzzwords to solve problems you don't understand.
- tastyfreeze 8y agoNobody said proof-of-work. Bitcoin is not the only game in town. Ledger consensus can be reaches without wasting resources on a proof-of-work algorithm.
- afiori 8y agoWhich answer none of the point presented. Financial markets are heavily regulated for a good reason, Bitcoin need to find a good way to "clone" that if it want to be used for actual finance. Errors can come from outside the system, any kind of consensus protocol cannot solve that. So cryptocoins do not have any particular advantage here.