4 ms·

This isn't the case, your wallet is not tied to your Facebook account.

FridgeSeal 7y ago
Yeah not now, but given everything else they’ve done, it wouldn’t be a surprised if they introduced it as a feature later down the line.
- allannienhuis 7y ago
  That's kind of the definition of FUD spreading, isn't it? How is anyone supposed to defend themselves against accusations like that?
  - FridgeSeal 7y ago
    > That's kind of the definition of FUD spreading, isn't it? How is anyone supposed to defend themselves against accusations like that? By not being an incredibly shady company in the first place? Am I just supposed to disregard everything FB is notorious for, just in case any concerns I raise might be FUD?
app4soft 7y ago
> your wallet is not tied to your Facebook account Nice try, Mark!
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
bonestamp2 7y ago
For now. but they said the same thing when they bought WhatsApp -- that it would remain separate from messenger. Now they're merging the two. So, I wouldn't necessarily trust that what Facebook says will stay true forever. It will stay true just long enough for most people to have forgotten that promise.
bamboozled 7y ago
“Sign-in with Facebook” is all it takes to lose your right to privacy though. It’s pretty clear this is an attempt to take advantage of network effects and dominate the market early. There is also no guarantee that while FB will be one many validators, I dont see any hard limit on the number of validators required for the network to be operable. So over time a single validators could take over. No one will bother changing coins in this case though as it will be too inconvenient.
- mrfenk 7y ago
  Use a different wallet then. Of course it will be tied to your FB account if you use a FB wallet. How will they kick out the existing validators?
  - bamboozled 7y ago
    Of course, but I guess the fear is %99 of people will use the “default” wallet” and be locked into a surveillance system for all transactions online. To your question, not necessarily kick them out intentionally, but if the companies that back the hardware to validate transactions fold, are taken over or pull out of the venture, then the number of validators diminishes and you can end up with something resembling a 51% attack [1] which gives a single corporation total control. This is a problem with all crypto’s unless something is special about Libra which is possible I guess. Then again, even in this case, the dominate player(s) could change the protocol to work in their favour removing the need for x number of validators present. [1]https://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/51-attack.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/51-attack.asp Given Facebooks quickly diminishing popularity, I’m not sure this is ever going to really workout anyway.
  - delfinom 7y ago
    Proprietary blockchain. Supposedly they ~may~ just ~may~ release the documentation in a few years.

Yeah not now, but given everything else they’ve done, it wouldn’t be a surprised if they introduced it as a feature later down the line.

allannienhuis 7y ago
That's kind of the definition of FUD spreading, isn't it? How is anyone supposed to defend themselves against accusations like that?
- FridgeSeal 7y ago
  > That's kind of the definition of FUD spreading, isn't it? How is anyone supposed to defend themselves against accusations like that? By not being an incredibly shady company in the first place? Am I just supposed to disregard everything FB is notorious for, just in case any concerns I raise might be FUD?

app4soft 7y ago

> your wallet is not tied to your Facebook account Nice try, Mark!

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

bonestamp2 7y ago

For now. but they said the same thing when they bought WhatsApp -- that it would remain separate from messenger. Now they're merging the two. So, I wouldn't necessarily trust that what Facebook says will stay true forever. It will stay true just long enough for most people to have forgotten that promise.

bamboozled 7y ago

“Sign-in with Facebook” is all it takes to lose your right to privacy though. It’s pretty clear this is an attempt to take advantage of network effects and dominate the market early. There is also no guarantee that while FB will be one many validators, I dont see any hard limit on the number of validators required for the network to be operable. So over time a single validators could take over. No one will bother changing coins in this case though as it will be too inconvenient.

mrfenk 7y ago
Use a different wallet then. Of course it will be tied to your FB account if you use a FB wallet. How will they kick out the existing validators?
- bamboozled 7y ago
  Of course, but I guess the fear is %99 of people will use the “default” wallet” and be locked into a surveillance system for all transactions online. To your question, not necessarily kick them out intentionally, but if the companies that back the hardware to validate transactions fold, are taken over or pull out of the venture, then the number of validators diminishes and you can end up with something resembling a 51% attack [1] which gives a single corporation total control. This is a problem with all crypto’s unless something is special about Libra which is possible I guess. Then again, even in this case, the dominate player(s) could change the protocol to work in their favour removing the need for x number of validators present. [1]https://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/51-attack.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/51-attack.asp Given Facebooks quickly diminishing popularity, I’m not sure this is ever going to really workout anyway.
- delfinom 7y ago
  Proprietary blockchain. Supposedly they ~may~ just ~may~ release the documentation in a few years.