5 ms·

A lot of comments here criticise the analogies made in the post. While the criticism might be correct, I feel this is like missing the forest because of the tre

A lot of comments here criticise the analogies made in the post. While the criticism might be correct, I feel this is like missing the forest because of the trees.. Etherium, and most crypto-currencies for that matter, were initially made to fix a broken financial system, where banks unjustly control too much wealth, and changes the rules so that they will always control too much wealth. Etherium does not fix this, it merely copies this system, with all its flaws(and some new ones). That is why etherium is pointless. It does not provide value to society, as it utterly fails to solve the problem it identified. There is no other crypto-currency that does solve this problem, but then I guess some of them never tried to in the first place.

ikt 5y ago
> Etherium, and most crypto-currencies for that matter, were initially made to fix a broken financial system No? Buterin argued to the bitcoin core developers that Bitcoin and blockchain technology could benefit from other applications besides money and needed a more robust language for application development that could lead to attaching real-world assets, such as stocks and property, to the blockchain.[15] It's like you're trying to describe Ethereum from what bitcoin fanboys have told you.
- jstx1 5y ago
  I think that you're confusing money and finance. In addition to being money (like Bitcoin), Ethereum is clearly doing a lot in the space of finance - that's the whole point of DeFi (it's also supported by what Vitalik said according to your own comment).
- amarant 5y ago
  But the only kind of application that would even theoretically benefit of running on the Blockchain is a finance application, and it's not better at that than the current system. In fact, it's worse. The whole idea of "code is law" is deeply flawed, and I think the hard forks prove that. The problem then is that smaller financial injustices that do not get the attention of the core Devs, will go unchecked and unfixed forever. The idea of zero trust financial applications is intriguing, but in practice "zero trust" means "trust Vitalik", and to be honest, I trust my current bank more than I trust some random dude in the internet, thank you very much. (Not that I'm a fan of my current bank, they suck, just slightly less than any alternative I'm aware of) I know some people develop other kinds of applications too, but I completely fail to see the point of running (for example) a video game on the Blockchain other than the novelty..
  - sanderjd 5y ago
    > But the only kind of application that would even theoretically benefit of running on the Blockchain is a finance application People have lots of theories of what other kinds of applications benefit from running on a blockchain. These are at various stages of being proven out. One that seems promising is attributing ownership to digital assets. But there are other theories too. This is all very new and speculative and it might all go nowhere, but it definitely isn't accurate that only financial applications would theoretically benefit.
simonh 5y ago
>made to fix a broken financial system, where banks unjustly control too much wealth... I don't think that's quite what you mean to say. The function of banks is to manage wealth. That's their one job. It's like blaming them for being too much of what they are. Bitcoin has not eliminated banks, it's just created new ones called bitcoin exchanges, online wallets, etc. The only reason they don't function even more like banks (paying interest on deposits, making loans, etc) is because coins are predominantly used more like assets than like currency so there's not much of a market for financial-like services.
mandmandam 5y ago
> There is no other crypto-currency that does solve this problem Perhaps the best thing a cryptocurrency can do is be neutral, and let society sort its own equality out. Like gold-backed currency, only global and instant. No smart contracts, no de-fi, no staking, no miners, no new coins or coins burned on a timer. Just extremely divisible coins that can be sent completely without fees. And there is a coin like this; Nano. Their community has the full expectation of being always fee-less. It even solved the spamming problem, at least to a point of 'good enough', without adding fees. I'm not sure there's much reason, to my mind, to try and add more stuff on top of that. Expecting a crypto currency to be both widely adopted and solve inequality is - possibly - just too tall an order.
vmception 5y ago
I think you and many crypto enthusiasts and crypto skeptics miss the forest because of the trees too What happened to accepting things as they are simply because it's obvious the market can bear it? The ideology and sales pitches of that ideology are not really relevant. These are platforms. No different than Shopify being a platform. You build on them, extract value, walk away. Who cares if Shopify - for example - said "our platform is decentralized and fixes clean water in Africa" and it didn't. Who cares? Does it still allow you to extract value? Yes? That's the whole equation. Figure it out at Harvard Business School a decade from now, or figure it out now.
iSnow 5y ago
Well, maybe it is time to think about whether currency is really the killer usecase for crypto. I used to but not anymore. ETH is much more useful as a global, standardized back-end technology for finance, so I'm kinda sad the "ultrasound money" trope is catching on, IMO that's what BTC should try to be. Oh, and BTW, it's called "Ethereum". Not "Etherium".
derangedHorse 5y ago
It’s odd to me that everyone seems to believe different things with regard to what the creators of these cryptocurrencies originally intended for the technology. I don’t think Ethereum has failed at being a different entity than banks where a central authority can make arbitrary decisions. At the end of the day, Ethereum is still community driven. In my opinion the main benefit of Ethereum and other blockchain technologies is transparency. Everyone can choose to go over the books and anyone can check discrepancies in the blockchain if some parties try to cheat. The beauty of this is that because there’s no formalized government, value can be generated by global consensus and currencies can be picked up and dropped based on whether the contributors are faithfully serving the community.
baby 5y ago
It’s hard to listen to the opinion of someone who can’t even spell Ethereum.

ikt 5y ago

> Etherium, and most crypto-currencies for that matter, were initially made to fix a broken financial system No? Buterin argued to the bitcoin core developers that Bitcoin and blockchain technology could benefit from other applications besides money and needed a more robust language for application development that could lead to attaching real-world assets, such as stocks and property, to the blockchain.[15] It's like you're trying to describe Ethereum from what bitcoin fanboys have told you.

jstx1 5y ago
I think that you're confusing money and finance. In addition to being money (like Bitcoin), Ethereum is clearly doing a lot in the space of finance - that's the whole point of DeFi (it's also supported by what Vitalik said according to your own comment).
amarant 5y ago
But the only kind of application that would even theoretically benefit of running on the Blockchain is a finance application, and it's not better at that than the current system. In fact, it's worse. The whole idea of "code is law" is deeply flawed, and I think the hard forks prove that. The problem then is that smaller financial injustices that do not get the attention of the core Devs, will go unchecked and unfixed forever. The idea of zero trust financial applications is intriguing, but in practice "zero trust" means "trust Vitalik", and to be honest, I trust my current bank more than I trust some random dude in the internet, thank you very much. (Not that I'm a fan of my current bank, they suck, just slightly less than any alternative I'm aware of) I know some people develop other kinds of applications too, but I completely fail to see the point of running (for example) a video game on the Blockchain other than the novelty..
- sanderjd 5y ago
  > But the only kind of application that would even theoretically benefit of running on the Blockchain is a finance application People have lots of theories of what other kinds of applications benefit from running on a blockchain. These are at various stages of being proven out. One that seems promising is attributing ownership to digital assets. But there are other theories too. This is all very new and speculative and it might all go nowhere, but it definitely isn't accurate that only financial applications would theoretically benefit.

simonh 5y ago

>made to fix a broken financial system, where banks unjustly control too much wealth... I don't think that's quite what you mean to say. The function of banks is to manage wealth. That's their one job. It's like blaming them for being too much of what they are. Bitcoin has not eliminated banks, it's just created new ones called bitcoin exchanges, online wallets, etc. The only reason they don't function even more like banks (paying interest on deposits, making loans, etc) is because coins are predominantly used more like assets than like currency so there's not much of a market for financial-like services.

mandmandam 5y ago

> There is no other crypto-currency that does solve this problem Perhaps the best thing a cryptocurrency can do is be neutral, and let society sort its own equality out. Like gold-backed currency, only global and instant. No smart contracts, no de-fi, no staking, no miners, no new coins or coins burned on a timer. Just extremely divisible coins that can be sent completely without fees. And there is a coin like this; Nano. Their community has the full expectation of being always fee-less. It even solved the spamming problem, at least to a point of 'good enough', without adding fees. I'm not sure there's much reason, to my mind, to try and add more stuff on top of that. Expecting a crypto currency to be both widely adopted and solve inequality is - possibly - just too tall an order.

vmception 5y ago

I think you and many crypto enthusiasts and crypto skeptics miss the forest because of the trees too What happened to accepting things as they are simply because it's obvious the market can bear it? The ideology and sales pitches of that ideology are not really relevant. These are platforms. No different than Shopify being a platform. You build on them, extract value, walk away. Who cares if Shopify - for example - said "our platform is decentralized and fixes clean water in Africa" and it didn't. Who cares? Does it still allow you to extract value? Yes? That's the whole equation. Figure it out at Harvard Business School a decade from now, or figure it out now.

iSnow 5y ago

Well, maybe it is time to think about whether currency is really the killer usecase for crypto. I used to but not anymore. ETH is much more useful as a global, standardized back-end technology for finance, so I'm kinda sad the "ultrasound money" trope is catching on, IMO that's what BTC should try to be. Oh, and BTW, it's called "Ethereum". Not "Etherium".

derangedHorse 5y ago

It’s odd to me that everyone seems to believe different things with regard to what the creators of these cryptocurrencies originally intended for the technology. I don’t think Ethereum has failed at being a different entity than banks where a central authority can make arbitrary decisions. At the end of the day, Ethereum is still community driven. In my opinion the main benefit of Ethereum and other blockchain technologies is transparency. Everyone can choose to go over the books and anyone can check discrepancies in the blockchain if some parties try to cheat. The beauty of this is that because there’s no formalized government, value can be generated by global consensus and currencies can be picked up and dropped based on whether the contributors are faithfully serving the community.

baby 5y ago

It’s hard to listen to the opinion of someone who can’t even spell Ethereum.