3 ms·
Superficially, the mistakes are different, but the evolution is the same. E.g. the original goal of bitcoin was to be a digital form of cash. Cash because the
by rsj_hn 5y ago
Superficially, the mistakes are different, but the evolution is the same.
E.g. the original goal of bitcoin was to be a digital form of cash. Cash because the transaction is just between you and the buyer - cash is a bearer instrument. With ACH it's a custodial relationship with the bank, and the bank's interest may not be aligned with yours. They can decline transactions, freeze your funds, monitor what you do, etc. So there was less "ownership", and this true ownership combined with digital payments was the original vision.
Except that true ownership is really limiting. Sometimes you want the intermediary or need money held in escrow and that's when you want a custodial relationship. So enters Etherium and the notion of contracts. Now it's no longer payer and payee, but you have the contract sitting between the two, much as the bank. And just as the bank, the contract can act against your interests. Now it's true, the specific ways that you get screwed by the smart contract are different than by the bank.
Next up, we are seeing the need for adjudication/rollback for when the custodians screw up, as people want to unwind errors in smart contracts or make policy changes. So this will be like re-inventing the court system. Soon, someone will be able to sue you and put a lien on your digital currency, using smart contracts, for example, with appeal to an adjuticating system that can force you to enter into the contract against your will. Then we will be back to longing for the days of bearer currencies.