4 ms·

Developers are wasting their time if nobody wants to use what they develop. Miners lose their income if they are mining blocks on a chain that nobody wants to u

Developers are wasting their time if nobody wants to use what they develop. Miners lose their income if they are mining blocks on a chain that nobody wants to use. Users running software nodes validates the blocks, limiting what miners can do. Miners can be pushed to change the rules with methods like a 'User Activated Soft Fork'. The proof of work algorithm can even be changed, rendering all the ASIC hardware of the mining industry worthless.

matteotom 5y ago
Corrupt governments and central banks can be pushed to change the rules with methods like "voting" or "mass protests".
- sunshinerag 5y ago
  Except corrupt governments and central banks do not care for either. Central bank policies are not subject to voting by people. Did any of us vote for bailouts, QE?. corrupt governments also know how to suppress "mass protests". If these are the only ways to hold them to account how would that work.
  - matteotom 5y ago
    The Fed has a pretty straightforward mission to balance inflation and employment. If they're doing a bad job of that, then the president or congress (acting on behalf of the people) can act to hold them accountable. If congress decides that's no longer the right mission, they can pass a law changing it. And there are countless historical examples (even recent) of peaceful or violent protests causing change to corrupt governments.
  - lkrubner 5y ago
    Most of us did vote for quantitative easing. Certainly after 2008, for many years, in the USA and in Europe, people were voting any kind of stimulus they could get, and when it was impossible to get enough fiscal stimulus, most of us were willing to support any effort for monetary stimulus as a second-best alternative. It is, of course, an interesting point of discussion why it was so difficult to get sufficient fiscal stimulus, but that topic is too complex to get into in a comment on Hacker News.
  - nuerow 5y ago
    > Central bank policies are not subject to voting by people. Did any of us vote for bailouts, QE?. Isn't the role of a central bank to enact monetary policy and to contribute to financial stability? I mean, actively working to stabilize the value of money and to ensure inflation meets the government's policy goals, which are motivated by the need to ensure the economy stays healthy, don't sound like something that creates controversy. I mean, do we really need a vote do check if we want Zimbabwean hyperinflation? Given the alternative is the perpetual risk of seeing the value of your currency halve in less than a week, like BTC experienced a few months ago, how exactly is the service provided by a central bank bad or undesirable?

matteotom 5y ago

Corrupt governments and central banks can be pushed to change the rules with methods like "voting" or "mass protests".

sunshinerag 5y ago
Except corrupt governments and central banks do not care for either. Central bank policies are not subject to voting by people. Did any of us vote for bailouts, QE?. corrupt governments also know how to suppress "mass protests". If these are the only ways to hold them to account how would that work.
- matteotom 5y ago
  The Fed has a pretty straightforward mission to balance inflation and employment. If they're doing a bad job of that, then the president or congress (acting on behalf of the people) can act to hold them accountable. If congress decides that's no longer the right mission, they can pass a law changing it. And there are countless historical examples (even recent) of peaceful or violent protests causing change to corrupt governments.
- lkrubner 5y ago
  Most of us did vote for quantitative easing. Certainly after 2008, for many years, in the USA and in Europe, people were voting any kind of stimulus they could get, and when it was impossible to get enough fiscal stimulus, most of us were willing to support any effort for monetary stimulus as a second-best alternative. It is, of course, an interesting point of discussion why it was so difficult to get sufficient fiscal stimulus, but that topic is too complex to get into in a comment on Hacker News.
- nuerow 5y ago
  > Central bank policies are not subject to voting by people. Did any of us vote for bailouts, QE?. Isn't the role of a central bank to enact monetary policy and to contribute to financial stability? I mean, actively working to stabilize the value of money and to ensure inflation meets the government's policy goals, which are motivated by the need to ensure the economy stays healthy, don't sound like something that creates controversy. I mean, do we really need a vote do check if we want Zimbabwean hyperinflation? Given the alternative is the perpetual risk of seeing the value of your currency halve in less than a week, like BTC experienced a few months ago, how exactly is the service provided by a central bank bad or undesirable?