4 ms·

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. The real world requires trust. It doesn't matter what the code says. If I buy something then I have to trust that

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. The real world requires trust. It doesn't matter what the code says. If I buy something then I have to trust that it will be delivered in some way by passing through trusted 3rd parties like FedEx. There is no way around trust. As soon as the digital makes contact with reality all mathematical guarantees of being "trust-less" are no longer relevant.

okwubodu 5y ago
Ah, so the real world requires trust but despite what the blockchain says. I get what you mean now but you can still make it a lot easier. Using your example, you could write a contract such that: you buy an item for X dollar amount, the contract holds it in escrow, waiting for FedEx to confirm receipt of the package and a deposit of Y% of X into a rolling insurance fund from both FedEX and the seller. At this point, if FedEx fails to deliver you’re fully refunded out of the insurance pool and the seller gets their money back. If they deliver, FedEx gets 90% of the insurance payment back, the shipper gets your payment, and they split the seller’s premium as a shipping fee. If the seller never drops off the package you get your money back. You could even throw in a return period where a third party can confirm whether a bad package is eligible for refund. There are obviously holes in this haphazard scenario but the big picture is that there’s a lot of stress that can be offloaded to a truly unbiased 3rd party, even if you can’t achieve full trustlessness in real life.
- holonomically 5y ago
  Yes, the point isn't that digitization is bad but that the crypto community is mostly full of people that don't really understand what they stand for and why. So whenever I hear things like "crypto is a trustless and distributed platform for democracy" I immediately assume that these people are not really serious about anything. They're just interested in parroting memes from Twitter and Reddit.
- warkdarrior 5y ago
  > if FedEx fails to deliver Who is in charge of confirming to the smart contract that FedEx delivered? Whoever you pick, they have a strong financial incentive to lie. If the recipient confirms, they can lie in order to keep the item and get their money refunded. If Fedex confirms, they can lie in order to keep the item and they only lose the shipping costs.
MrMan 5y ago
I beat this drum on HN and IRL and get tired of being downvoted for it. Trust is a lower energy state - it allows specialization, and conservation of energy that might need to be spent defending against threats from different directions. But people who hold anti-social ideas seem to indulge in thinking that they can create a novel system where they have no obligations, just privileges. Crypto prices going up causes these anti-social delusions to flourish because the increasing prices seem to validate the libertarian futurists fantasy of a world with no trade-offs, where we can avoid having responsibility to other humans.

okwubodu 5y ago

Ah, so the real world requires trust but despite what the blockchain says. I get what you mean now but you can still make it a lot easier. Using your example, you could write a contract such that: you buy an item for X dollar amount, the contract holds it in escrow, waiting for FedEx to confirm receipt of the package and a deposit of Y% of X into a rolling insurance fund from both FedEX and the seller. At this point, if FedEx fails to deliver you’re fully refunded out of the insurance pool and the seller gets their money back. If they deliver, FedEx gets 90% of the insurance payment back, the shipper gets your payment, and they split the seller’s premium as a shipping fee. If the seller never drops off the package you get your money back. You could even throw in a return period where a third party can confirm whether a bad package is eligible for refund. There are obviously holes in this haphazard scenario but the big picture is that there’s a lot of stress that can be offloaded to a truly unbiased 3rd party, even if you can’t achieve full trustlessness in real life.

holonomically 5y ago
Yes, the point isn't that digitization is bad but that the crypto community is mostly full of people that don't really understand what they stand for and why. So whenever I hear things like "crypto is a trustless and distributed platform for democracy" I immediately assume that these people are not really serious about anything. They're just interested in parroting memes from Twitter and Reddit.
warkdarrior 5y ago
> if FedEx fails to deliver Who is in charge of confirming to the smart contract that FedEx delivered? Whoever you pick, they have a strong financial incentive to lie. If the recipient confirms, they can lie in order to keep the item and get their money refunded. If Fedex confirms, they can lie in order to keep the item and they only lose the shipping costs.

MrMan 5y ago

I beat this drum on HN and IRL and get tired of being downvoted for it. Trust is a lower energy state - it allows specialization, and conservation of energy that might need to be spent defending against threats from different directions. But people who hold anti-social ideas seem to indulge in thinking that they can create a novel system where they have no obligations, just privileges. Crypto prices going up causes these anti-social delusions to flourish because the increasing prices seem to validate the libertarian futurists fantasy of a world with no trade-offs, where we can avoid having responsibility to other humans.