9 ms·

I really try to resist being drawn into flame bait. > "Remember the golden rule of blockchain: except in the case of regulatory arbitrage, grift and crime, if

I really try to resist being drawn into flame bait. > "Remember the golden rule of blockchain: except in the case of regulatory arbitrage, grift and crime, if you think a blockchain is a better solution to a problem than any classical solution - you either don't know enough about crypto or you don't know enough about the problem." There's a real possibility here that you're way overconfident and wrong and this overconfidence will blind you from a lot of interesting stuff that's going on. > "There's no reason you can't just execute a SQL transaction to deduct from one and increment the other haha. That's not the slow part." Yeah - that's because that's ignoring the entire context of everything else required around that. The centralized systems, the manual trust, the integration problems between organizations. The sql update is not the issue. It seems clear from your tone that you're not really curious about this so I'll just leave it here. > "Not a blockchain in sight. Amazing right?" Good for you - let's check back in 10yr. > "I seriously doubt you're betting against me haha." ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

arcticbull 5y ago
> There's a real possibility here that you're way overconfident and wrong and this overconfidence will blind you from a lot of interesting stuff that's going on. I'm always open to that possibility, and I spend a lot of time learning about blockchain technology. And I've spent the last 10 years working in fintech. Of the commenters here, I probably have more context than most on both. > Yeah - that's because that's ignoring the entire context of everything else required around that. The centralized systems, the manual trust, the integration problems between organizations. The sql update is not the issue. Correct, centralization and trust represent massive efficiencies. Banks trust each other or can trust a central intermediary which is again why NPP, RTP, FedNow, SEPA, FPA all work instantly, basically free, without blockchain. Whereas moving USDC-ETH between two accounts costs $25. > Good for you - let's check back in 10yr. It's been 14 years and yet we have nothing to show for it except a whole pile of used up Kazakh and Xinjiang coal - and some really ugly twitter avatars. But yes, I'll wait, I'm sure OP will deliver by 2031.
- gonehome 5y ago
  The bitcoin whitepaper came out in 2009, Ethereum was 2015, a lot of the interesting stuff has been within the last two years. You may be right in the end, but people with exposure to the industry at risk of disruption are often bad at recognizing it. See Ballmer at Microsoft mocking the iPhone, Blockbuster failing to adapt to Netflix, Borders failing to adapt to Kindle/Amazon etc. That knowledge can provide context for accuracy, but it can also mislead or bias you against something that's changing rapidly. > "Correct, centralization and trust represent massive efficiencies." At a real cost. The web comparison would be decentralized underlying protocols vs. the centralized applications on top of them. "Web3" may allow a way to fix the things that lead to centralization at the application layer with UX that actually works. This is distinct from cryptocurrency, but there's some overlap. ETH cost should get reduced by ETH2 and sharding, the cost is representative of current transaction demand. I'm not a crypto-anarchist, I think both systems will have complementary purposes. Programmable money is something new, knee-jerk dismissals of "it's all crime" are dumb imo.
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    > You may be right in the end, but people with exposure to the industry at risk of disruption are often bad at recognizing it. See Ballmer at Microsoft mocking the iPhone, Blockbuster failing to adapt to Netflix, Borders failing to adapt to Kindle/Amazon etc. That's a lovely narrative except I work in fintechs exposed to crypto. > ... That knowledge can provide context for accuracy, but it can also mislead or bias you against something that's changing rapidly. And as I said I spend a lot of time researching so that I can have informed discussions. > At a real cost. The web comparison would be decentralized underlying protocols vs. the centralized applications on top of them. "Web3" may allow a way to fix the things that lead to centralization at the application layer with UX that actually works. The real cost of PoW blockchain is the electricity consumption and e-waste production of a country, and the cost of all blockchains is a system absolutely rife with corruption and scams. You're just describing APIs, which we've had forever.
TigeriusKirk 5y ago
>There's a real possibility here that you're way overconfident and wrong and this overconfidence will blind you from a lot of interesting stuff that's going on. I'm tempted to start keeping track of how many hundreds of negative comments about crypto HN generates each day, every day. It doesn't really come across as confidence to me.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- arcticbull 5y ago
  HN is quite a bit softer on average on crypto than the broader audience. There's a small but confidently vocal minority of us keeping the light on for sanity. You find me one thing, just one thing, that crypto is better at than a traditional solution and I'll be all over it. 14 years and counting. 0 killer apps.
  - gonehome 5y ago
    People have mentioned things to you [0], you ignore them and repeat this phrase. So despite what you say, you will not be “all over it”. You have no interest in changing your mind or in engaging in genuine discussion. You won’t even update “14yrs” which is just a clear factual error. [0]: getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one
    - arcticbull 5y ago
      > getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one Do you have a concrete example that wouldn't (a) be suitably handled by Wise, Xoom or a wire transfer and (b) isn't out of a sanctioned country and (b) isn't out of a country where the transfer fee would be prohibitive? If so, could you quantify? Is it even good for this? You have to buy the coins from someone else, meaning if you did it domestically you're still net the same level of welfare. If you traded them internationally, you can just buy USD. This is yet another hand-wavey claim, and what I asked for was something concrete, tangible, measurable. > You won’t even update “14yrs” which is just a clear factual error. 2008 to 2022. Just rounding by a couple months. > So despite what you say, you will not be “all over it”. You have no interest in changing your mind or in engaging in genuine discussion. I have no interest in slapping crypto on the back when it hasn't done anything but crime, grift and regulatory arbitrage. Bitcoin is the official currency of the alt-right and yes, it's now older than your average high schooler. [1] Just one, concrete application is all I ask. [1] https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/9/30/22703200/bitcoin-cryptocurrency-andrew-anglin-white-surpemacists-alt-right-richard-spencer-daily-stormer https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/9/30/22703200/bitcoin-cryp...

arcticbull 5y ago

> There's a real possibility here that you're way overconfident and wrong and this overconfidence will blind you from a lot of interesting stuff that's going on. I'm always open to that possibility, and I spend a lot of time learning about blockchain technology. And I've spent the last 10 years working in fintech. Of the commenters here, I probably have more context than most on both. > Yeah - that's because that's ignoring the entire context of everything else required around that. The centralized systems, the manual trust, the integration problems between organizations. The sql update is not the issue. Correct, centralization and trust represent massive efficiencies. Banks trust each other or can trust a central intermediary which is again why NPP, RTP, FedNow, SEPA, FPA all work instantly, basically free, without blockchain. Whereas moving USDC-ETH between two accounts costs $25. > Good for you - let's check back in 10yr. It's been 14 years and yet we have nothing to show for it except a whole pile of used up Kazakh and Xinjiang coal - and some really ugly twitter avatars. But yes, I'll wait, I'm sure OP will deliver by 2031.

gonehome 5y ago
The bitcoin whitepaper came out in 2009, Ethereum was 2015, a lot of the interesting stuff has been within the last two years. You may be right in the end, but people with exposure to the industry at risk of disruption are often bad at recognizing it. See Ballmer at Microsoft mocking the iPhone, Blockbuster failing to adapt to Netflix, Borders failing to adapt to Kindle/Amazon etc. That knowledge can provide context for accuracy, but it can also mislead or bias you against something that's changing rapidly. > "Correct, centralization and trust represent massive efficiencies." At a real cost. The web comparison would be decentralized underlying protocols vs. the centralized applications on top of them. "Web3" may allow a way to fix the things that lead to centralization at the application layer with UX that actually works. This is distinct from cryptocurrency, but there's some overlap. ETH cost should get reduced by ETH2 and sharding, the cost is representative of current transaction demand. I'm not a crypto-anarchist, I think both systems will have complementary purposes. Programmable money is something new, knee-jerk dismissals of "it's all crime" are dumb imo.
- arcticbull 5y ago
  > You may be right in the end, but people with exposure to the industry at risk of disruption are often bad at recognizing it. See Ballmer at Microsoft mocking the iPhone, Blockbuster failing to adapt to Netflix, Borders failing to adapt to Kindle/Amazon etc. That's a lovely narrative except I work in fintechs exposed to crypto. > ... That knowledge can provide context for accuracy, but it can also mislead or bias you against something that's changing rapidly. And as I said I spend a lot of time researching so that I can have informed discussions. > At a real cost. The web comparison would be decentralized underlying protocols vs. the centralized applications on top of them. "Web3" may allow a way to fix the things that lead to centralization at the application layer with UX that actually works. The real cost of PoW blockchain is the electricity consumption and e-waste production of a country, and the cost of all blockchains is a system absolutely rife with corruption and scams. You're just describing APIs, which we've had forever.

TigeriusKirk 5y ago

>There's a real possibility here that you're way overconfident and wrong and this overconfidence will blind you from a lot of interesting stuff that's going on. I'm tempted to start keeping track of how many hundreds of negative comments about crypto HN generates each day, every day. It doesn't really come across as confidence to me.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
arcticbull 5y ago
HN is quite a bit softer on average on crypto than the broader audience. There's a small but confidently vocal minority of us keeping the light on for sanity. You find me one thing, just one thing, that crypto is better at than a traditional solution and I'll be all over it. 14 years and counting. 0 killer apps.
- gonehome 5y ago
  People have mentioned things to you [0], you ignore them and repeat this phrase. So despite what you say, you will not be “all over it”. You have no interest in changing your mind or in engaging in genuine discussion. You won’t even update “14yrs” which is just a clear factual error. [0]: getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    > getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one Do you have a concrete example that wouldn't (a) be suitably handled by Wise, Xoom or a wire transfer and (b) isn't out of a sanctioned country and (b) isn't out of a country where the transfer fee would be prohibitive? If so, could you quantify? Is it even good for this? You have to buy the coins from someone else, meaning if you did it domestically you're still net the same level of welfare. If you traded them internationally, you can just buy USD. This is yet another hand-wavey claim, and what I asked for was something concrete, tangible, measurable. > You won’t even update “14yrs” which is just a clear factual error. 2008 to 2022. Just rounding by a couple months. > So despite what you say, you will not be “all over it”. You have no interest in changing your mind or in engaging in genuine discussion. I have no interest in slapping crypto on the back when it hasn't done anything but crime, grift and regulatory arbitrage. Bitcoin is the official currency of the alt-right and yes, it's now older than your average high schooler. [1] Just one, concrete application is all I ask. [1] https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/9/30/22703200/bitcoin-cryptocurrency-andrew-anglin-white-surpemacists-alt-right-richard-spencer-daily-stormer https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/9/30/22703200/bitcoin-cryp...