7 ms·

> Bitcoin did actually solve a real problem: a completely digital decentralized immutable record. That doesn't describe a problem though, it describes a techni

by yed 5y ago

> Bitcoin did actually solve a real problem: a completely digital decentralized immutable record. That doesn't describe a problem though, it describes a technical solution. > I hesitate to call it a currency, but it created something that was digitally scarce. My comment was about web3 really and the associated hype, not so much cryptocurrencies themselves. I agree there's something there, though not entirely convinced it won't always be illegal sales or scams. > At one point the internet was also a problem looking for a solution too so I don’t think it’s a fair criticism of the technology. I see this repeated a lot but it's just not accurate. E-mail was invented within like 2 years of the internet and immediately allowed universities to exchange messages with one another. It doesn't take a networking enthusiast to see the value in sending a textual message instantly across the globe. Meanwhile I've never seen even a description of a web3 product that doesn't rely on architecture or politics to explain why it's useful.

p1esk 5y ago
As a non-enthusiast I agree with your points. I’ve heard a lot about cryptocurrencies since 2010 and I’ve never had a need to use them. Paying for goods or services on a black market might be a valid use case, but I, like vast majority of people, have never needed to do that. Smart contracts sound like an interesting concept, but again, I don’t really have anything in my life that could use them in the foreseeable future.
grog454 5y ago
> That doesn't describe a problem though, it describes a technical solution. I'll present a problem that that solution solves. That cryptographically backed record establishes a closer approximation to the abstract idea of "ownership" than anything has before. I was a pretty naïve first-time home owner in that I was surprised to learn about something called "property tax". "property rent" would be a better description, since its not a one time fee (like most taxes) but something you have to pay to a government entity in perpetuity. Don't feel like paying it? You get booted off "your" "property". Title theft and fraud are also a thing, and we even have "title insurance" to help mitigate falling victim to it. Neither of these things is possible on a cryptographic blockchain (eviction or theft). Ownership of the NFT cannot physically be altered without the owner's volition. Establishing a link between the NFT and the underlying asset is certainly a problem, but it's not one that blockchains are attempting to solve.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > Ownership of the NFT cannot physically be altered without the owner's volition. Until you own a house on the NFT and realize that NFTs has literally zero relationship between you and the object you "own".
- p1esk 5y ago
  I'm sorry, I still don't get it. What is the problem with a house ownership that crypto would solve? Would it eliminate the property tax? Would it eliminate an eviction if I don't pay the property tax? Would it eliminate one type of ownership fraud without introducing a new type of ownership fraud?
  - grog454 5y ago
    It would eliminate 1. forfeiture without volition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...) 2. title theft/fraud (https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_foreclosed_had_no_idea_new_jersey/ https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_fo...) 3. Many of the needs for title insurance (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insurance.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insurance.asp) It doesn't need to do much else to be obviously beneficial. Keep in mind that once upon a time the entire internet functioned without https. I have no doubt many of the same arguments against crypto(currency, tokens) were also made against cryto(graphy) not long ago. A vast majority of users of cryptography still subject themselves to side channel attacks (stupid passwords, phishing) and yet somehow still benefit from the existence of https without even realizing it. Since a lot of people still get hung up on the need for a link between an NFT and an underlying asset, consider that we somehow establish the exact same kind of link between a fancy piece of paper (a title) and a plot of land. If you forewent some of the (imo misled) notions that blockchains need to be 100% "trustless" and decentralized, and you JUST upgraded your county's title database with a blockchain, and you accepted that various forms of government are going to have to enforce a lot of it, hopefully it is evident how (1) (2) and (3) above now go away or at least change significantly.
    - 5y ago
meowkit 5y ago
>> Bitcoin did actually solve a real problem: a completely digital decentralized immutable record. > That doesn't describe a problem though, it describes a technical solution. The problem is that we can't seem to form consensus in a world inundated with technology. Bitcoin and other chains have shown that you can create a state that reaches consensus under specified rules that are enforceable by computation and not violence. Yes it has many problems, and the consensus is limited to the blockchain "world", but I envision a future where block chains can be valuable "truth" layers to the computation stack that society operates on. Practically, I believe blockchains can be solution for creating online decentralized identity (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/business/identity-access-management/decentralized-identity-blockchain https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/business/identity-a...), which will help solve our information consensus problems (https://consilienceproject.org/democracy-and-the-epistemic-commons/ https://consilienceproject.org/democracy-and-the-epistemic-c...). I also believe they have much to offer in modernizing the financial system, and providing better ways for governments to implement monetary policy.
- p1esk 5y ago
  The problem is that we can't seem to form consensus in a world inundated with technology. I have no idea what you mean. What is the problem?
Karrot_Kream 5y ago
> I see this repeated a lot but it's just not accurate. E-mail was invented within like 2 years of the internet and immediately allowed universities to exchange messages with one another. This is untrue. Look at my answer here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29847559 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29847559 .
- tsimionescu 5y ago
  But still, the point is that even ARPANET solved real problems: instant message exchange in text form, without the need for specialized telegraph operators, is a real problem with real value for anyone who can afford it - even at the scale of ARPANET.
  - Karrot_Kream 5y ago
    That was being done by teleprinters, from the late 1800s. The UNIX concept of the TTY comes from teleprinters and teletype.
- p1esk 5y ago
  But it is true. It is pretty clear that "Internet" in this context means "ARPANET", built in 1969. First email was sent over ARPANET in 1971. ARPANET was built to solve a very real and clearly defined problem - connecting computers over a shared network. Here's the original problem statement: For each of these three terminals, I had three different sets of user commands. So if I was talking online with someone at S.D.C. and I wanted to talk to someone I knew at Berkeley or M.I.T. about this, I had to get up from the S.D.C. terminal, go over and log into the other terminal and get in touch with them.... I said, oh man, it's obvious what to do: If you have these three terminals, there ought to be one terminal that goes anywhere you want to go where you have interactive computing. That idea is the ARPAnet. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet#ARPANET https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet#ARPANE... To me it seems like crypto still hasn't found its killer application, 13 years after its creation.

by yed 5y ago

p1esk 5y ago

As a non-enthusiast I agree with your points. I’ve heard a lot about cryptocurrencies since 2010 and I’ve never had a need to use them. Paying for goods or services on a black market might be a valid use case, but I, like vast majority of people, have never needed to do that. Smart contracts sound like an interesting concept, but again, I don’t really have anything in my life that could use them in the foreseeable future.

grog454 5y ago

> That doesn't describe a problem though, it describes a technical solution. I'll present a problem that that solution solves. That cryptographically backed record establishes a closer approximation to the abstract idea of "ownership" than anything has before. I was a pretty naïve first-time home owner in that I was surprised to learn about something called "property tax". "property rent" would be a better description, since its not a one time fee (like most taxes) but something you have to pay to a government entity in perpetuity. Don't feel like paying it? You get booted off "your" "property". Title theft and fraud are also a thing, and we even have "title insurance" to help mitigate falling victim to it. Neither of these things is possible on a cryptographic blockchain (eviction or theft). Ownership of the NFT cannot physically be altered without the owner's volition. Establishing a link between the NFT and the underlying asset is certainly a problem, but it's not one that blockchains are attempting to solve.

dmitriid 5y ago
> Ownership of the NFT cannot physically be altered without the owner's volition. Until you own a house on the NFT and realize that NFTs has literally zero relationship between you and the object you "own".
p1esk 5y ago
I'm sorry, I still don't get it. What is the problem with a house ownership that crypto would solve? Would it eliminate the property tax? Would it eliminate an eviction if I don't pay the property tax? Would it eliminate one type of ownership fraud without introducing a new type of ownership fraud?
- grog454 5y ago
  It would eliminate 1. forfeiture without volition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...) 2. title theft/fraud (https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_foreclosed_had_no_idea_new_jersey/ https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/pyhjwv/home_fo...) 3. Many of the needs for title insurance (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insurance.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/title_insurance.asp) It doesn't need to do much else to be obviously beneficial. Keep in mind that once upon a time the entire internet functioned without https. I have no doubt many of the same arguments against crypto(currency, tokens) were also made against cryto(graphy) not long ago. A vast majority of users of cryptography still subject themselves to side channel attacks (stupid passwords, phishing) and yet somehow still benefit from the existence of https without even realizing it. Since a lot of people still get hung up on the need for a link between an NFT and an underlying asset, consider that we somehow establish the exact same kind of link between a fancy piece of paper (a title) and a plot of land. If you forewent some of the (imo misled) notions that blockchains need to be 100% "trustless" and decentralized, and you JUST upgraded your county's title database with a blockchain, and you accepted that various forms of government are going to have to enforce a lot of it, hopefully it is evident how (1) (2) and (3) above now go away or at least change significantly.
  - 5y ago

meowkit 5y ago

>> Bitcoin did actually solve a real problem: a completely digital decentralized immutable record. > That doesn't describe a problem though, it describes a technical solution. The problem is that we can't seem to form consensus in a world inundated with technology. Bitcoin and other chains have shown that you can create a state that reaches consensus under specified rules that are enforceable by computation and not violence. Yes it has many problems, and the consensus is limited to the blockchain "world", but I envision a future where block chains can be valuable "truth" layers to the computation stack that society operates on. Practically, I believe blockchains can be solution for creating online decentralized identity (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/business/identity-access-management/decentralized-identity-blockchain https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/business/identity-a...), which will help solve our information consensus problems (https://consilienceproject.org/democracy-and-the-epistemic-commons/ https://consilienceproject.org/democracy-and-the-epistemic-c...). I also believe they have much to offer in modernizing the financial system, and providing better ways for governments to implement monetary policy.

p1esk 5y ago
The problem is that we can't seem to form consensus in a world inundated with technology. I have no idea what you mean. What is the problem?

Karrot_Kream 5y ago

> I see this repeated a lot but it's just not accurate. E-mail was invented within like 2 years of the internet and immediately allowed universities to exchange messages with one another. This is untrue. Look at my answer here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29847559 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29847559 .

tsimionescu 5y ago
But still, the point is that even ARPANET solved real problems: instant message exchange in text form, without the need for specialized telegraph operators, is a real problem with real value for anyone who can afford it - even at the scale of ARPANET.
- Karrot_Kream 5y ago
  That was being done by teleprinters, from the late 1800s. The UNIX concept of the TTY comes from teleprinters and teletype.
p1esk 5y ago
But it is true. It is pretty clear that "Internet" in this context means "ARPANET", built in 1969. First email was sent over ARPANET in 1971. ARPANET was built to solve a very real and clearly defined problem - connecting computers over a shared network. Here's the original problem statement: For each of these three terminals, I had three different sets of user commands. So if I was talking online with someone at S.D.C. and I wanted to talk to someone I knew at Berkeley or M.I.T. about this, I had to get up from the S.D.C. terminal, go over and log into the other terminal and get in touch with them.... I said, oh man, it's obvious what to do: If you have these three terminals, there ought to be one terminal that goes anywhere you want to go where you have interactive computing. That idea is the ARPAnet. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet#ARPANET https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet#ARPANE... To me it seems like crypto still hasn't found its killer application, 13 years after its creation.