4 ms·

This is the perfect example of a critic response and exactly the phenomenon I'm describing. On 1, you're somehow conveniently ignoring the "without permission

This is the perfect example of a critic response and exactly the phenomenon I'm describing. On 1, you're somehow conveniently ignoring the "without permission or interference from a third party.". I never mentioned against a car, stock, or house. Nonetheless the functionality still exists. Using ETH or other crypto assets. It gets so much easier. Have you tried it? No talking to advisors, no documents, no discriminatory requirements. Pretty much 1 click and 30 seconds. Fully expect the next question of validity "aha! Well that's against a useless asset!". 2nd example. Yes it can be a hyper link or a hash, is there something particularly wrong with that? The use case I described has still been achieved, it's a digital object. Are you really questioning that people exchange assets using a digital identity? I'm not sure how that invalidates the use case. By the way you're incorrect that digital objects don't fit on the Blockchain. First it depends which Blockchain. Second, there are some objects that do fit. Look at ENS. A domain name, address mapping fits on the chain. That is an NFT. That exists today.

hartator 5y ago
> without permission or interference from a third party Aren’t other nodes the third parties? If you are talking automated loan, you should look into credit lines backed by assets. Pledge assets lines. Once open, it’s fully automated and you don’t need to interact with a third party either.
- disruptalot 5y ago
  They can't interfere with what you want to do. They could try to prevent you from interacting for a while but it would be futile. There are heavy disencentives, and decentralised enough. Which is why this has basically never happened. Talking strictly bitcoin and Ethereum here. In honesty I have no experience with a pledge asset line but I can guarantee you that if the institutions involved in conducting it wanted to, they could cancel it on you anytime. With a correctly coded smart contract on Ethereum, you could ensure that never happens. One system requires trust in third parties. One gives you the option to design a system to minimise or eliminate it.
  - hartator 5y ago
    PAL is 1-2 clicks once they are open. And you borrow a lot at a very low interests. You might lose your stocks though if the market goes down too much. Please note that the lack of paperwork in Ethereum just means you borrow or loan money in a way that might be not legal. I am all for removing redtape here.

hartator 5y ago

> without permission or interference from a third party Aren’t other nodes the third parties? If you are talking automated loan, you should look into credit lines backed by assets. Pledge assets lines. Once open, it’s fully automated and you don’t need to interact with a third party either.

disruptalot 5y ago
They can't interfere with what you want to do. They could try to prevent you from interacting for a while but it would be futile. There are heavy disencentives, and decentralised enough. Which is why this has basically never happened. Talking strictly bitcoin and Ethereum here. In honesty I have no experience with a pledge asset line but I can guarantee you that if the institutions involved in conducting it wanted to, they could cancel it on you anytime. With a correctly coded smart contract on Ethereum, you could ensure that never happens. One system requires trust in third parties. One gives you the option to design a system to minimise or eliminate it.
- hartator 5y ago
  PAL is 1-2 clicks once they are open. And you borrow a lot at a very low interests. You might lose your stocks though if the market goes down too much. Please note that the lack of paperwork in Ethereum just means you borrow or loan money in a way that might be not legal. I am all for removing redtape here.