7 ms·

Thank goodness it's decentralized and there are no single points of failure.

by n_time 5y ago

mritchie712 5y ago
I'm guessing this is sarcasm? crypto.com is very very far from a single point of failure.
- boopboopbadoop 5y ago
  They might be alluding to the removal of centralized authorities that would have otherwise been able to get that money back.
  - capableweb 5y ago
    The allude from my naive point of view is that n_time thinks we're lucky the network is decentralized and that users are spread out over various wallet software and services, so the impact of the issue was only related to a sub-section of the network as a whole. But I might just misunderstand the sarcasm or something.
    - tsimionescu 5y ago
      Well, traditional banking is much more decentralized in this sense, as there are many more banks than crypto exchanges, and the vast majority offer payment apps etc.
    - dematz 5y ago
      I assumed it's sarcastic, the point is even if the network is decentralized in practice people use centralized services.
thebean11 5y ago
How is this a single point of failure? The issue was limited to a subset of users keeping funds in a Crypto.com wallet. Unless by "it" you mean crypto.com and not Ethereum. Crypto.com is not decentralized.
- smokey_circles 5y ago
  It is the implementation. I believe in bitcoin, works well and I don't blame the consumer for the producer's problems when it comes to power. But exchanges have become a key part of the implementation. That's not the real issue though. The issue is the _need_ for exchanges. They provide a host of services, mostly all of which are antithetical to the loftier ideals espoused by bitcoin. Too many crypto fans waltz passed this glaringly obvious issue and these kinds of stories will never go away as a result. If banks get hacked, nobody blames the internet. "a small sub section of the system" applies as aptly to the blockchain as it does the global financial system, and I'm pretty confident being a locally popular trading commodity amongst edge communities is not the central goal for bitcoin
  - danuker 5y ago
    > and I'm pretty confident being a locally popular trading commodity amongst edge communities is not the central goal for bitcoin Given the transaction fees needed for a distributed-enough network, and the bureaucracy needed when trading, it is not very useful as a currency, at least not for small payments, excluding Lightning. So it's a commodity.
    - thebean11 5y ago
      Excluding lightning and layer 2 solutions like rollups. Why would you make those exclusions though?
      - danuker 5y ago
        The reason is they are not yet accepted in many places, though in fairness, they seem to grow a lot.
- wpietri 5y ago
  And I think that's exactly the point. Cryptocurrency promoters endlessly talk up how it's part of a decentralized wave of the future. But in practice it's quite centralized, and the incentives point in that direction for the future. That's one of the points made very well recently by Moxie Marlinspike: https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html
capableweb 5y ago
I agree. Imagine if a centralized system was compromised and every single account holder was at risk. Instead there is only a small sub-section of accounts that were vulnerable, thank goodness for that.

Thank goodness it's decentralized and there are no single points of failure.

by n_time 5y ago

Thank goodness it's decentralized and there are no single points of failure.

mritchie712 5y ago

I'm guessing this is sarcasm? crypto.com is very very far from a single point of failure.

boopboopbadoop 5y ago
They might be alluding to the removal of centralized authorities that would have otherwise been able to get that money back.
- capableweb 5y ago
  The allude from my naive point of view is that n_time thinks we're lucky the network is decentralized and that users are spread out over various wallet software and services, so the impact of the issue was only related to a sub-section of the network as a whole. But I might just misunderstand the sarcasm or something.
  - tsimionescu 5y ago
    Well, traditional banking is much more decentralized in this sense, as there are many more banks than crypto exchanges, and the vast majority offer payment apps etc.
  - dematz 5y ago
    I assumed it's sarcastic, the point is even if the network is decentralized in practice people use centralized services.

thebean11 5y ago

How is this a single point of failure? The issue was limited to a subset of users keeping funds in a Crypto.com wallet. Unless by "it" you mean crypto.com and not Ethereum. Crypto.com is not decentralized.

smokey_circles 5y ago
It is the implementation. I believe in bitcoin, works well and I don't blame the consumer for the producer's problems when it comes to power. But exchanges have become a key part of the implementation. That's not the real issue though. The issue is the _need_ for exchanges. They provide a host of services, mostly all of which are antithetical to the loftier ideals espoused by bitcoin. Too many crypto fans waltz passed this glaringly obvious issue and these kinds of stories will never go away as a result. If banks get hacked, nobody blames the internet. "a small sub section of the system" applies as aptly to the blockchain as it does the global financial system, and I'm pretty confident being a locally popular trading commodity amongst edge communities is not the central goal for bitcoin
- danuker 5y ago
  > and I'm pretty confident being a locally popular trading commodity amongst edge communities is not the central goal for bitcoin Given the transaction fees needed for a distributed-enough network, and the bureaucracy needed when trading, it is not very useful as a currency, at least not for small payments, excluding Lightning. So it's a commodity.
  - thebean11 5y ago
    Excluding lightning and layer 2 solutions like rollups. Why would you make those exclusions though?
    - danuker 5y ago
      The reason is they are not yet accepted in many places, though in fairness, they seem to grow a lot.
wpietri 5y ago
And I think that's exactly the point. Cryptocurrency promoters endlessly talk up how it's part of a decentralized wave of the future. But in practice it's quite centralized, and the incentives point in that direction for the future. That's one of the points made very well recently by Moxie Marlinspike: https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html

capableweb 5y ago

I agree. Imagine if a centralized system was compromised and every single account holder was at risk. Instead there is only a small sub-section of accounts that were vulnerable, thank goodness for that.