5 ms·

Is this a motivation issue with crypto? Here is what I mean. Centralized systems work like a web of tunnels - you can’t send “nowhere” or make a huge mistake, b

by wruza 5y ago

Is this a motivation issue with crypto? Here is what I mean. Centralized systems work like a web of tunnels - you can’t send “nowhere” or make a huge mistake, but if your part of a tunnel gets shut for some reason, you’re locked. Decentralized ones are like an endless empty void with point-like islands of ownership in it. You can send anywhere, but make one mistake and it’s over. Now pepper this with our usual issues with code correctness and debugging. The issue is that people do like tunnels because they feel safe, and empty voids are scary. This incentives to still build and use tunnels around this void, which makes “crypto”-ness just an implementation detail not worth using as is by the masses. Afaiu, this happens for two reasons: 1, the usual, people tend to forget assertions. 2, the new one, crypto institutions who make contracts are incentivized to omit assertions because runtime now costs serious money. They are like factories where there is no rule of safety yet. Is the above correct, or is it a true half a million dollars mistake? You can’t trust node_modules as it seems, how can you trust piles of contracts code when there is no support, no takedowns of bad versions and no easily accessible (and decentralized?) audit? Also, could a type system help in this case?

rosndo 5y ago
>Centralized systems work like a web of tunnels - you can’t send “nowhere” or make a huge mistake You can totally make a 1 digit typo while making a bank transfer that results in all the money being lost. Perhaps you’ll recover it after years of litigation, but that’s really not guaranteed. https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/dec/07/i-lost-my-193000-inheritance-with-one-wrong-digit-on-my-sort-code https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/dec/07/i-lost-my-1930... E: downvoted by upset bankers? :)
- josephcsible 5y ago
  But at least in that case, it's possible to get the money back. In this case, isn't the money absolutely, totally, 100% gone forever?
  - rosndo 5y ago
    Sort of? You could appeal to the Ethereum developers, they could reasonably recover these funds without upsetting anyone too much by just refunding all WETH transactions sent to that contract. (This is the root of the spiritual disagreement between Ethereum and Ethereum Classic) Of course you’re more likely to succeed when it’s real money and the other party has to worry about getting sued. But even in the case of a bank transfer, the other party can abscond with your money and it’ll be extremely hard to recover since law enforcement probably won’t help you and (especially international) litigation costs can quickly render such an endeavor far too expensive.
- tommek4077 5y ago
  Americans do not understand money transfer, they are still using cheques and western union. To everyone: If you wrongly send money to a mistyped IBAN it is gone.
  - alanfranz 5y ago
    > mistyped Very unlikely, the checksum would prevent that. And most banks (even though I’m unsure it is mandatory) will check the recipient, if totally mismatched a warning will be raised. But if you send money to the wrong iban+recipient, the money is gone.
    - distances 5y ago
      It is not gone. You may have to go through courts if the recipient does not return the money voluntarily though.
      - rosndo 5y ago
        You will not have any luck enforcing that court judgment if the recipient does not want to play ball. All they need to do is transfer the money to another country. It is very unlikely that law enforcement would help you in a situation like this, especially internationally.
  - fxtentacle 5y ago
    But that's very unlikely because IBAN has a checksum precisely to prevent typos. Plus banks in Europe have a transfer reversal grave period so you just call them and they'll most likely be able to undo the transaction.
    - lozenge 5y ago
      I'm not sure about IBAN, but in the UK there are multiple layers that help you avoid sending to the wrong account. However, if you do ultimately send money into an actual incorrect person's account, the only thing the recipient's bank will do is to ask them to send it back. They will not give you contact details or anything else.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dividuum 5y ago
  Bad example. IBAN (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bank_Account_Number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bank_Account_Num... ) for example has a two digit checksum that prevents this and similar simple typos.
  - microtonal 5y ago
    Besides the checksum, in some countries (e.g. in many banks in The Netherlands), the given name is also checked against the name associated with the target account [1]. [1] https://www.betaalvereniging.nl/betaalproducten-en-diensten/iban/iban-naam-check/ https://www.betaalvereniging.nl/betaalproducten-en-diensten/...
  - rosndo 5y ago
    How is it a bad example? Not everyone uses IBANs. And besides, big banks still have to deal with checksum-passing iban typos on a daily basis. IBANs only have two check digits.
    - user-the-name 5y ago
      > And besides, big banks still have to deal with checksum-passing iban typos on a daily basis. That's the thing - they can deal with it. There are fallbacks. In crypto, your money is just instantly destroyed.
      - rosndo 5y ago
        You’re mistaken, they usually can’t deal with it. They’ll ask the other bank if they’d like to return the money, and that bank will maybe ask the recipient if they’d like to return the money. The recipient doesn’t want to return the money? You’re SOL. You can go to court, but they can trivially evade civil action by transferring the money overseas.
        user-the-name 5y ago
        Those are all things you can try, though. In crypto, again, the money just instantly disappears.
- HL33tibCe7 5y ago
  If you read the followup, that man ended up getting his money back. Additionally, it would be astronomically unlikely to make a mistake like that nowadays because confirmation of payee is used so widely (banks check that the name of your recipient matches the intended name before completing a transaction). [0] https://www.psr.org.uk/publications/consultations/cp19-4-confirmation-of-payee-response-to-the-first-consultation-and-draft-specific-direction-for-further-consultation/ https://www.psr.org.uk/publications/consultations/cp19-4-con...
  - posterboy 5y ago
    But this costs us much much more than 500k in sum
- jmull 5y ago
  This is a really good case against crypto. In the crypto case of this thread, the OP made a mistake and there's no process to fix it. 100K's lost. There's no avenue for recovery. In the banking case of your link, the man made a mistake and was able to correct it, despite the bank working against him. 100K's lost and recovered. In the case of the bank, it sure wasn't perfect and definitely should be better. But ultimately, the bank not only paid to recover the money, but the banking system (according to the article) is at least promising a fix for the underlying issue that a simple mistake in writing digits can lead to missending funds. Also: crypto is touts its trustless nature as a positive. But note that trust is the lever Mr. Teich used to get Barclays to pay the cost of recovering the funds. Barclays only paid after their reputation was threatened, and of course, trust is based on reputation.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  > You can totally make a 1 digit typo while making a bank transfer that results in all the money being lost. Difference being that it isn't "lost" -- not in the sense of vanished from the face of the Earth, gone, ceased to exist. It's only lost to the sender, but it still exists; someone still has it. Sure, the wrong person or entity, but still: It's not gone from existence. Only CryptoCrap does that.
tromp 5y ago
What would really help is if the recipient had to prove they can spend the money they're about to receive before they receive it. Which is in fact required with cryptocurrencies using the (pure) Mimblewimble protocol.

by wruza 5y ago

rosndo 5y ago

>Centralized systems work like a web of tunnels - you can’t send “nowhere” or make a huge mistake You can totally make a 1 digit typo while making a bank transfer that results in all the money being lost. Perhaps you’ll recover it after years of litigation, but that’s really not guaranteed. https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/dec/07/i-lost-my-193000-inheritance-with-one-wrong-digit-on-my-sort-code https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/dec/07/i-lost-my-1930... E: downvoted by upset bankers? :)

josephcsible 5y ago
But at least in that case, it's possible to get the money back. In this case, isn't the money absolutely, totally, 100% gone forever?
- rosndo 5y ago
  Sort of? You could appeal to the Ethereum developers, they could reasonably recover these funds without upsetting anyone too much by just refunding all WETH transactions sent to that contract. (This is the root of the spiritual disagreement between Ethereum and Ethereum Classic) Of course you’re more likely to succeed when it’s real money and the other party has to worry about getting sued. But even in the case of a bank transfer, the other party can abscond with your money and it’ll be extremely hard to recover since law enforcement probably won’t help you and (especially international) litigation costs can quickly render such an endeavor far too expensive.
tommek4077 5y ago
Americans do not understand money transfer, they are still using cheques and western union. To everyone: If you wrongly send money to a mistyped IBAN it is gone.
- alanfranz 5y ago
  > mistyped Very unlikely, the checksum would prevent that. And most banks (even though I’m unsure it is mandatory) will check the recipient, if totally mismatched a warning will be raised. But if you send money to the wrong iban+recipient, the money is gone.
  - distances 5y ago
    It is not gone. You may have to go through courts if the recipient does not return the money voluntarily though.
    - rosndo 5y ago
      You will not have any luck enforcing that court judgment if the recipient does not want to play ball. All they need to do is transfer the money to another country. It is very unlikely that law enforcement would help you in a situation like this, especially internationally.
- fxtentacle 5y ago
  But that's very unlikely because IBAN has a checksum precisely to prevent typos. Plus banks in Europe have a transfer reversal grave period so you just call them and they'll most likely be able to undo the transaction.
  - lozenge 5y ago
    I'm not sure about IBAN, but in the UK there are multiple layers that help you avoid sending to the wrong account. However, if you do ultimately send money into an actual incorrect person's account, the only thing the recipient's bank will do is to ask them to send it back. They will not give you contact details or anything else.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dividuum 5y ago
Bad example. IBAN (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bank_Account_Number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bank_Account_Num... ) for example has a two digit checksum that prevents this and similar simple typos.
- microtonal 5y ago
  Besides the checksum, in some countries (e.g. in many banks in The Netherlands), the given name is also checked against the name associated with the target account [1]. [1] https://www.betaalvereniging.nl/betaalproducten-en-diensten/iban/iban-naam-check/ https://www.betaalvereniging.nl/betaalproducten-en-diensten/...
- rosndo 5y ago
  How is it a bad example? Not everyone uses IBANs. And besides, big banks still have to deal with checksum-passing iban typos on a daily basis. IBANs only have two check digits.
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    > And besides, big banks still have to deal with checksum-passing iban typos on a daily basis. That's the thing - they can deal with it. There are fallbacks. In crypto, your money is just instantly destroyed.
    - rosndo 5y ago
      You’re mistaken, they usually can’t deal with it. They’ll ask the other bank if they’d like to return the money, and that bank will maybe ask the recipient if they’d like to return the money. The recipient doesn’t want to return the money? You’re SOL. You can go to court, but they can trivially evade civil action by transferring the money overseas.
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        Those are all things you can try, though. In crypto, again, the money just instantly disappears.
HL33tibCe7 5y ago
If you read the followup, that man ended up getting his money back. Additionally, it would be astronomically unlikely to make a mistake like that nowadays because confirmation of payee is used so widely (banks check that the name of your recipient matches the intended name before completing a transaction). [0] https://www.psr.org.uk/publications/consultations/cp19-4-confirmation-of-payee-response-to-the-first-consultation-and-draft-specific-direction-for-further-consultation/ https://www.psr.org.uk/publications/consultations/cp19-4-con...
- posterboy 5y ago
  But this costs us much much more than 500k in sum
jmull 5y ago
This is a really good case against crypto. In the crypto case of this thread, the OP made a mistake and there's no process to fix it. 100K's lost. There's no avenue for recovery. In the banking case of your link, the man made a mistake and was able to correct it, despite the bank working against him. 100K's lost and recovered. In the case of the bank, it sure wasn't perfect and definitely should be better. But ultimately, the bank not only paid to recover the money, but the banking system (according to the article) is at least promising a fix for the underlying issue that a simple mistake in writing digits can lead to missending funds. Also: crypto is touts its trustless nature as a positive. But note that trust is the lever Mr. Teich used to get Barclays to pay the cost of recovering the funds. Barclays only paid after their reputation was threatened, and of course, trust is based on reputation.
CRConrad 5y ago
> You can totally make a 1 digit typo while making a bank transfer that results in all the money being lost. Difference being that it isn't "lost" -- not in the sense of vanished from the face of the Earth, gone, ceased to exist. It's only lost to the sender, but it still exists; someone still has it. Sure, the wrong person or entity, but still: It's not gone from existence. Only CryptoCrap does that.

tromp 5y ago

What would really help is if the recipient had to prove they can spend the money they're about to receive before they receive it. Which is in fact required with cryptocurrencies using the (pure) Mimblewimble protocol.