4 ms·

Depending on how you view the world and whether you think nation states and government-backed fiat is a good or bad thing, probably defines your stance on block

Depending on how you view the world and whether you think nation states and government-backed fiat is a good or bad thing, probably defines your stance on blockchain and cryptocurrencies IMO. I still contend that blockchain has its use cases - journalism, games which wish to institute a real economy instead of a virtual one, voting, etc... Blockchain has been maturing and bitcoin has been around for a minute, but ethereum and the whole smart contract bit is newer and POS is around the corner if you believe those working on the project. I view bitcoin and blockchain as a big FU to fiat and I'm okay with that, because IMHO hierarchical power structures are inherently a bad thing.

dfabulich 5y ago
Blockchains are hierarchical power structures. They're democracies, in fact, but instead of "one person, one vote" you get a share of votes based on how much electricity you waste. As the article explains, mining capacity is centralized, and therefore, so is Web3. Blockchains are no better than any other democratic institution; substantially worse, in fact, because they're wasting electricity to do it. Web3 pretends to be a big FU to hierarchical power structures, but if you believe that, you're being scammed.
- hahaitsfunny 5y ago
  I never claimed they were not - I said they were a big FU to nation state fiat. I don't work on web3 or own crypto. Nation State fiat is a scam too - I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make to me... Am I trading one hierarchical power structure for another? Maybe? Does that mean blockchains hold no promise? No. With POS an eth node will supposedly be able to run on a rasp pi - is that too much electricity? Doesn't diminish my point that it is trying to disrupt nation state fiat and I am all for that - doesn't mean I have to sign on to whatever the replacement is - I can be against that as well.
  - dfabulich 5y ago
    If we assume that you're trading one hierarchical power structure for another, then can we agree that proof-of-work blockchain is worse, just for the electricity waste? What's the point of an electricity-guzzling PoW blockchain if it's just a new hierarchical power structure, the same as the old boss? "Proof of stake" (POS) is really the same as the old boss. There's no way to build a decentralized POS network, because in POS, the more stake you have, the more you earn. Centralization follows immediately. POS is literally no better than using the banking network.
    - hahaitsfunny 5y ago
      The point is, there is promise in the utility of blockchain. If your only gripe with blockchain is that it is energy-inefficient and that it is centralized (but still less so than the current web we have) - as blockchain technology improves and becomes more energy efficient, doesn't your gripe go out the window? Just because AH and other VC's have dumped money into the space, and because of the nature of blockchain and the fact that it is not regulated in any manner and is ripe for exploration currently, doesn't make the technology worthless. Your stance would have one believe so. I'm not going to sit here and dive into the details of blockchain technology because I don't know them as well as others, but afaik, levers exist where if a token becomes too centralized, action can be taken by the stakers. Blockchain is basically just digital fiat without nation state backing - so I don't understand how you can sit here and shill for one and condemn the other. It's pretty hypocritical in my mind, even if one is the status quo.

dfabulich 5y ago

Blockchains are hierarchical power structures. They're democracies, in fact, but instead of "one person, one vote" you get a share of votes based on how much electricity you waste. As the article explains, mining capacity is centralized, and therefore, so is Web3. Blockchains are no better than any other democratic institution; substantially worse, in fact, because they're wasting electricity to do it. Web3 pretends to be a big FU to hierarchical power structures, but if you believe that, you're being scammed.

hahaitsfunny 5y ago
I never claimed they were not - I said they were a big FU to nation state fiat. I don't work on web3 or own crypto. Nation State fiat is a scam too - I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make to me... Am I trading one hierarchical power structure for another? Maybe? Does that mean blockchains hold no promise? No. With POS an eth node will supposedly be able to run on a rasp pi - is that too much electricity? Doesn't diminish my point that it is trying to disrupt nation state fiat and I am all for that - doesn't mean I have to sign on to whatever the replacement is - I can be against that as well.
- dfabulich 5y ago
  If we assume that you're trading one hierarchical power structure for another, then can we agree that proof-of-work blockchain is worse, just for the electricity waste? What's the point of an electricity-guzzling PoW blockchain if it's just a new hierarchical power structure, the same as the old boss? "Proof of stake" (POS) is really the same as the old boss. There's no way to build a decentralized POS network, because in POS, the more stake you have, the more you earn. Centralization follows immediately. POS is literally no better than using the banking network.
  - hahaitsfunny 5y ago
    The point is, there is promise in the utility of blockchain. If your only gripe with blockchain is that it is energy-inefficient and that it is centralized (but still less so than the current web we have) - as blockchain technology improves and becomes more energy efficient, doesn't your gripe go out the window? Just because AH and other VC's have dumped money into the space, and because of the nature of blockchain and the fact that it is not regulated in any manner and is ripe for exploration currently, doesn't make the technology worthless. Your stance would have one believe so. I'm not going to sit here and dive into the details of blockchain technology because I don't know them as well as others, but afaik, levers exist where if a token becomes too centralized, action can be taken by the stakers. Blockchain is basically just digital fiat without nation state backing - so I don't understand how you can sit here and shill for one and condemn the other. It's pretty hypocritical in my mind, even if one is the status quo.