4 ms·

>To append corrections in most cases you need a process Which can itself be implemented on-chain, using atomic primitives, and become subject to the same trans

>To append corrections in most cases you need a process Which can itself be implemented on-chain, using atomic primitives, and become subject to the same transparency and correctness guarantees. >some kind of authority Which is a performance hack for cases where formal correctness is too expensive, such as paper-based bureaucracies, or impossible a priori, such as totalitarian dictatures. >we don't have problems county recorder forging records to steal people's homes You don't. Well, lucky you. >any problem people actually have What about wealth inequality? Not that long ago, in a time when people were supposed to be Too Civilized To Be Doing That Sort Of Thing Any More, my family's property happened to be forcibly nationalized by a totalitarian invasion. Have you lived through the arduous and fraud-ridden process of restitution of nationalized property half a century afterwards, after most records were destroyed? Your people probably weren't out on the streets, starving, when the banks screwed up, either... except maybe for that 2008 thing where some jerks offloaded to some other jerks some formally incorrect financial instruments that also happened to contain 10 million people's houses in them? I'm really glad that you like the world that you live in. It was made so nice for you because some centuries ago some people rolled in and stole a whole bleedin' continent. The rest of us are left to make do with the scraps of that and we could sure use a fairer distribution of those. Beats eating the rich, any day

tablespoon 5y ago
>> some kind of authority > Which is a performance hack for cases where formal correctness is too expensive, such as paper-based bureaucracies, or impossible a priori, such as totalitarian dictatures. No, it's a solution things like "I sent my money to the wrong guy" and "this transaction was technically correct but the result of fraud by one party." >> we don't have problems county recorder forging records to steal people's homes > You don't. Well, lucky you. If you have a problem with that, then do share the details. > Not that long ago ... my family's property happened to be forcibly nationalized by a totalitarian invasion. Have you lived through the arduous and fraud-ridden process of restitution of nationalized property half a century afterwards, after most records were destroyed? Assuming your story is true, how is that much of a selling point for blockchain-all-the-things? It's pretty speculative and unlikely that a blockchain would even help at all in that scenario (e.g. the invaders are likely to care as little about a blockchain as they did the the paper records, digital records are fragile when unmaintained, the invaders may not ever be driven out, and if they are there may not be a restitution process). In the unlikely event that they do help, I'd likely only benefit distant descendants that may never have even met their wronged ancestor. > I'm really glad that you like the world that you live in. I never said that. What I will say is I'm pretty sure blockchains fail at being a solution to most if not all the problems they purport to solve.
- kuramitropolis 5y ago
  >No, it's a solution things like "I sent my money to the wrong guy" and "this transaction was technically correct but the result of fraud by one party." These things happen. I'll tell you this much - debit card got skimmed last year on a trip to Western Europe, nobody gave me my money back either. I guess the current model of resolving them is perceived as working convincingly enough for the general public to overlook its externalities (which reach as far as police brutality, economic disempowerment, and mass media-driven global cognitive collapse, and yes, I'm blaming the entrenched financial system for that.) >If you have a problem with that, then do share the details. It's a matter of threat model, and of affordances. There are failed states in the world today where it is commonplace to bribe officials to commit fraud, including stealing people's homes. For those people it makes a lot of sense to keep their assets away from the state-favored banking system - at least liquid ones because that's what's technologically available to them today. >Assuming your story is true Even if it wasn't. (It is.) >the invaders are likely to care as little about a blockchain as they did the the paper records, digital records are fragile when unmaintained Geographical decentralization and distribution of responsibility among multiple independent interested parties solves that >the invaders may not ever be driven out, and if they are there may not be a restitution process). In the unlikely event that they do help, I'd likely only benefit distant descendants that may never have even met their wronged ancestor. That's a matter of offline consensus. Blockchain can enable oppressed communities to maintain internal organization, and increase the overall independence of their members. >blockchains fail at being a solution to most if not all the problems they purport to solve. That much is true, and while the dominant discourse is that of crypto bros are hyped about on gains and driving lambos on the moon, everyone will keep overlooking the capabilities of distributed consensus tech in favor of the novelty value of magic internet money, smart people who know what to do with the stuff will do other things, and the whole thing will collapse on itself. Just one self-fulfilling prophecy among so many...

tablespoon 5y ago

>> some kind of authority > Which is a performance hack for cases where formal correctness is too expensive, such as paper-based bureaucracies, or impossible a priori, such as totalitarian dictatures. No, it's a solution things like "I sent my money to the wrong guy" and "this transaction was technically correct but the result of fraud by one party." >> we don't have problems county recorder forging records to steal people's homes > You don't. Well, lucky you. If you have a problem with that, then do share the details. > Not that long ago ... my family's property happened to be forcibly nationalized by a totalitarian invasion. Have you lived through the arduous and fraud-ridden process of restitution of nationalized property half a century afterwards, after most records were destroyed? Assuming your story is true, how is that much of a selling point for blockchain-all-the-things? It's pretty speculative and unlikely that a blockchain would even help at all in that scenario (e.g. the invaders are likely to care as little about a blockchain as they did the the paper records, digital records are fragile when unmaintained, the invaders may not ever be driven out, and if they are there may not be a restitution process). In the unlikely event that they do help, I'd likely only benefit distant descendants that may never have even met their wronged ancestor. > I'm really glad that you like the world that you live in. I never said that. What I will say is I'm pretty sure blockchains fail at being a solution to most if not all the problems they purport to solve.

kuramitropolis 5y ago
>No, it's a solution things like "I sent my money to the wrong guy" and "this transaction was technically correct but the result of fraud by one party." These things happen. I'll tell you this much - debit card got skimmed last year on a trip to Western Europe, nobody gave me my money back either. I guess the current model of resolving them is perceived as working convincingly enough for the general public to overlook its externalities (which reach as far as police brutality, economic disempowerment, and mass media-driven global cognitive collapse, and yes, I'm blaming the entrenched financial system for that.) >If you have a problem with that, then do share the details. It's a matter of threat model, and of affordances. There are failed states in the world today where it is commonplace to bribe officials to commit fraud, including stealing people's homes. For those people it makes a lot of sense to keep their assets away from the state-favored banking system - at least liquid ones because that's what's technologically available to them today. >Assuming your story is true Even if it wasn't. (It is.) >the invaders are likely to care as little about a blockchain as they did the the paper records, digital records are fragile when unmaintained Geographical decentralization and distribution of responsibility among multiple independent interested parties solves that >the invaders may not ever be driven out, and if they are there may not be a restitution process). In the unlikely event that they do help, I'd likely only benefit distant descendants that may never have even met their wronged ancestor. That's a matter of offline consensus. Blockchain can enable oppressed communities to maintain internal organization, and increase the overall independence of their members. >blockchains fail at being a solution to most if not all the problems they purport to solve. That much is true, and while the dominant discourse is that of crypto bros are hyped about on gains and driving lambos on the moon, everyone will keep overlooking the capabilities of distributed consensus tech in favor of the novelty value of magic internet money, smart people who know what to do with the stuff will do other things, and the whole thing will collapse on itself. Just one self-fulfilling prophecy among so many...