4 ms·

A database does this. The trusted party isn't eliminated by blockchain, because someone has to code the implementation of the software. Unless you checked the s

A database does this. The trusted party isn't eliminated by blockchain, because someone has to code the implementation of the software. Unless you checked the software for bugs or backdoors camouflaged as bugs and compile it yourself, you trust someone else. The trust 'problem' is overrated, because nothing in this world works without trust.

baby 4y ago
You’re wrong because you’re talking about database when we’re talking about distributed databases.
- hurflmurfl 4y ago
  > You're wrong Can I just say, on a rather unrelated note, that this just sounds very toxic and will trigger most people into "defense mode". I understand that "wrong" thoughts and opinions don't come out of nowhere, someone must have produced them, but it just reads so much nicer when the attack is explicitly targeting the opinion, and not the author. In your other comments in this very thread you're using "Your comment goes in all directions...", "Your example is implemented in...". This is so much nicer! Thanks for going the extra mile! Let's keep the discussion going and reduce the chances of someone getting triggered and starting a flame war.
  - baby 4y ago
    Reading all the comments here is infuriating
petesergeant 4y ago
I'm blockchain skeptical, but I think you're slightly throwing out the baby with the bathwater here. > the trusted party isn't eliminated by blockchain, because someone has to code the implementation of the software I don't think is relevant in practice, and I think the blockchain does solve this problem regarding double-spending. Yes, there's a centralized set of developers, but that does not seem to be a problem in practice, 13 years in > The trust 'problem' is overrated, because nothing in this world works without trust. Bingo, this is the real problem. The world has very few problems where a trusted authority / arbitrator isn't a massive benefit.
- roonyh 4y ago
  Why the set of developers is considered centralised? I can write an implementation according to the specification and have no relationship with developers of another implementation.
  - petesergeant 4y ago
    My understanding is that the specification changes over time, and if your implementation doesn't match the central one, then the rest of the network stops interacting with you. That is: there is a massive network effect of people using github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin as canon, and there is a central group of devs with write-access there. While you can fork it, unless the rest of the network gets in on it, you've just created some altcoin that nobody cares about.
  - baobabKoodaa 4y ago
    You can write an implementation according to what specification? Bitcoin? Where is the specification for Bitcoin? There isn't one.
  - tsimionescu 4y ago
    Maybe you can, but have you? Has anyone? Are there any nodes on the bitcoin network not running the same code written by the same handful of people? Also, saying that "all you have to do to participate in this new trustless economy is to read the spec and implement your own validation node and client, and maintain it as the protocol changes" is a pretty different promise than "just download this app".
- j3th9n 4y ago
  Machine 2 machine payments are a massive problem you can solve with a blockchain. Which can solve a whole lot of other problems, like automation. Which can solve another set of problems.
  - petesergeant 4y ago
    > Machine 2 machine payments are a massive problem you can solve with a blockchain Right but you can also solve these with a government regulated exchange and it’s not clear what a blockchain adds

baby 4y ago

You’re wrong because you’re talking about database when we’re talking about distributed databases.

hurflmurfl 4y ago
> You're wrong Can I just say, on a rather unrelated note, that this just sounds very toxic and will trigger most people into "defense mode". I understand that "wrong" thoughts and opinions don't come out of nowhere, someone must have produced them, but it just reads so much nicer when the attack is explicitly targeting the opinion, and not the author. In your other comments in this very thread you're using "Your comment goes in all directions...", "Your example is implemented in...". This is so much nicer! Thanks for going the extra mile! Let's keep the discussion going and reduce the chances of someone getting triggered and starting a flame war.
- baby 4y ago
  Reading all the comments here is infuriating

petesergeant 4y ago

I'm blockchain skeptical, but I think you're slightly throwing out the baby with the bathwater here. > the trusted party isn't eliminated by blockchain, because someone has to code the implementation of the software I don't think is relevant in practice, and I think the blockchain does solve this problem regarding double-spending. Yes, there's a centralized set of developers, but that does not seem to be a problem in practice, 13 years in > The trust 'problem' is overrated, because nothing in this world works without trust. Bingo, this is the real problem. The world has very few problems where a trusted authority / arbitrator isn't a massive benefit.

roonyh 4y ago
Why the set of developers is considered centralised? I can write an implementation according to the specification and have no relationship with developers of another implementation.
- petesergeant 4y ago
  My understanding is that the specification changes over time, and if your implementation doesn't match the central one, then the rest of the network stops interacting with you. That is: there is a massive network effect of people using github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin as canon, and there is a central group of devs with write-access there. While you can fork it, unless the rest of the network gets in on it, you've just created some altcoin that nobody cares about.
- baobabKoodaa 4y ago
  You can write an implementation according to what specification? Bitcoin? Where is the specification for Bitcoin? There isn't one.
- tsimionescu 4y ago
  Maybe you can, but have you? Has anyone? Are there any nodes on the bitcoin network not running the same code written by the same handful of people? Also, saying that "all you have to do to participate in this new trustless economy is to read the spec and implement your own validation node and client, and maintain it as the protocol changes" is a pretty different promise than "just download this app".
j3th9n 4y ago
Machine 2 machine payments are a massive problem you can solve with a blockchain. Which can solve a whole lot of other problems, like automation. Which can solve another set of problems.
- petesergeant 4y ago
  > Machine 2 machine payments are a massive problem you can solve with a blockchain Right but you can also solve these with a government regulated exchange and it’s not clear what a blockchain adds