8 ms·

This solves inter-bank transfers in EU but does not mean payments going out of, or into, the EU are solved. Crypto takes a different approach: a single protoco

This solves inter-bank transfers in EU but does not mean payments going out of, or into, the EU are solved. Crypto takes a different approach: a single protocol that is shared across all countries.

thawaya3113 4y ago
How is crypto any better at doing this than say, Western Union? Ultimately, as someone who finds blockchain technology really cool, what I struggle with is, in which scenarios is blockchain better than Postgres?
- junofan 4y ago
  Composability; as a user I can prove things publicly about my assets and other people can offer services independently of the asset issuer. E.g. take out a loan against my bacon coins or whatever, even if Bacon Bank didn’t think to implement a way for lenders to verify my ownership of bacon coins.
- dcolkitt 4y ago
  I agree that anything that can be done with a blockchain can technically be done with a database. But the practical challenge comes down to coordination problems. With blockchains you get credibly neutrality out of the box. Different developers are comfortable building inside a shared execution environment. If Western Union built a smart contract execution system, you'd have a much, much harder time convincing developers to build inside of it than you would on Ethereum. It would be much less likely that Ethereum would shut off, change the rules, ban you from the platform, etc. The advantage that gives blockchains is composability. Thousands of different applications can instantly talk to one another using standardized calls inside atomic transactions. Databases by contrast are siloed. So they work really well if you stay within the application that database was built for. But really poorly once you try to cross applications, and hence databases. Imagine how hard it would be and how many hoops you would have to jump through to be able to use Venmo to buy Nasdaq listed stocks. In contrast USDC and Uniswap work together seamlessly because they're both built on the same common credibly neutral layer, Ethereum.
  - mNovak 4y ago
    "credible neutrality" is a nice phrase for a concept I've struggled to articulate, thanks
  - lazzlazzlazz 4y ago
    This is totally correct and something that devs on HN seem to struggle to understand. There are many theories as to why, but it is an unending source of amusement.
- forum_ghost 4y ago
  Postgres doesn't help with scenarios where you don't want your sovereign foreign reserves seized.
- randomran01234 4y ago
  Better by what metric? Ethereum settlements are nearly instant and global, involve no need for a private third party arbiter, and are built on permissionless and open source protocols. Some of the areas they fall short is often around throughput, energy externalities, and user privacy. As the article points out, there are engineering solutions and new cryptography being applied to all three of those problems.
lottin 4y ago
So bitcoin "solves" the problem by being non-compliant with local laws and regulations.
- randomran01234 4y ago
  Crypto attempts to solve the problem in the same way that web protocols and web standards do. Define a single shared spec that spans all geographic borders, rather than a spec that is reinvented at each jurisdiction.
  - lottin 4y ago
    And this violates the spec that is already in force in each jurisdiction.
    - randomran01234 4y ago
    - IanCal 4y ago
      I don't get your point here, there's not a legally required minimum fee being skipped.
      - lottin 4y ago
        Few countries allow unrestricted movement of people, goods and capitals across their borders. Payment systems that are meant to support cross-border transactions need to deal with that. If your way of dealing with these regulations is ignoring them, well... now you have two problems.
        warkdarrior 4y ago
        Hmmm, it's almost as if cryptocurrencies are the regexes of the financial world.
- danuker 4y ago

This solves inter-bank transfers in EU but does not mean payments going out of, or into, the EU are solved. Crypto takes a different approach: a single protocol that is shared across all countries.

thawaya3113 4y ago

How is crypto any better at doing this than say, Western Union? Ultimately, as someone who finds blockchain technology really cool, what I struggle with is, in which scenarios is blockchain better than Postgres?

junofan 4y ago
Composability; as a user I can prove things publicly about my assets and other people can offer services independently of the asset issuer. E.g. take out a loan against my bacon coins or whatever, even if Bacon Bank didn’t think to implement a way for lenders to verify my ownership of bacon coins.
dcolkitt 4y ago
I agree that anything that can be done with a blockchain can technically be done with a database. But the practical challenge comes down to coordination problems. With blockchains you get credibly neutrality out of the box. Different developers are comfortable building inside a shared execution environment. If Western Union built a smart contract execution system, you'd have a much, much harder time convincing developers to build inside of it than you would on Ethereum. It would be much less likely that Ethereum would shut off, change the rules, ban you from the platform, etc. The advantage that gives blockchains is composability. Thousands of different applications can instantly talk to one another using standardized calls inside atomic transactions. Databases by contrast are siloed. So they work really well if you stay within the application that database was built for. But really poorly once you try to cross applications, and hence databases. Imagine how hard it would be and how many hoops you would have to jump through to be able to use Venmo to buy Nasdaq listed stocks. In contrast USDC and Uniswap work together seamlessly because they're both built on the same common credibly neutral layer, Ethereum.
- mNovak 4y ago
  "credible neutrality" is a nice phrase for a concept I've struggled to articulate, thanks
- lazzlazzlazz 4y ago
  This is totally correct and something that devs on HN seem to struggle to understand. There are many theories as to why, but it is an unending source of amusement.
forum_ghost 4y ago
Postgres doesn't help with scenarios where you don't want your sovereign foreign reserves seized.
randomran01234 4y ago
Better by what metric? Ethereum settlements are nearly instant and global, involve no need for a private third party arbiter, and are built on permissionless and open source protocols. Some of the areas they fall short is often around throughput, energy externalities, and user privacy. As the article points out, there are engineering solutions and new cryptography being applied to all three of those problems.

lottin 4y ago

So bitcoin "solves" the problem by being non-compliant with local laws and regulations.

randomran01234 4y ago
Crypto attempts to solve the problem in the same way that web protocols and web standards do. Define a single shared spec that spans all geographic borders, rather than a spec that is reinvented at each jurisdiction.
- lottin 4y ago
  And this violates the spec that is already in force in each jurisdiction.
  - randomran01234 4y ago
  - IanCal 4y ago
    I don't get your point here, there's not a legally required minimum fee being skipped.
    - lottin 4y ago
      Few countries allow unrestricted movement of people, goods and capitals across their borders. Payment systems that are meant to support cross-border transactions need to deal with that. If your way of dealing with these regulations is ignoring them, well... now you have two problems.
      - warkdarrior 4y ago
        Hmmm, it's almost as if cryptocurrencies are the regexes of the financial world.
danuker 4y ago