12 ms·

A central bank and blockchain technology are antithetical concepts, and if a central bank is ever offering you something blockchain it's probably a scam by mean

by kriops 4y ago

A central bank and blockchain technology are antithetical concepts, and if a central bank is ever offering you something blockchain it's probably a scam by means of sham decentralization.

NikolaNovak 4y ago
>>A central bank and blockchain technology are antithetical concepts, I feel I need to screenshot this. It demonstrates more succinctly than I could write an essay on, how much we are muddying up technology, and purpose / politics / ideals when we start discussing this area (Crypto currency etc) How is a human institution in your mind "antithetical" to a technology? Is a government "antithetical" to 3rd normal form or airline antithetical to a b-tree? You are inserting a large number of undisclosed assumptions to even begin to make such a statement (whether aware of it or not). >>if a central bank is ever offering you something blockchain it's probably a scam by means of sham decentralization. I don't disagree with this... I just think it neatly extends fully to "if anybody is ever offering you something block chain" :-)
- DasIch 4y ago
  Blockchain has a purpose: consensus without trust. Central banks are institutions that are trusted and cooperate with trusted institutions. In general as long as you have a mechanism to establish trust-based consensus by relying on people or a government there is really no advantage by using a blockhain and a huge number of disadvantages.
  - NikolaNovak 4y ago
    I agree.frequently it seems I'm in twilight zone minority :-)
- mintyDijon 4y ago
  >How is a human institution in your mind "antithetical" to a technology? It's not human institution vs technology, it's the very structure of central banking vs decentral banking. It's the concepts themselves that are antithetical. -Edit I couldn't remember the word, but I believe the term that applies here is 'diametrically opposed'
  - NikolaNovak 4y ago
    But that's the unspoken assumption I'm talking about - that blockchain and decentralized banking are one and the same / that this is the only design use case for the technology. There are many people actively working in block chain space who do not believe these are identical concepts. They may yet win out long term.
    - mintyDijon 4y ago
      I'm not claiming that blockchain is a one use concept. Yes it can be used for other things then banking. I personally feel that NFTs are a great example of that, and that they hold many possibilities for the future. But the main benefit that blockchain provides is a way to decentralize a network, it's quite inefficient from a performance standpoint. So to use it for anything other than that is a waste (at least currently). Centralized currencies are better than decentralized ones performance wise, and I don't predict that will change anytime in the near future. To quote Eldenwrong's perfect comment here "You can use a rock as a spoon but that just makes you retarded" Hense blockchain currencies (the ones that aren't scams ofc) are decentralized by their nature, since that's the only draw to using that method. Because of the Pareto distribution this should fail at some point, but with the innumerable amount of new currencies coming into existence, that shouldn't be a problem.
- kriops 4y ago
  I feel like you're intentionally playing semantic games, i.e. trolling, so let me tell you straight that I don't appreciate that. The fact a central bank is a "human institution" is irrelevant. The fact blockchain is a "technology" is also in itself irrelevant. The point is that each concept necessitates characteristics that are irreconcilable. Most importantly a central bank can not function without central authority. The defining property of the blockchain is the decentralization of authority. Authority can not be simultaneously centralized and decentralized, and so the blockchain and the central bank are antithetical concepts.
  - kortilla 4y ago
    > The defining property of the blockchain is the decentralization of authority No it’s not. A blockchain can be used in a way that only specific central authorities can add to it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain#Private_blockchains https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain#Private_blockchains
    - astrange 4y ago
      I was kind of expecting you to link to an article about Git repository permissions.
    - eldenwrong 4y ago
      You can use a rock as a spoon but that just makes you retarded.
      - kortilla 4y ago
        Are you familiar with git repositories?
  - NikolaNovak 4y ago
    >> The defining property of the blockchain is the decentralization of authority. So "unaware assumptions" it is then. I'm sorry if you perceive that as snarky (and not everyone that disagrees is a troll btw), but to me, decentralized authority is what some people perceive an important (if not zealous) use case. It is not the defining property of blockchain. There are many companies that are building distributed ledger with centralized authority. You may disagree with that use case. I feel it's lack of self awareness to think a valid and clearly implemented use case is somehow antithetical to a simple neutral well defined technology.
bozhark 4y ago
Both are, always have been

by kriops 4y ago

A central bank and blockchain technology are antithetical concepts, and if a central bank is ever offering you something blockchain it's probably a scam by means of sham decentralization.

NikolaNovak 4y ago

>>A central bank and blockchain technology are antithetical concepts, I feel I need to screenshot this. It demonstrates more succinctly than I could write an essay on, how much we are muddying up technology, and purpose / politics / ideals when we start discussing this area (Crypto currency etc) How is a human institution in your mind "antithetical" to a technology? Is a government "antithetical" to 3rd normal form or airline antithetical to a b-tree? You are inserting a large number of undisclosed assumptions to even begin to make such a statement (whether aware of it or not). >>if a central bank is ever offering you something blockchain it's probably a scam by means of sham decentralization. I don't disagree with this... I just think it neatly extends fully to "if anybody is ever offering you something block chain" :-)

DasIch 4y ago
Blockchain has a purpose: consensus without trust. Central banks are institutions that are trusted and cooperate with trusted institutions. In general as long as you have a mechanism to establish trust-based consensus by relying on people or a government there is really no advantage by using a blockhain and a huge number of disadvantages.
- NikolaNovak 4y ago
  I agree.frequently it seems I'm in twilight zone minority :-)
mintyDijon 4y ago
>How is a human institution in your mind "antithetical" to a technology? It's not human institution vs technology, it's the very structure of central banking vs decentral banking. It's the concepts themselves that are antithetical. -Edit I couldn't remember the word, but I believe the term that applies here is 'diametrically opposed'
- NikolaNovak 4y ago
  But that's the unspoken assumption I'm talking about - that blockchain and decentralized banking are one and the same / that this is the only design use case for the technology. There are many people actively working in block chain space who do not believe these are identical concepts. They may yet win out long term.
  - mintyDijon 4y ago
    I'm not claiming that blockchain is a one use concept. Yes it can be used for other things then banking. I personally feel that NFTs are a great example of that, and that they hold many possibilities for the future. But the main benefit that blockchain provides is a way to decentralize a network, it's quite inefficient from a performance standpoint. So to use it for anything other than that is a waste (at least currently). Centralized currencies are better than decentralized ones performance wise, and I don't predict that will change anytime in the near future. To quote Eldenwrong's perfect comment here "You can use a rock as a spoon but that just makes you retarded" Hense blockchain currencies (the ones that aren't scams ofc) are decentralized by their nature, since that's the only draw to using that method. Because of the Pareto distribution this should fail at some point, but with the innumerable amount of new currencies coming into existence, that shouldn't be a problem.
kriops 4y ago
I feel like you're intentionally playing semantic games, i.e. trolling, so let me tell you straight that I don't appreciate that. The fact a central bank is a "human institution" is irrelevant. The fact blockchain is a "technology" is also in itself irrelevant. The point is that each concept necessitates characteristics that are irreconcilable. Most importantly a central bank can not function without central authority. The defining property of the blockchain is the decentralization of authority. Authority can not be simultaneously centralized and decentralized, and so the blockchain and the central bank are antithetical concepts.
- kortilla 4y ago
  > The defining property of the blockchain is the decentralization of authority No it’s not. A blockchain can be used in a way that only specific central authorities can add to it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain#Private_blockchains https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain#Private_blockchains
  - astrange 4y ago
    I was kind of expecting you to link to an article about Git repository permissions.
  - eldenwrong 4y ago
    You can use a rock as a spoon but that just makes you retarded.
    - kortilla 4y ago
      Are you familiar with git repositories?
- NikolaNovak 4y ago
  >> The defining property of the blockchain is the decentralization of authority. So "unaware assumptions" it is then. I'm sorry if you perceive that as snarky (and not everyone that disagrees is a troll btw), but to me, decentralized authority is what some people perceive an important (if not zealous) use case. It is not the defining property of blockchain. There are many companies that are building distributed ledger with centralized authority. You may disagree with that use case. I feel it's lack of self awareness to think a valid and clearly implemented use case is somehow antithetical to a simple neutral well defined technology.

bozhark 4y ago

Both are, always have been