5 ms·

> As usual crypto in practice is the opposite of decentralized because people. Will. Not. Run. Their. Servers. "My theory would be perfect if only I could conv

> As usual crypto in practice is the opposite of decentralized because people. Will. Not. Run. Their. Servers. "My theory would be perfect if only I could convince humans to stop acting like humans," is the original sin of bad economics. I would submit that it is approximately impossible to have a cryptocurrency that is simultaneously popularly successful, and has even a significant minority of its users owning their own wallets. Because only a fraction of a percent of the general public has both the skill and the inclination to do something like that.

ethbr0 4y ago
> "My [product] would be perfect if only I could convince humans to stop acting like humans," is the original sin of bad [technologists] fixed that
- SantalBlush 4y ago
  There was recently an article posted to HN [0] about a startup founder doing this very thing, blaming his customers for behaving like humans. >I was fighting human nature and losing. >Everyone swears they will eat right and exercise, but most don’t. Everyone agrees they need to spend less to be financially secure later, but most won’t. Our users were telling us they would use ContractBeast to achieve those long-term benefits, but most weren’t. >When I looked at the contracts the users were creating, I found most of them were ones in which a particular feature provided a clear and immediate benefit. Usually involving contract review and approval. >Human nature sucks. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11866868 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11866868
  - rat9988 4y ago
    >here was recently an article posted to HN [0] about a startup founder doing this very thing, blaming his customers for behaving like humans. He did it the opposit. He blamed his product for going against human nature.This is misquoting him.
    - SantalBlush 4y ago
      I read the article. He didn't blame his product, he blamed users for not utilizing his product to its full potential, and compared them with people who don't eat right and exercise.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - namaria 4y ago
    Selling sugar is one of the biggest businesses out there. Has been for centuries...
FerociousTimes 4y ago
"My theory would be perfect if only I could convince humans to stop acting like humans," is the original sin of bad economics. In other words, the is–ought problem as viewed by David Hume.
- readthenotes1 4y ago
  Or is it the ought-is, the opposite?
  - FerociousTimes 4y ago
    Ah The Tomahto-Tomayto problem
    - tclancy 4y ago
      I thought this was about potatoes.
      - FerociousTimes 4y ago
        or maybe you're just being hungry
        Izkata 4y ago
        The potato-tomato problem.
        namaria 4y ago
        There is no cryptocurrency. Only potato.
jiveturkey 4y ago
Is that a failure of implementation though? I ask because you also said "impossible". Computers themselves were impossibly unfriendly for so long. What if someone created a UX friendly cryptocurrency. Like any computer, deep down it could be insanely complex, but is it a requirement that the UX reflect that complexity?
- achenet 4y ago
  that is kind of what the exchanges do. The thing is user friendly UX usually creates user friendliness by removing the user's ability to control the product. For example, macOS vs BSD. The GUI makes it much more user friendly, but at the cost of limiting the user a bit more. Then again, perhaps there are exceptions.
  - jiveturkey 4y ago
    > that is kind of what the exchanges do. Well not really. the parent I replied to specifically qualified it as users holding their own wallets. I agree that is a critical component. Exchanges are a bit of a farce from the perspective of "not your wallet, not your coins". Like you say, exchanges that abstract this too much, for their benefit not yours, are probably distorting the original intent of a cryptocurrency. macOS doesn't have to hide all the knobs; they could have an advanced interface, which they do for some things. Why can't there be a wallet hardware/software that does the same? Is there something inherent that prevents this, making it "impossible"? Or is there just no business model around it, that can overcome the gravity of the kind of exchanges we have today. For example, are wallet addresses inherently unmanageable?

ethbr0 4y ago

> "My [product] would be perfect if only I could convince humans to stop acting like humans," is the original sin of bad [technologists] fixed that

SantalBlush 4y ago
There was recently an article posted to HN [0] about a startup founder doing this very thing, blaming his customers for behaving like humans. >I was fighting human nature and losing. >Everyone swears they will eat right and exercise, but most don’t. Everyone agrees they need to spend less to be financially secure later, but most won’t. Our users were telling us they would use ContractBeast to achieve those long-term benefits, but most weren’t. >When I looked at the contracts the users were creating, I found most of them were ones in which a particular feature provided a clear and immediate benefit. Usually involving contract review and approval. >Human nature sucks. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11866868 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11866868
- rat9988 4y ago
  >here was recently an article posted to HN [0] about a startup founder doing this very thing, blaming his customers for behaving like humans. He did it the opposit. He blamed his product for going against human nature.This is misquoting him.
  - SantalBlush 4y ago
    I read the article. He didn't blame his product, he blamed users for not utilizing his product to its full potential, and compared them with people who don't eat right and exercise.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- namaria 4y ago
  Selling sugar is one of the biggest businesses out there. Has been for centuries...

FerociousTimes 4y ago

"My theory would be perfect if only I could convince humans to stop acting like humans," is the original sin of bad economics. In other words, the is–ought problem as viewed by David Hume.

readthenotes1 4y ago
Or is it the ought-is, the opposite?
- FerociousTimes 4y ago
  Ah The Tomahto-Tomayto problem
  - tclancy 4y ago
    I thought this was about potatoes.
    - FerociousTimes 4y ago
      or maybe you're just being hungry
      - Izkata 4y ago
        The potato-tomato problem.
        namaria 4y ago
        There is no cryptocurrency. Only potato.

jiveturkey 4y ago

Is that a failure of implementation though? I ask because you also said "impossible". Computers themselves were impossibly unfriendly for so long. What if someone created a UX friendly cryptocurrency. Like any computer, deep down it could be insanely complex, but is it a requirement that the UX reflect that complexity?

achenet 4y ago
that is kind of what the exchanges do. The thing is user friendly UX usually creates user friendliness by removing the user's ability to control the product. For example, macOS vs BSD. The GUI makes it much more user friendly, but at the cost of limiting the user a bit more. Then again, perhaps there are exceptions.
- jiveturkey 4y ago
  > that is kind of what the exchanges do. Well not really. the parent I replied to specifically qualified it as users holding their own wallets. I agree that is a critical component. Exchanges are a bit of a farce from the perspective of "not your wallet, not your coins". Like you say, exchanges that abstract this too much, for their benefit not yours, are probably distorting the original intent of a cryptocurrency. macOS doesn't have to hide all the knobs; they could have an advanced interface, which they do for some things. Why can't there be a wallet hardware/software that does the same? Is there something inherent that prevents this, making it "impossible"? Or is there just no business model around it, that can overcome the gravity of the kind of exchanges we have today. For example, are wallet addresses inherently unmanageable?