3 ms·

Using a blockchain is literally trusting a third party. Blockchains require third party miners/validators to run the chain. The idea that blockchains will chang

Using a blockchain is literally trusting a third party. Blockchains require third party miners/validators to run the chain. The idea that blockchains will change anything about this is a pipe dream. The design of them simply makes it impossible for everyone to "be their own trusted third party", whatever that is supposed to look like. Ironically, the most feasible way to really go "off the grid" is still probably to hide large amounts of valuable commodities (i.e. gold, platinum, etc) inside your home. In the words of that grug brain developer from yesterday, you go back to collecting shiny rocks. But I really doubt cryptocurrency is going to encourage people to do that, it's bad for many obvious reasons.

PretzelPirate 4y ago
> Using a blockchain is literally trusting a third party. Blockchains require third party miners/validators to run the chain. I disagree. I have to trust that at least 51% of validators (though smaller in other cases) are honest. That’s in no way that same as trusting that a traditional third party is honest. In some blockchain systems, you only have to trust that there is a single honest participant in the network. You can even participate in these networks to reduce the amount of trust you have to have in any part of the system. These are very different trust assumptions to what we have today with large, centralized institutions.
- hnthrow1010 4y ago
  >I have to trust that at least 51% of validators are honest Those 51% are third parties. Full stop. There is no difference. You don't control them, they are not you, they are not your friends. They're third parties. You can argue why you trust them more than "centralized institutions" but that doesn't make them not third parties. And this of course is assuming that the validators aren't centralized and will never become centralized, which there is no guarantee that it won't happen or has not already happened. I am not making this up either, this is a design parameter of the system; the fallacious premise of blockchains appears to readily assume that miners/validators will become greedy and hostile but also seems to trust them not to centralize and attack the network, for some reason that has not held up in practice.
- 300bps 4y ago
  I have to trust that at least 51% of validators Don't you mean 51% of hashrate? Pretty big difference because a single person with substantial resources could acquire 51% of hashrate.

PretzelPirate 4y ago

> Using a blockchain is literally trusting a third party. Blockchains require third party miners/validators to run the chain. I disagree. I have to trust that at least 51% of validators (though smaller in other cases) are honest. That’s in no way that same as trusting that a traditional third party is honest. In some blockchain systems, you only have to trust that there is a single honest participant in the network. You can even participate in these networks to reduce the amount of trust you have to have in any part of the system. These are very different trust assumptions to what we have today with large, centralized institutions.

hnthrow1010 4y ago
>I have to trust that at least 51% of validators are honest Those 51% are third parties. Full stop. There is no difference. You don't control them, they are not you, they are not your friends. They're third parties. You can argue why you trust them more than "centralized institutions" but that doesn't make them not third parties. And this of course is assuming that the validators aren't centralized and will never become centralized, which there is no guarantee that it won't happen or has not already happened. I am not making this up either, this is a design parameter of the system; the fallacious premise of blockchains appears to readily assume that miners/validators will become greedy and hostile but also seems to trust them not to centralize and attack the network, for some reason that has not held up in practice.
300bps 4y ago
I have to trust that at least 51% of validators Don't you mean 51% of hashrate? Pretty big difference because a single person with substantial resources could acquire 51% of hashrate.