4 ms·

Yea, who would have thought that you don’t want to build a venture on top of a currency. There is no other use case in blockchain than transferring wealth plus

Yea, who would have thought that you don’t want to build a venture on top of a currency. There is no other use case in blockchain than transferring wealth plus some quality of life features like time locks, multi signatures etc.

yieldcrv 4y ago
it seems he missed how those quality of life features are viable businesses on their own there are plenty of services taking a cut from people trying to use this multisender.app - pay/airdrop multiple people, thats it. team.finance - broadcast to your community that you locked your tokens, instead of just saying so. they solve a problem, they collect a cut from volume of transactions, they aren’t sitting in business development meetings around San Francisco because that’s reserved for grifters so its easy to see how OP missed that
- smoldesu 4y ago
  I think OP was perfectly willing to acknowledge these other use cases: > Crypto speculation is a vast and fast-growing market, while other use cases are small. Simply put, cryptocurrency has turned itself into a side-pot for disillusioned and desperate investors. The 'dream' that you're being sold is the same one we pondered 10 years ago - if we add enough bureaucracy, a democratically-controlled currency is feasible! Time has proven this wrong. Every attempt at making the '15th competing standard' ends the same way. Nobody is putting their money in cryptocurrency, and arbitrary architectural rehashes like the Ethereum Merge isn't going to drive adoption.
  - yieldcrv 4y ago
    I think crypto pundit narratives are absolutely worth criticizing and making fun of I can also observe that outside of crypto, speculation is a vast and fast-growing market, while other use cases are small in comparison. Financial services is a big sector, servicing an even bigger pile of assets, led by an even bigger notional value of synthetic assets and derivatives. and every other sector is smaller. so the outcome in the crypto space not only fits one of the original narratives of crypto, it also makes no sense how uninterested, alongside disillusioned, people hold crypto to a separate impossible higher standard.
    - smoldesu 4y ago
      Crypto isn't necessarily held to a 'higher standard', though. Not a single cryptocurrency is required to be audited by independent parties to confirm that there isn't deliberate wrongdoing. There are no encryption or privacy standards to be held to, cryptocurrency doesn't have ISO-compliance checks or even a concept of red-team/blue-team. On an individual basis, these features might seem desirable. At a higher level (eg. the financial services sector), every last one of these is a deal-breaker. There isn't a CFO on the planet that wouldn't laugh you out of the room for suggesting crypto as a replacement for Western Union. Pretty much the only advantage it holds over TradFin is transparency, which isn't a direct upgrade. Distributing a main ledger encourages rampant speculation, which leaves most cryptocurrencies as awful stores of value. The outcome of the crypto space is as-expected, IMO - any deregulated sector will inevitably be a race-to-the-bottom. I too like to argue in good-faith for the benefits of cryptocurrency, but comparing it to the dollar is like complaining that your orange doesn't taste like an apple. Cryptocurrency simply cannot exist as a suitable substitute for a state-backed currency without abandoning everything that makes it unique.
      - yieldcrv 4y ago
        these are strawman arguments, that I think can all be talked about individually, and this is all for you to pick apart one dream you heard about replacing state backed currency. This is one of the narratives I was referring to as worth making fun of. so can you try rewinding and responding again, putting that particular thing aside and responding to the ways people use the amount of speculation in crypto to ignore the amount of speculation in the parallel economy? It functions accurately to power a permissionless economy, rampant speculation is because humans are in both. That means it’s working as a platform. Regarding what dream or narrative that is from: There were threads where people talking with Satoshi realized contracts and derivatives could be executed on chain and even collateralized with the cryptocurrency, and this has happened and will continue.
      - Ferret7446 4y ago
        In practice, the most popular cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum have been audited by more independent parties than almost any other software. No auditor would have passed up the opportunity to be the one who discovered a major hole in Bitcoin.
mhluongo 4y ago
Name systems. Decentralized forex. Censorship resistant voting.
- fsh 4y ago
  The first two require centralized governance to function, so putting it on a blockchain is useless. Voting requires anonymity, so putting it on a blockchain is dangerous.
  - mhluongo 4y ago
    Neither of those require centralized governance (see Handshake, see Uniswap v2) and you can get anonymous voting on-chain as long as you have a registry of voting weight (see a variety of ZKPs). It amazes me that on this forum for technologists, so few are familiar with the technology... and still try to tear down crypto so passionately.
    - fsh 4y ago
      It amazes me that crypto-fanboys simply refuse to think through the failure modes of their toy projects. If you put your domains or your money on the blockchain, and you lose your keys, your domains or your money are gone with no recourse. This makes it obviously unusable in practice (keys get stolen all the time), and the only solution is centralized governance. This is fundamentally the oracle problem, and adding more and more layers of bullshit complexity won't fix it. Some ZKP-Voodoo may provide weak anonymity (the votes are not immediately obvious), but the voter can still prove to a third party who he or she voted for. Obviously this makes it vulnerable to vote buying and voter intimidation.
      - mhluongo 4y ago
        Hm, by that logic we shouldn't ever do cryptography at all I guess? I mean keys get lost all the time, what's the point? On ZKPs... seriously, you're calling cutting edge advances in cryptography "voodoo"? Do you not realize how anti-intellectual that is? There are plenty of proofs for truly anon voting, without auditability if that's what you so desire. More protocols include it than not because it turns out people want to be able to audit elections! The difference in this system is users have to volunteer the information, rather than rely on an election operator.
rvz 4y ago
I know right? Just like how Skiff has being using other blockchain projects such as ENS domains as well as decentralized P2P software like IPFS to help build their product offering. [0] Perhaps they found a use case for it. [0] https://skiff.com https://skiff.com
- mccorrinall 4y ago
  After checking their github repos I’m only seeing a web mail client with metamask for auth instead of user password. It’s using a normal graphql api. Very decentral. I guess web3.0 only requires a „login with metamask“-button now. Oh, and about the cool, very decentral drive on IPFS thing: the drive is still only on a single server, pinned by a single server. That’s how IPFS works. It it would work otherwise and they didn’t have to actually pay their storage bills, they wouldn’t limit the storage to a mediocre 10GB less-than-gdrive shit tier.
  - zeroclip 4y ago
    Sign in with private/public keypair instead of Google auth or per-site auth is a pretty incredible advancement of authentication on the web. IPFS does not need to be single drive. The user has the option to self host. The original platform also can go insolvent and the user can pin through another service.
    - mccorrinall 4y ago
      Check out webauthn, it’s awesome!

yieldcrv 4y ago

it seems he missed how those quality of life features are viable businesses on their own there are plenty of services taking a cut from people trying to use this multisender.app - pay/airdrop multiple people, thats it. team.finance - broadcast to your community that you locked your tokens, instead of just saying so. they solve a problem, they collect a cut from volume of transactions, they aren’t sitting in business development meetings around San Francisco because that’s reserved for grifters so its easy to see how OP missed that

smoldesu 4y ago
I think OP was perfectly willing to acknowledge these other use cases: > Crypto speculation is a vast and fast-growing market, while other use cases are small. Simply put, cryptocurrency has turned itself into a side-pot for disillusioned and desperate investors. The 'dream' that you're being sold is the same one we pondered 10 years ago - if we add enough bureaucracy, a democratically-controlled currency is feasible! Time has proven this wrong. Every attempt at making the '15th competing standard' ends the same way. Nobody is putting their money in cryptocurrency, and arbitrary architectural rehashes like the Ethereum Merge isn't going to drive adoption.
- yieldcrv 4y ago
  I think crypto pundit narratives are absolutely worth criticizing and making fun of I can also observe that outside of crypto, speculation is a vast and fast-growing market, while other use cases are small in comparison. Financial services is a big sector, servicing an even bigger pile of assets, led by an even bigger notional value of synthetic assets and derivatives. and every other sector is smaller. so the outcome in the crypto space not only fits one of the original narratives of crypto, it also makes no sense how uninterested, alongside disillusioned, people hold crypto to a separate impossible higher standard.
  - smoldesu 4y ago
    Crypto isn't necessarily held to a 'higher standard', though. Not a single cryptocurrency is required to be audited by independent parties to confirm that there isn't deliberate wrongdoing. There are no encryption or privacy standards to be held to, cryptocurrency doesn't have ISO-compliance checks or even a concept of red-team/blue-team. On an individual basis, these features might seem desirable. At a higher level (eg. the financial services sector), every last one of these is a deal-breaker. There isn't a CFO on the planet that wouldn't laugh you out of the room for suggesting crypto as a replacement for Western Union. Pretty much the only advantage it holds over TradFin is transparency, which isn't a direct upgrade. Distributing a main ledger encourages rampant speculation, which leaves most cryptocurrencies as awful stores of value. The outcome of the crypto space is as-expected, IMO - any deregulated sector will inevitably be a race-to-the-bottom. I too like to argue in good-faith for the benefits of cryptocurrency, but comparing it to the dollar is like complaining that your orange doesn't taste like an apple. Cryptocurrency simply cannot exist as a suitable substitute for a state-backed currency without abandoning everything that makes it unique.
    - yieldcrv 4y ago
      these are strawman arguments, that I think can all be talked about individually, and this is all for you to pick apart one dream you heard about replacing state backed currency. This is one of the narratives I was referring to as worth making fun of. so can you try rewinding and responding again, putting that particular thing aside and responding to the ways people use the amount of speculation in crypto to ignore the amount of speculation in the parallel economy? It functions accurately to power a permissionless economy, rampant speculation is because humans are in both. That means it’s working as a platform. Regarding what dream or narrative that is from: There were threads where people talking with Satoshi realized contracts and derivatives could be executed on chain and even collateralized with the cryptocurrency, and this has happened and will continue.
    - Ferret7446 4y ago
      In practice, the most popular cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum have been audited by more independent parties than almost any other software. No auditor would have passed up the opportunity to be the one who discovered a major hole in Bitcoin.

mhluongo 4y ago

Name systems. Decentralized forex. Censorship resistant voting.

fsh 4y ago
The first two require centralized governance to function, so putting it on a blockchain is useless. Voting requires anonymity, so putting it on a blockchain is dangerous.
- mhluongo 4y ago
  Neither of those require centralized governance (see Handshake, see Uniswap v2) and you can get anonymous voting on-chain as long as you have a registry of voting weight (see a variety of ZKPs). It amazes me that on this forum for technologists, so few are familiar with the technology... and still try to tear down crypto so passionately.
  - fsh 4y ago
    It amazes me that crypto-fanboys simply refuse to think through the failure modes of their toy projects. If you put your domains or your money on the blockchain, and you lose your keys, your domains or your money are gone with no recourse. This makes it obviously unusable in practice (keys get stolen all the time), and the only solution is centralized governance. This is fundamentally the oracle problem, and adding more and more layers of bullshit complexity won't fix it. Some ZKP-Voodoo may provide weak anonymity (the votes are not immediately obvious), but the voter can still prove to a third party who he or she voted for. Obviously this makes it vulnerable to vote buying and voter intimidation.
    - mhluongo 4y ago
      Hm, by that logic we shouldn't ever do cryptography at all I guess? I mean keys get lost all the time, what's the point? On ZKPs... seriously, you're calling cutting edge advances in cryptography "voodoo"? Do you not realize how anti-intellectual that is? There are plenty of proofs for truly anon voting, without auditability if that's what you so desire. More protocols include it than not because it turns out people want to be able to audit elections! The difference in this system is users have to volunteer the information, rather than rely on an election operator.

rvz 4y ago

I know right? Just like how Skiff has being using other blockchain projects such as ENS domains as well as decentralized P2P software like IPFS to help build their product offering. [0] Perhaps they found a use case for it. [0] https://skiff.com https://skiff.com

mccorrinall 4y ago
After checking their github repos I’m only seeing a web mail client with metamask for auth instead of user password. It’s using a normal graphql api. Very decentral. I guess web3.0 only requires a „login with metamask“-button now. Oh, and about the cool, very decentral drive on IPFS thing: the drive is still only on a single server, pinned by a single server. That’s how IPFS works. It it would work otherwise and they didn’t have to actually pay their storage bills, they wouldn’t limit the storage to a mediocre 10GB less-than-gdrive shit tier.
- zeroclip 4y ago
  Sign in with private/public keypair instead of Google auth or per-site auth is a pretty incredible advancement of authentication on the web. IPFS does not need to be single drive. The user has the option to self host. The original platform also can go insolvent and the user can pin through another service.
  - mccorrinall 4y ago
    Check out webauthn, it’s awesome!