hudon

46 ms·

421.
by hudon 9y ago
The nodes are federated and you're still calling this a blockchain? What definition of the word "blockchain" are you using? Is this not more commonly called a "distributed database"?
422.
by hudon 9y ago
If you take Ethereum and you remove ETH/gas, you remove proof of work, you remove decentralized computation because that's just really inefficient and you want high throughput... can you really call what you have left Ethereum?
423.
by hudon 9y ago
Here is your schema: DATA | auditor_sig ------------------ Now: a) Assume 3 components: client, server, auditorService b) How to write to server: 1- client sends DATA to auditorService 2- auditorService signs DATA and returns S(DATA)
424.
by hudon 9y ago
> Ethereum based blockchains provide an ability to create an auditable log of events If all they want is a log of events, why not use a tried and true database whose performance is more well understood? MySQL, Cassandra, whatever. You ca
425.
by hudon 9y ago
Decentralized validation and ordering of transactions is expensive. In Bitcoin, it requires: 1. Miners to validate 1MB of transactions every 10 minutes 2. Users to be able to confirm that the entire chain of transactions was properly valida
426.
by hudon 9y ago
Every block hash has a target it is trying to be under. For example, if the target is "0000008dab3", then when you are hashing your block, you need to come up with a hash that is below that number. When the network's hash rat
427.
by hudon 9y ago
Yep, and the history of R3 Corda is evidence of how "bitcoin as a clearing house between banks" is a pipe dream. Bitcoin is almost 10 years old. We have enough data now to be able to build strong cases for what it's actually
428.
by hudon 9y ago
"peer to peer" payments don't require a blockchain: see Venmo, Square Cash, Facebook Messenger, PayPal, TransferWise, Uber (paying the driver), etc. Exchange trading is not really using bitcoin, it is buying/selling bitc
429.
by hudon 9y ago
A bigger block requires at least as many resources as a smaller one to receive, validate and store the data. I am not saying we should never increase the block size, but I am saying we should try all alternatives that make the network more
430.
by hudon 9y ago
If you can show me that bitpay processes around the same amount as dark markets, I will re-assess my position... As for anonymity and fungibility: I believe tumbling services are good enough today, which is why buying on a dark market works
431.
by hudon 9y ago
Does CHIPS use a blockchain?
432.
by hudon 9y ago
It is a lot. Again, please show me an example application of the blockchain that comes close to that number but that does not need censorship resistance. The estimate of daily volume provided by blockchain.info obscures our discussion, espe
433.
by hudon 9y ago
> I also don't think the market actually values censorship resistance in their digital cash Alphabay processed $600,000 to $800,000 per day [1]. This is economic activity for tangible goods. In the list of other top uses of the bl
434.
by hudon 9y ago
1. SPV is not sufficient for security because it requires whitelisted nodes. If your client connects to a malicious node, you are shit out of luck. 2. There is no non-blockchain alternative to online censorship resistant cash. So if the pri
435.
by hudon 9y ago
> SegWit2x is an attempt to remove control from the core dev team I disagree. SegWit2x is a misguided attempt to make Bitcoin "more efficient" without realizing that it puts at risk the core value proposition of Bitcoin: censor
436.
by hudon 9y ago
The arguments for Bitcoin are the same arguments for cash with respect to censorship resistance. The gist of it being that sometimes the law and what is legitimate diverges to a point where there are legitimate value transfers that are outl
437.
by hudon 9y ago
Many people simply believe there is a need for a digital censorship resistant currency like physical cash. I don't think it'll replace currencies, but I think it will serve a purpose as a means to transfer value when authorities d
438.
by hudon 9y ago
The post I was replying to was talking about us discussing technical limitations, not artificial ones. Whether or not ISPs throttle streaming is an artificial limitation. You're right that the decentralized solution would have censorsh
439.
by hudon 9y ago
OK let's go with that hypothesis and say you do have enough seeders and there are no legal repercussions for seeding. Let's be even more generous and say the protocol incentivizes seeding with Bitcoin. If you take all the seeders&
440.
by hudon 9y ago
Sia is going to have a hard time defending the content that their system will end up hosting... But ethics aside, if the tech works, why can't the nodes be paid in Bitcoin? If payments are the only piece missing in making this work, as
441.
by hudon 9y ago
> [popcorn time] proves that it can be more reliable and easier I don't think this is true... My friend used popcorn time and I can tell you that it is not easier or more reliable. The movie comes in somewhat random chunks so mos
442.
by hudon 9y ago
The biggest pro of decentralization is censorship resistance. You can compute, store and transfer data and disregard authority or oppressors. This is why torrents worked. They allowed people to share media even though it wasn't legal.
443.
by hudon 9y ago
Awesome deep dive into the space. The two positions I object to are: > In some ways, Bitcoin could be considered the first decentralized application since it runs on blockchain technology, is fully open-source, and runs without a central
444.
by hudon 9y ago
> because it can't handle too much traffic The two most popular blockchains, Ethereum and Bitcoin, can't "handle too much traffic". They both suffer from severe congestion the moment people start using them actively.
445.
by hudon 9y ago
I'm curious to know if you erased all of modern civilization (governments, laws, et. all) and replaced it with decentralized apps and a blockchain-based currency, would it work? I read Snow Crash and I can see how fascinating the conce
446.
by hudon 9y ago
Your comment is just one big ad hominem so I'm going to guess what your position is: tokens on the blockchain are great to bootstrap users. (correct me if I'm wrong) Given my assumption, can you explain why I can't do this: 1
447.
by hudon 9y ago
> Only cash is "censorship resistant" Still not perfect, though. Look at how India swiftly and broadly decommissioned some of the bank notes. It is not too crazy to imagine some nations going a step further and decommissioning
448.
by hudon 9y ago
> We're now capable, thanks to these consensus systems, of creating tokens that have certain properties. For instance Bitcoin is a specific kind of token which is scarce - hence will work more like gold. Other tokens (perhaps Ether
449.
by hudon 9y ago
You've got the right idea. Hyperledger and R3's Corda [1] are where it's at for distributed ledgers (fast and cheap, as you say). Blockchains add censorship resistance and that's their primary feature, not a weakness as
450.
by hudon 9y ago
> Can cryptocurrency governance be decentralized? Can we do better than the anarchy of management for Bitcoin and Ethereum with chain splits being the solution to dispute? What does this mean , really? What is decentralized governance a

More ›