Hacker News Reader

Comment by gowld | Hacker News Reader

The increased risk of total loss in the edge case is in exchange for a more efficient system with lower prices in the average case. Individual users should make an informed decision about the tradeoff.

View on HN

This sounds like an argument for why companies should be allowed to sell unregulated drugs and use asbestos and lead paint.

Individual consumers, who we all know are extremely knowledgeable and informed on all topics interacting with their lives, should weigh the increased risk of total loss against generally lower prices. And then in the event they unluck into in the total loss case, they should just shrug their shoulders and accept that they were lucky.

Companies selling "unregulated drugs" could also mean people getting the covid vaccine in mid 2020 rather then waiting months and months for trials. People could have made that personal choice based on their own situation and risk factors. Also compare the regulation between "drugs" and "supplements" in the USA.

I find it hard to argue that "asbestos and lead paint" are the same kind of individual choice as a bank or unregulated drugs.

Yes, and it could have led to scammers selling fake vaccines that did nothing, or worse, killed people.

The whole thing exists because etherium is prohibitively expensive. And blockchain is far from efficient

oh cmon, this comment (gowld's) should not be downvoted like that. It's a reasonable point to make even if you disagree with it

Reply on news.ycombinator.com