Hacker News Reader

Comment by namose | Hacker News Reader

The problem is that most use-cases for blockchain require being beholden to a central authority anyway, because a chain is only as strong as it’s weakest link, and it’s either impossible or prohibitively inefficient to also run distributed applications that interact with the blockchain.

I think anyone who’s trying to achieve trustlessness by introducing more complexity into software is running a fools’ errand. Make simple, auditable systems.

View on HN

Uh... no? What single, central authority are you beholden to when you transact using Bitcoin?

"Lots of mining is centralized in large pools." or "lots of people choose to buy their Bitcoin through Coinbase" is not anywhere near the same level of dependence on a central authority as "PayPal can freeze my account at any time and I'm SOL". It's like claiming the internet is a centralized system because AWS exists.

If most of the internet is on the AWS that is a pretty understandable argument, no? Mt. Gox was responsible for 70% of Bitcoin transactions at its peak.

Most buy coins through exchanges, via fiat as an intermediary. They upload a driver's license which the intermediary keeps on file for KYC purposes.

If Bitcoin or cryptocurrency in general is supposed to decentralize finance how is it going to attain that goal if "doing it properly" requires installing a miner or exchanging cash for a flash drive in a Walmart parking lot? We're talking about the typical person globally whose conception of the internet might just be Facebook.

No, it’s like claiming the internet is centralized because google exists, except the alternative to things like coinbase is way more difficult to use than alternatives to big search engines. It’s a pretty valid argument

Reply on news.ycombinator.com