Hacker News Reader

This is a list of things people have created, none of which offers any kind of improvement or transformative change. The fact that someone's money had been sucked into this black hole also doesn't justify the technology or its intentions.

As every good old pyramid scheme, the crypto ecosystem needs you to believe that investing time and money has merits. That's how the few at the top benefit from the whole scheme.

I replied elsewhere in the tree on this thread. But exchanges, lending markets, human coordination over the internet, capital allocation, novel on-chain governance structures for organizations, smart contract multisig wallets, zero knowledge proof gaming, zk privacy, hell, even programmable, accessible, liquid, token-denominated assets have incredible value for the world. Value is being created despite your inability to distinguish the wheat from the chaffe.

How does any of this help a typical financial products consumer? Can you explain where I can do $0.00 transactions to my friends? Can you point me to where I can get a better deal on a refinance or HELOC loan with my house as collateral?

Because I love financial products that help me retain my earned money, and am avid about getting the best deals. Right now I have 0$ transactions, 3.75% actual guaranteed returns on cash (not a 50% chance of being worth $0 by next year a la FTX, genesis, blockfi, etc.), 3% cash back on transactions that cost a business 2.5%, and would love a cheaper HELOC than traditional banks. However, none of anything you mentioned actually does any of this better, the things that 99.8% people actually want, rather than speculative "investments" they're hoping to sell for more later.

What's that YC slogan again? "Make something people want."

Everything you mentioned is stuck in this inflationary monetary system.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL

Ethereum offers a way to step outside of it and is creating a decentralized, deflationary money.

https://ultrasound.money/

Only one of the uses I mentioned is harmed by inflation. Transactions don’t require me to hold a long position in USD and inflation would be in my favor if I’m holding USD debt. That just leaves USD bank interest, which has the strongest case for it out of any, because ETH and all cryptos lost much more value this year, if you were lucky enough to not be in the 50% holdings where your “account” was fraudulently wiped out a la FTX and BlockFi.

ETH is also inflationary… Both of your provided charts show large currency issuance and only very slight recent drawdowns.

As I expected; a whole bunch of buzz words and given the chance to produce a single real example, no actual use case for the 99.8% consumer.

> is creating a decentralized, deflationary money

Deflationary money means "whoever got in early and got the most money is going to be ultra-rich forever, unlike the poor sods who get in years/generations from now"

These graphs seem to say otherwise. Leaving the gold standard seems to have ushered in the current dystopia we find ourselves in. The gold standard wasn’t perfect for sure, but having to have money rooted in something instead of nothing seems to have kept wage improvements for all classes, not just the elite.

https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

If you think about it when you turn on a money printer, those closest to it (elites, the well connected) are going to catch most of it.

> These graphs seem to say otherwise.

Which graphs? I wasn't talking about 1971 or the largely US-specific chart of not compensating people.

I'm talking about deflationary currency. With a deflationary currency people who got in early and got the larger part of the pie will for ever be ultra rich, and get richer.

Because the money you get now will only increase in value over time. So you got in early and got a single coin X for something. Congrats, you're nearly infinitely richer than, say, your grand kids who'll be getting fractions of a percent of that coin for that same something.

I;m not going to comment on the crypto side, but I would argue that your conclusion also applies to the traditional currency system; it's not like created money was freely handle to the poorest.

> "3% cash back on transactions that cost a business 2.5%"

What does this reference?

My US credit card makes a $100 transaction earn me $3, while on average the retail business received $97.5.

All of this may be true, but each one of these things is one tiny programming mistake away from complete and irrevocable collapse. The track record for this category is poor.

For new projects, yes. New projects should be treated with caution, especially if from unknown entities or entities with a poor security track record. But Uniswap V2 is almost 3 years old at this point, and Uniswap V3 is almost 2 years old. The contracts were audited before they were deployed. They're open source. They've got billions of dollars in the contracts. If they could be hacked, they would have been hacked by now.

Almost 3 years old! There's a great joke in the movie _LA Story_ about this kind of thing.

Heartbleed, Shellshock, Log4Shell, Spectre... there are plenty of examples of serious flaws found in software far more mature than these smart contracts. Audits and testing only confirm the presence of bugs, not their absence.

I can also write lists of things and pretend that long lists === list of value.

What value did any of this provide to the world? Just reads like a buzzword soup where finance bros find more and more obscure ways to leach money.

Automated Market Makers, like Uniswap, provide open, accessible, auditable, open source, extensible, liquidity to the world wide web. Anyone with an internet connection gets access to the market. Market access is taken for granted by Americans, but it should be noted that even here, Uniswap is superior to a NYSE or Nasdaq exchange along several vectors (openness, 24/7 availability, censorship resistance, full auditability, permissionless access, fair market making, etc).

Tokens are also fully programmable, and that enables a number of primitives that are not possible with stock certificates or grain contracts. For one, they can easily be held within a multisig smart contract wallet, governed by configurable rules for spending (in an M-of-N scheme). This makes it frictionless to set up a small group or organization on the internet even if the participants are in 7 different countries. This helps to coordinate human and financial capital, because rules can be programmed in the DAO or multisig to prevent one person from stealing all the funds. Since everything is on-chain, everything is above the board. Very difficult to arrange this with traditional corporate checking accounts, and even then, one executive ultimately controls the account.

Those two alone would be huge and worth it for humanity, but I listed more on that list and I'm running out of time for a reply. But I invite you to analyze the products yourself. Try them on testnets for free if you like.

> This helps to coordinate human and financial capital, because rules can be programmed in the DAO or multisig

"Rules can be programmed (in esoteric programming languages using new made up terms for everything)" and frictionless in one sentence. Smh.

Very simple explanation: imagine you want to start a software company with 5 people you met on the internet. You each live in 5 different countries. How do you decide who holds the treasury? How do you decide which jurisdiction to register a partnership agreement in? There's a lot of friction there. And a lot of trust involved. Even if one person takes it upon themselves, the other 4 members have to trust the 1 guy in charge of the legal org & bank account won't rug pull on them and run off with the money or spend it needlessly.

With a multisig smart contract wallet (https://gnosis-safe.io/), it's frictionless to setup a simple smart contract for holding the treasury and for enacting M-of-N rules on any expenditures from that multisig. This may be a 3 of 5 signature requirement or even a 5 of 5 signature requirement. It's fully programmable. So when starting a Web3 project, it's possible to jump into a partnership with a group and be productive without having to worry as much about establishing trust, navigating five different jurisdictions for employment agreements, or centralizing control in a single person.

In addition, far more elaborate org structures are possible, and there exist plenty of tooling for making those happen without even needing to know how to code (https://juicebox.money/, https://daohaus.club/).

Solidity is not all that esoteric. It's similar in syntax to JavaScript, but it's statically typed. There are also widely recognized and audited open source code bases to build off of (https://www.openzeppelin.com/contracts). And tons of developer tooling (https://docs.ethers.io/v5/, https://wagmi.sh/), along with countless resources on the web.

> Very simple explanation: imagine you want to start a software company with 5 people you met on the internet.

This is sufficiently rare that "traditional" finance hasn't come up with a product for that. Or maybe it has, but it's just as obscure as Gnosis.

> It's fully programmable.

You keep saying this as if this was a desirable quality.

> Solidity is not all that esoteric. It's similar in syntax to JavaScript

It doesn't make it not esoteric. It doesn't make it Javascript.

It's its own language with its own idiosyncrasies, its own lingo, its own terminology (so much of the terminology in the crypto space is just absolutely random bullshit people came up on the spot for things that already exist in the language).

There are no tools, no way to debug, no way to revert a deployment, no way to upgrade a "contract" etc.

And it's so bad that repeated audits and bug hunts routinely fail to find issues in the code of even the simplest contracts.

> This is sufficiently rare that "traditional" finance hasn't come up with a product for that. Or maybe it has, but it's just as obscure as Gnosis.

Traditional finance doesn't have an answer for this. It's not rare at all. I personally work with people from Argentina, Denmark, Canada, Serbia, Croatia, Australia and Hong Kong. It's very common to work in a fully distributed online manner, using chat products to communicate. It's very easy to meet people in online hackathons, on Discord servers, on gaming platforms, etc these days, from all over the world.

Yes, programmability is always superior to non-programmability, as it is a superset of non-programmability. After all, you could always encode whatever non-configurable properties you wanted as part of the ruleset for the contract or asset.

> It doesn't make it not esoteric. There are no tools, no way to debug, no way to revert a deployment, no way to upgrade a "contract" etc.

At this point Solidity is 7 years old. There are more than 200K developers that have learned it (50K from ETHGlobal hackathons alone: https://ethglobal.com/), 20K stars on Github, 44 million smart contracts have been deployed to ETH mainnet, 60K people watched Devcon Colombia vids a couple weeks ago (6K attended in person), 20K attended ETHDenver earlier this year, etc.

There's tons of tools: Hardhat (https://hardhat.org/) - for JS based task running, deployment, testing, debugging, etc. Even deploys a local chain or allows you to fork a copy of mainnet locally to test against.

Foundry (https://getfoundry.sh/) - if you want to run your build/test/debug tool-chain in Solidity

WAGMI (https://wagmi.sh/) - Robust React hooks for client-side interactions with smart contracts

Ethers.js (https://docs.ethers.io/v5/) - Client side lib for interacting with Solidity primitives like 256 bit numbers

Block Explorers like https://etherscan.io/ or https://beaconcha.in/

In the pareto distribution of smart contracts, the most consequential contracts get the most eyeballs, and after they've been deployed for years without hacks, in spite of holding billions in user funds, you can be reasonably assured of their security. If not, I invite you to use your superior powers of analysis to find a bug in:

Uniswap V3: https://github.com/Uniswap/v3-core (Currently open $2.2M bug bounty plus additional $3M reward for the Universal Router and Permit2 contracts https://uniswap.org/bug-bounty)

Or Aave V3: https://docs.aave.com/developers/deployed-contracts/security..., which has been audited by ABDK, OpenZeppelin, Trail of Bits, Peckshield, and SigmaPrime (up to $250K for critical bugs: https://github.com/aave/bug-bounty).

Also, see: https://docs.openzeppelin.com/learn/upgrading-smart-contract... about upgrading smart contracts. Not always desirable, but of course, entirely possible, thanks to the proxy pattern. There's also the alternative of doing "migrations" by wrapping an asset in another contract.

blub

Don't you guys get tired of rehashing the same baseless arguments over and over again?

The value of decentralized platforms is that it gets rid of the tech bros and financial scams. Anyone, anywhere in the world, can make transactions independently, without having to blindly trust that the funds are actually there.

If people transacted using DeFI, there would be no FTX, no Coinbase, no VC trying to leech off the masses.

> The value of decentralized platforms is that it gets rid of the tech bros and financial scams.

Ah yes. No scams or tech bros. Except the implicit blind trust in programs written in esoteric programming languages on esoteric VMs that are rife with financial scams.

> If people transacted using DeFI, there would be no FTX, no Coinbase, no VC trying to leech off the masses.

Except that Uniswap is currently almost 100% automated bots "swapping" fictional tokens. And for anything useful you depend on centralized oracles. And for anything related to actual real world you must go through centralized entities.

> almost 100% automated bots "swapping" fictional tokens.

Even if that was true (which it is not) it is still valuable for the people that use it and for the liquidity providers who can employ their capital in a reasonably safe manner without relying on banks.

There's no such thing as "liquidity" in these fantasy land tokens. The absolute vast majority of things happening on uniswap is indistinguishable from Forex and flash loans, only in these fantasy tokens.

I don't need to care about the "absolute vast majority" of the tokens to make use of Uniswap to exchange, e.g, Storj/BAT/ETH for DAI/USDC/EURS and to spend it for real goods.

All I need is to have a market of people willing to trade. If you don't see the value of it, fine. But just go find someone who got their PayPal account frozen with no recourse and ask them how much they would value the ability to trade in a permissionless network.

> I don't need to care about the "absolute vast majority" of the tokens to make use of Uniswap

I didn't say "absolute vast majority of tokens". I said "absolute vast majority of things happening on uniswap".

> All I need is to have a market of people willing to trade.

There's absolutely a market for people willing to trade. If there wasn't, Amazon, eBay, AliExpress etc. wouldn't have been multi-trillion behemoths they are.

Uniswap isn't a "market for people willing to trade". It's a market for people willing to engage in currency speculation and flash loans using fantasy tokens. Even you are saying this. Quote: "make use of Uniswap to exchange, e.g, Storj/BAT/ETH for DAI/USDC/EURS". There's nothing new or revolutionary in this.

You are grasping as straws.

Speculation in markets are always going to exist. We have people making a living by speculating on the price of commodities, forex, company stock and event insurance policies. You calling them fantasy does not change the fact that there are people willing to trade them and does not change the fact that there is value in being able to do this without a central authority.

I gave the example of Storj/BAT precisely because these are business who are paying actual money for a service (Storj is paid for those hosting data, BAT distributed by Brave as a reward for those willing to receive privacy-protecting ads).

You could argue that the tokens themselves are not needed and that we could do it with cash, but that would be missing the point: such systems could not work on a worldwide scale as easily as they work now, and the speculation is a desired property of the system. Most people are getting into the network not because of the $5/month they get from seeing ads, but because of the possibility of the received tokens going up in value. At the same time, the people who do want to sell their tokens and get cash can do so.

> You are grasping as straws.

I am not. I am describing the absolute vast majority of cases on Uniswap.

> Speculation in markets are always going to exist. We have people making a living by speculating on the price of commodities, forex, company stock and event insurance policies.

Yes, but you're effusing that currency speculation and flash loans (majority of Uniswap) is this some new grand thing that never existed before. Reality disagrees.

> such systems could not work on a worldwide scale as easily as they work now

Forex was (and probably still is) a huge global market. I know because my friends spent a lot of time on it in early 2000s. Global market works easily, and at scale. For much longer and at much larger scale than anything crypto maximalists can even dream of.

> Most people are getting into the network not because of the $5/month they get from seeing ads, but because of the possibility of the received tokens going up in value.

Yup. Pure speculation. You're pretending it's something new, novel, and hasn't ever existed before.

> You're pretending it's something new, novel, and hasn't ever existed before.

At no point I said that what makes Uniswap (or crypto in general) valuable is the speculation in itself. The value of crypto is in the ability of doing things permissionlessly.

The value of Uniswap is not to that it is "better" than Forex. The value of Uniswap is that it lets people exchange value permissionlessly.

The value of ENS is not that it is "better" than the ICANN. The value of ENS is that it lets people control a stable, unique, global identity permissionlessly.

The value of crypto payment networks is not that it is "better" than Visa. The value of crypto payment networks is that it lets people make transactions around the world permissionlessly.

The value of Storj

> my friends spent a lot of time on (Forex) in early 2000s.

After jumping through all the required hoops, putting together minimum deposit requirements, passing KYC to show their legal standing with who-knows how many financial authorities... but what about those people who wanted to do Forex, but failed to pass any type of requirement? What about, e.g, people in Argentina who are forced to buy and sell dollars at the totally artificial rate imposed by the government?

> Global market works easily, and at scale.

If it works for you, great! Plenty of people who don't have the same luck.

> For much longer and at much larger scale than anything crypto maximalists can even dream of.

Nice strawman you got here. Where in this conversation was there any type of "maximalist" proclamation?

"And for anything useful you depend on centralized oracles."

chainlink etc

> chainlink etc

Which are entirely dependent on centralised oracles etc.

Hint: if there are only 2/5/10 centralised oracles providing you with data, no amount of fluffy "decentralised tamper-proof inputs" statements make them such.

Ok, I'll grant the game sounds cool.