Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by almost_usual | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

almost_usual

> May the entire of crypto be brought down with it

Pretty hard to get rid of decentralized systems.

View on HN

Crypto is pretty centralised thanks to these exchanges and many blockchains running solely on AWS such as Ethereum.

Crypto being ‘decentralised’ is a well known myth.

You don't need exchanges for cryptocurrencies to work, they just make onboarding easier.

Do you mean that, once on-boarded, crypto holders would only need to trade with fellow crypto holders?

Ethereum running “solely” on AWS is a myth. If AWS were shut down, the chain would continue as usual.

Even Vitalik knows that Ethereum is centralised.

> If AWS were shut down, the chain would continue as usual.

Continue laundering money for foreign state actors and narcotics businesses, sounds about right as this is is what crypto is good for.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-nj/pr/united-states-seized-and-...

Do you think it would continue or not? Your comments seem to hold conflicting points.

We both know that crypto is only used for and that the main use case is criminal activities, so it's only right that the whole thing should be shut down by law.

It's already impossible for crypto to become part of the current financial system so the only way to stop this scourge is to make crypto illegal starting with the exchanges down to the blockchains.

Blockchains have absolutely no use case at all.

You seem to be confusing would with should?

You're right, it must be shut down by law.

That should be much better.

You're free to hold whatever opinions you want, but I don't see how they're relevant to this conversation.

It's not productive to spread falsehoods about how blockchains are hosted.

I don't see any sources for any of your claims so I've completely ignored it as you have no hard sources.

Okay, then it should be just as fair for everyone to ignore your claim that Ethereum runs "solely on AWS".

No, since there are clearly cited sources on the centrality of Ethereum on AWS and everyone from Vitalik and others knows it.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/3-cloud-providers-accounting-...

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2022/10/12/morgan-stanley-...

Both your sources show that only 30-35% of nodes run on AWS. They seem to support my point that Ethereum would continue running during an AWS outage, not your point that Ethereum runs "solely" on AWS.

Furthermore, the cointelegraph article misquotes a Messari report as if it's discussing the current state of Ethereum as having central points of failure, when it's really discussing a hypothetical upgrade to Ethereum that was never considered nor built.

Finally, node percentages don't actually matter in terms of chain uptime. What really matters are staking validator percentages, since they are what determine chain building and finality.

And?

This doesn't change the fact that centralisation is still a massive problem with Ethereum and it is still a big enough problem that everyone knows that the crypto infra of choice is to coalesce on AWS.

Infura deploys Ethereum nodes solely on AWS further centralising Ethereum on there thanks to a Consensys and AWS partnership.

The entire opposite of decentralisation in crypto.

Again, you're free to hold whatever additional opinions you want. I'll respectfully pass on discussing those, as my original intent was to correct a particular piece of misinformation.

What misinformation? I think I missed it or it wasn't misinformation in the first place.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com