6 ms·

If you don’t believe that there is value in a distributed self replicating Byzantine tolerant state machine, that’s fair, everybody is entitled to their opinion

by tzumby 5y ago

If you don’t believe that there is value in a distributed self replicating Byzantine tolerant state machine, that’s fair, everybody is entitled to their opinion.

yannoninator 5y ago
what? english please? edit: why the flagging? do I seriously need to go get a PhD from MIT to understand this and why this is important?
- dang 5y ago
  If you genuinely want to understand something, you need to ask about it in a way that expresses that intent. A snarky putdown in the form of a question does the opposite. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=disambiguate%20burden%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
Considering that it hasn't produced any value of note in 13 years, I'm gonna go out a limb here and say I don't think it's worth 2% of the entire world's wealth - and certainly not 3% of the world's energy.
- xpe 5y ago
  From what I can tell, much of this discussion seems to be characterized by people miscommunicating. > Considering that _it_ hasn't produced any value of note in 13 years... What do you mean by "it"? Do you mean (a) Bitcoin in particular; (b) some/many/most/all cryptocurrencies; (c) a distributed self replicating Byzantine tolerant state machine? Or something else? The comment by tzumby meant (c). Generally, the HN thread was about (b), best I can tell.
- xpe 5y ago
  In this comment, I'm assuming you are talking about Bitcoin. > I don't think it's worth 2% of the entire world's wealth Taken literally, if 2% of the world's wealth is in Bitcoin, so isn't that its value, by definition? I'm not trying to nitpick. I'm trying to push back on what seems to be a glossing over of the fundamentals. I wonder if what you mean is that you don't think it is _wise_ for people to put so much of their assets in the form of Bitcoin. Now, if we want to have the discussion of "how has Bitcoin affected the economy?" it is not enough to only look at a snapshot of how wealth is allocated at one instant of time. We should be looking at a differential view; i.e. before and after. In particular, an economist would ask questions such as... 1. How has Bitcoin changed transaction costs? Who bears these costs? Over what time frame? 2. To what degree does the structure of Bitcoin provide advantages relative to other assets? 3. How does the development of Bitcoin factor into a longer-term view of experimentation and innovation? 4. To what degree has wealth been reallocated due to Bitcoin? To what degree did it disrupt existing wealth patterns? And so on...
  - onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
    People paid a lot of money for Enron stock before it exploded. Did that mean it was worth $70B the day before it exploded and suddenly it was worth nothing when people found out it was actually all a fraud? Enron wasn't actually producing any value. Neither are self-replicating Byzantine fault tolerant systems. Anything they can do can be done hundreds of orders of magnitude more efficiently. And nothing they are doing /requires/ the inefficiencies. I mean, obviously people at Enron were doing /something/ in the same way Bitcoin is. And obviously investors were paying a lot of money for that at one point and then stopped paying for it when it became clear that /something/ was mostly fraud.
    - xpe 5y ago
      What is your definition of value / worth, as used above? I can see that it is not market capitalization.
    - xpe 5y ago
      Market capitalization varies over time, sometimes quite rapidly, because it (partly) depends on human perception. Am I detecting some conceptual discomfort with how market valuations work? You wouldn't be the first.
- baby 5y ago
  You’re barking at the wrong tree. Bitcoin is not bft
xpe 5y ago
I don't think anyone is denying that there is value in any subset of the following: * distributed systems * self-replicating systems * Byzantine fault tolerant systems * state machines The tweets by Pinboard are largely talking about social and societal issues. Both technical and societal issues are important. They are intertwined.
- baby 5y ago
  Pinboard ignores the tech because he doesn’t understand it, yet he talks about societal impact without understanding it as well.
  - xpe 5y ago
    This is a blanket, unsupported statement. It isn't persuasive. > ignores the tech ... Not true. He doesn't ignore the technology of Bitcoin. > because he doesn’t understand it Please show evidence of this. You are not "in his/her/their head", nor is it likely that you've had a conversation where you can assess. It is more likely that Pinboard disagrees with you largely because of value differences.
    - baby 5y ago
      “Of bitcoin” yet targets all cryptocurrencies

by tzumby 5y ago

If you don’t believe that there is value in a distributed self replicating Byzantine tolerant state machine, that’s fair, everybody is entitled to their opinion.

yannoninator 5y ago

what? english please? edit: why the flagging? do I seriously need to go get a PhD from MIT to understand this and why this is important?

dang 5y ago
If you genuinely want to understand something, you need to ask about it in a way that expresses that intent. A snarky putdown in the form of a question does the opposite. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=disambiguate%20burden%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago

Considering that it hasn't produced any value of note in 13 years, I'm gonna go out a limb here and say I don't think it's worth 2% of the entire world's wealth - and certainly not 3% of the world's energy.

xpe 5y ago
From what I can tell, much of this discussion seems to be characterized by people miscommunicating. > Considering that _it_ hasn't produced any value of note in 13 years... What do you mean by "it"? Do you mean (a) Bitcoin in particular; (b) some/many/most/all cryptocurrencies; (c) a distributed self replicating Byzantine tolerant state machine? Or something else? The comment by tzumby meant (c). Generally, the HN thread was about (b), best I can tell.
xpe 5y ago
In this comment, I'm assuming you are talking about Bitcoin. > I don't think it's worth 2% of the entire world's wealth Taken literally, if 2% of the world's wealth is in Bitcoin, so isn't that its value, by definition? I'm not trying to nitpick. I'm trying to push back on what seems to be a glossing over of the fundamentals. I wonder if what you mean is that you don't think it is _wise_ for people to put so much of their assets in the form of Bitcoin. Now, if we want to have the discussion of "how has Bitcoin affected the economy?" it is not enough to only look at a snapshot of how wealth is allocated at one instant of time. We should be looking at a differential view; i.e. before and after. In particular, an economist would ask questions such as... 1. How has Bitcoin changed transaction costs? Who bears these costs? Over what time frame? 2. To what degree does the structure of Bitcoin provide advantages relative to other assets? 3. How does the development of Bitcoin factor into a longer-term view of experimentation and innovation? 4. To what degree has wealth been reallocated due to Bitcoin? To what degree did it disrupt existing wealth patterns? And so on...
- onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
  People paid a lot of money for Enron stock before it exploded. Did that mean it was worth $70B the day before it exploded and suddenly it was worth nothing when people found out it was actually all a fraud? Enron wasn't actually producing any value. Neither are self-replicating Byzantine fault tolerant systems. Anything they can do can be done hundreds of orders of magnitude more efficiently. And nothing they are doing /requires/ the inefficiencies. I mean, obviously people at Enron were doing /something/ in the same way Bitcoin is. And obviously investors were paying a lot of money for that at one point and then stopped paying for it when it became clear that /something/ was mostly fraud.
  - xpe 5y ago
    What is your definition of value / worth, as used above? I can see that it is not market capitalization.
  - xpe 5y ago
    Market capitalization varies over time, sometimes quite rapidly, because it (partly) depends on human perception. Am I detecting some conceptual discomfort with how market valuations work? You wouldn't be the first.
baby 5y ago
You’re barking at the wrong tree. Bitcoin is not bft

xpe 5y ago

I don't think anyone is denying that there is value in any subset of the following: * distributed systems * self-replicating systems * Byzantine fault tolerant systems * state machines The tweets by Pinboard are largely talking about social and societal issues. Both technical and societal issues are important. They are intertwined.

baby 5y ago
Pinboard ignores the tech because he doesn’t understand it, yet he talks about societal impact without understanding it as well.
- xpe 5y ago
  This is a blanket, unsupported statement. It isn't persuasive. > ignores the tech ... Not true. He doesn't ignore the technology of Bitcoin. > because he doesn’t understand it Please show evidence of this. You are not "in his/her/their head", nor is it likely that you've had a conversation where you can assess. It is more likely that Pinboard disagrees with you largely because of value differences.
  - baby 5y ago
    “Of bitcoin” yet targets all cryptocurrencies