| ▲ | stale2002 6 days ago |
| > There is nothing that a Stripe controlled blockchain could offer that a database could not. There absolutely is. Its called having access to the ecosystem. The money features that exist in the current blockchain landscape are simply a better developer ecosystem, with many more features, than the non existent "Database driven", uhh money tools. Blockchains are no longer about the singular feature of having a trustless ledger that bitcoin tried to provide. No, instead it is about a whole variety of money related features and developer ecosystems that simply do not exist outside of the crypto space. Recreating all that exists in the crypto space, but using a database instead, sounds like a lot of wasted work when you can just use the tools that are already available. |
|
| ▲ | paperpunk 6 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| I think this may be an insightful comment. It's not for lack of trying that traditional, "database driven" cross-border payments are costly and unreliable. SWIFT have thrown technology at this problem: GPI, Swift Go, ISO20022, etc. Unfortunately the ecosystem has an extremely weak technical culture. Banks rarely follow the standards as written – your perfectly crafted API payment may be re-keyed by a low-paid human operator on a slow, buggy UI written a decade ago. I could believe that the developer experience and technical standards of the participants is where the value lies right now. The one thing I'm not sure on is to what extent those ecosystems depend on reduced regulatory scrutiny compared to banks. |
|
| ▲ | jrm4 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| All pointless. None of those things require a blockchain and are all made less efficient by doing them that way. Again, truly decentralized cryptocurrency ADDS slow clunky overhead; that's the price of decentralization. Everything you're imagining is ALL done much easier with good ol' databases et al. |
| |
| ▲ | stale2002 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > ADDS slow clunky overhead; that's the price of decentralization. Actually, you can just use a federated blockchain. > Everything you're imagining is ALL done much easier with good ol' databases There is an ecosystem of 10s of thousands of developers that can run specifically ethereum contracts on a database, while being compatible with all existing stable coin onramps? You have to show me the 10s of thousands of developers is the point. Thats an ecosystem. It means that you can connect to all of these existing apps and on ramps, and smart contracts and more. There isn't a database version of that. | | |
| ▲ | jrm4 5 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah, as grumpy op, I should slow down and give your ideas more credit. Very optimistically -- what you're saying is correct. There is a best case scenario in which Stripe et al observe all of these already working and perhaps popular financial use-case things (perhaps to compete with bigger banks or just because they see/believe it as the future) and encourage adoption. I'd bet this won't much happen, but I really do hope I'm wrong. | |
| ▲ | dmbche 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | What are the tens of thousands (?) of devs doings that is more efficient by doing it on a blockchain is the question Hint: the point of "proof of work" is to do more work than necessary | | |
| ▲ | stale2002 5 days ago | parent [-] | | > that is more efficient by doing it on a blockchain Well one major thing is what I just brought up that is more efficient thing is the developer experience. Being able to fork an open source integration that has all of these money and smart contract features built in is much easier than trying to figure out how to design a smart contract system from scratch that doesn't use a blockchain. |
|
| |
| ▲ | utyop22 5 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Indeed. People don't seem to evaluate the benefits of centralisation do they.. |
|
|
| ▲ | vanviegen 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > the non existent "Database driven", uhh money tools. Are you claiming here that things like banks and stock markets don't exist? Genuinely curious though; what kind of 'money related features', that have no non-crypto counterparts, are you referring to? |
| |
| ▲ | stale2002 6 days ago | parent [-] | | > Are you claiming here that things like banks and stock markets don't exist? No, I am claiming that I couldn't spin up a bank or a stock market on my laptop, that is compatible with all the other stock markets, by forking a git repo. > that have no non-crypto counterparts, are you referring to? The git repo fork button, that slots right into a whole ecosystem that has 10s of thousands of contributors to it. Ease of use, and developer experience and existing markets and existing integrations with all of these businesses is a big deal. It doesn't matter if someone could hypothetically spend 1 billion dollars recreating all of that, using a database. Because that would require 1 billion dollars. | | |
| ▲ | kiitos 6 days ago | parent [-] | | > No, I am claiming that I couldn't spin up a bank or a stock market on my laptop, that is compatible with all the other stock markets, by forking a git repo. yeah, and that's kind of very much by design -- regulations that prevent this kind of yolo nonsense are a feature and not a bug | | |
| ▲ | stale2002 5 days ago | parent [-] | | > and that's kind of very much by design Ok, so then Yes I have brought up a valid and in demand usecase, you just don't like it. Yes the point of all of this stuff is to make this usecase easy. Thats a real usecase. You just don't like that its easy. | | |
| ▲ | kiitos 5 days ago | parent [-] | | it's in demand by malicious actors, is the point we used to have markets that worked exactly like what you're describing, it immediately led to disastrous consequences for the broad base of society, and when we figured that problem out, we solved it with rules and regulations specifically designed to prevent abuses you can suggest reifications of those rules and regulations to make them better, but what you can't do is suggest throwing them out altogether, that's pure regression | | |
| ▲ | stale2002 5 days ago | parent [-] | | So then yes, it is in demand, there is a usecase, you just don't like the usecase. > but what you can't do is suggest throwing them out altogether Actually, that seems to be exactly whats happening. Bitcoin has been around for 17 years, and it and other blockchain technologies have only become better, more prevalent, more mainstream, and most importantly, more legal. The freaking president/vice president seem to be pretty pro crypto as well. I've been following bitcoin since 2010, and never in my wildest dreams back then would I have thought that the president would launch his own "Trump coin", for example. Crypto won. Beyond everyone's most extreme expectations. The "regulators" lost. Its over. You can cry about it, but that doesn't change the fact that it won. | | |
| ▲ | kiitos 5 days ago | parent [-] | | you're using trump coin as an exemplar? the obviously unconstitutional grift that perfectly demonstrates all of my points about the importance of regulations? crypto won?? get out of your bubble, my dude, you're high on your own supply | | |
| ▲ | stale2002 2 days ago | parent [-] | | > you're using trump coin as an exemplar? Its an exemplar of "The government definitely isn't going to go after the crypto space, as even something as ridiculous as this is allowed". | This is because you previously said "what you can't do is suggest throwing them out altogether". But if freaking trump coin exists, then it looks like, yes, we actually can throw out all the rules. > crypto won?? It won the regulation war, yes. Its not going away. If the president launched his own meme coin, then everyone else is safe. | | |
| ▲ | kiitos 2 days ago | parent [-] | | when you said "crypto won" you weren't talking about a regulation war, you were talking about a war between crypto and banking in general, in that war crypto has obviously not won, or even really entered the fight trump coin is obviously illegal, it has no bearing on any discussion of policy but you're obviously fully bought-in to the hype, so, you do you my dude | | |
| ▲ | stale2002 a day ago | parent [-] | | > when you said "crypto won" you weren't talking about a regulation war Yes that is what I was talking about. Its why I said: 'Crypto won. Beyond everyone's most extreme expectations. The "regulators" lost. ' You see that 'The "regulators" lost' part? That is where I was referencing the regulation war. Its why I used the word regulators. Crypto won, extremely, in the regulation war. It was in direct response to this statement: "but what you can't do is suggest throwing them out altogether" > trump coin is obviously illegal Ok. So then yes crypto was able to throw out the rules altogether. The rules are gone. They have been thrown out. Your original statement of "you can't do is suggest throwing them out altogether" isn't true. | | |
| ▲ | kiitos 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | ok well we are not talking about the same thing, keep on carrying that torch, i wish you the best |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | procaryote 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Could you give an example of such a "money related feature"? |
|
| ▲ | dmbche 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > No, instead it is about a whole variety of money related features and developer ecosystems that simply do not exist outside of the crypto space. Like what? Speculation? |
