Hacker News Reader

Comment by Anonobread | Hacker News Reader

My point is running all the nodes in the cloud means that the users of those nodes don't own them.

> the user's choice to use the application in the first place.

Right, but if none of the users can even run the so called "peer-to-peer" component, what's the difference between that and run-of-the-mill centralized DB software? Either way nobody but the chosen few can directly access the DB.

View on HN

With blockchains, only the user has write access to the database with their cryptographic identity. Users are in full control.

Users can run a node of the peer-to-peer component if they want. Anyone can. They just don't have to.

> With blockchains, only the user has write access to the database with their cryptographic identity. Users are in full control.

That trait is far from being unique to blockchains.

But no, users aren't in full control of cloud software.

> Users can run a node of the peer-to-peer component if they want. Anyone can. They just don't have to.

After 18 months of block size debate, this is deja vu. No, anyone can't run a node if you make it cost $5k/mo

You are clearly talking to an Ethereum investor and not a programmer. A large part of the Ethereum hype is using blockchains where they are woefully the wrong tool for the job.

Haha, you didn't even take the effort to look at my profile. I write code. Like many Ethereum developers, I own ether. My comments apply to any EVM-based blockchain, and there will be many.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com