Hacker News Reader

Comment by austenallred | Hacker News Reader

In summary: "I don't think the Blockchain will be a winner because there's too much hype, it's not being developed by geeks, and it's not helping people do their existing jobs."

1. There is a lot of hype, sure, but there was around that whole Internet thing too.

2. The idea that geeks aren't working on it is patently absurd, and

3. I'm not sure how OP missed the jobs-to-be-done of financial transactions, proof of identity, proof of ownership, etc. Those are all pretty important jobs in trillion dollar industries.

View on HN

He's not saying it's not being developed by geeks. It clearly is! He's saying that the geeks responsible for keeping the global electronic financial system running haven't adopted it, as they have with other technologies that made their task easier. It's a subtle point (and not one I agree with as being dispositive).

OK, that makes more sense. I'm still not entirely sure there's a corollary, or that this is a good metric to go by - of course the work being done by geeks day to day isn't generally underwriting financial transactions, but that doesn't mean it's not important work to be done.

Those are all important jobs that are being done today using non blockchain methods.

How does blockchain perform better at sub critical mass?

The kinks have to be worked out, of course, the same way loading up the newspaper in 1992 wasn't exactly a superior experience to walking outside and getting the paper. But removing the friction of third-party verification changes the entire nature of financial transactions as we know it.

Getting the newspaper online had clear advantages even before the web took off: news junkies were one of the first adopters since e.g. it beat driving to the one place nearby which carried the NYT if you didn't live in NY.

In contrast, BitCoin offers nothing other that risk and uncertainty vs. using a credit card to buy online unless you're hoping to avoid law enforcement.

Re 3., tell me one problem that blockchain solves that a regular db and authentication can't?

Show me one db with auth that can't be maliciously altered.

Agree that many usecases would be better served by a centralised system, but many don't seem to grasp how useful an immutable database is.

Even with the advent of quantum computing and the havoc that Shor's algorithm will cause, there still won't be enough computing power to undo the Bitcoin blockchain.

Publication gives similar durability though.

(there's no need to do proof of work to track and publish a hash tree)

Financial transactions without third party verifying and/or underwriting the risk. That's everything.

Frictionless (well, one day) payments.

Consumers quite like the protections against fraud or loss which they currently have. How does that work without a trusted third party?

Similarly, what does “frictionless” even mean? Consumers have very little friction currently and the situation is decent for most vendors. How much better can a new system be, especially one with significant operating costs?

He's saying that no geek has introduced blockchain tech into their own day job in order to solve some pressing problem that they met in the context of their day job.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com