Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I've been studying the space for a few years now and from what I gather is similar to what @saurik is saying. Blockchain-based applications are prime candidates for adversarial networks where a centralized entity will at some point be incentivized to take actions that benefit itself and not the network.

This is why I believe that these applications have little use in spaces other than finance. For example, the NYSE is governed by a central entity that acts as a market maker, buying and selling securities to "make" the market. This is all done behind closed doors in a way that the vast majority of people do not understand. A Blockchain-based market maker provides much more transparency and stability than a centralized one governed by human decisions and thus emotions.

However, very few, if any Blockchain projects are truly decentralized as they are still developed and changed by a central organization. We need more projects that are simple, efficient, financial tools that are immutable on the Blockchain that people can use and there is no incentive from a central authority to change the system in order to achieve their goals or boost their profits.



The owner of NYSE isn't a market maker. ICE provides exchange and clearing services. Some of their largest customers are market makers.

There is no evidence that a Blockchain based approach would provide more transparency or stability. In fact the opposite is likely true.


These kinds of errors - claiming an exchange is a market maker for example - seem to be minor errors. But every single argument in favor of a blockchain seems to have one or two of them which make the argument flawed.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: