The bitcoin blockchain is a crappy database that's incredibly secure because it's backed by an amazing amount of irreversible thermodynamic energy. Anything you put into it is there forever, even quantum computing couldn't undo anything a few hours old. That's all the public needs to know.
These articles are a bit tiring, despite being an aficionado somewhat keen for a blockchain winter.
The analogy is to nuclear winter (life after a hypothetical nuclear world war) or AI winter (after the fall of the Soviet Union led to decreased military-funded spending on AI).
Hello, I've started Awesome Blockchains [1]. The idea is to collect samples (and recipes) on how to build your own blockchains (from scratch) in JavaScript, Ruby, and friends. [1] https://github.com/openblockchains/awesome-blockchains
They are two different things.
A Blockchain is the internet of money but some tokens and crypto-currencies are not backed by anything else than trust which could mean they could be seen as fiat currencies.
The reason why the Economist is wrong is that the writer doesn't understand how mining and block issuance work so he doesn't see a reward token as a proof of work. PoW is the exact opposite of fiat because you don't have to trust the miner, you can check that he's done actual work to get that coin issued to him.
11 comments
[ 36.0 ms ] story [ 497 ms ] threadjavascript:window.location="https://m.facebook.com/l.php?u="+encodeURIComponent(window.l...
alternative:
https://zerobin.net/?9b41630b08e38f96#FAC6oUt+oqX9fwxhamtom+...
The bitcoin blockchain is a crappy database that's incredibly secure because it's backed by an amazing amount of irreversible thermodynamic energy. Anything you put into it is there forever, even quantum computing couldn't undo anything a few hours old. That's all the public needs to know.
These articles are a bit tiring, despite being an aficionado somewhat keen for a blockchain winter.
The WSJ says Blockchain is the Internet of Money
The Economist says Bitcoin is fiat.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15315813
The reason why the Economist is wrong is that the writer doesn't understand how mining and block issuance work so he doesn't see a reward token as a proof of work. PoW is the exact opposite of fiat because you don't have to trust the miner, you can check that he's done actual work to get that coin issued to him.