this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2024
1299 points (94.2% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26926 readers
3781 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 47 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (7 children)

as hostile as people are to block chain due to NFT's and bad implementations, the technology itself has its use cases. It's a great solution for information exchange that requires verification and Immutation. This makes them perfect for ledgers or transaction networks.

It's just there is so much bad PR regarding it everyone just discredits it. Not all of the block chain technologies are massively energy intensive per transaction, it's just many of the cryptocurrencies use the most intensive one because it's also arguably the most secure

[–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 35 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Absolute immutability is kind of a terrible property for a financial system though, cos it completely ignores the fact that mistakes and fraud happen and you need a way to forcefully recover funds other than "lol sucks to be you I guess".

The one actually genuinely useful application for this kind of technology that anyone has come up with is Certificate Transparency, but crypto people don't get excited about it cos it's not possible to make money from it.

[–] anivia@lemmy.ml 17 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You can implement clawback while still having an immutable blockchain. The transaction will always stay on the blockchain, but the funds can be recovered

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 17 points 8 months ago

this is how it should be anyway, you do not want any ledger or database to be mutable because it allows for integrity violations and will cause you to lose the ability to trust it. Even non-blockchain styles follow that principle.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 15 points 8 months ago (2 children)

You can revert transactions with immutable storage. For example git can do revert-commits.

[–] OneCardboardBox@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 8 months ago

Reverts work because users have equal write access to all the data. You can mess things up in the codebase, and even if you die of a heart attack 10m later, my revert is just as valid as your commit.

It's not really the same when every user has "sovereignty" over their address in the ledger. A bad actor has to consent to pushing a revert transaction onto the chain, or they have to consent to using a blockchain system where 3rd-party reversion is possible (which exists on some systems, but also defeats the concept of true sovereignty over your address).

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So, would the bitcoin equivalent be sending the BTC back?

[–] HaywardT@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yes. Clawback might be executed by having some entity or system of trust that is able to reverse a transaction by creating and posting the opposite of the faulty transaction. This is not built in to the current BTC.

[–] nothead@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Its a good concept, but it violates other concepts of the blockchain and would mean implementing a central authority with the power to force a transaction. Try telling a cryptobro to use a coin with a central bank and imagine the reaction you'd get.

At least with the way the regular banking system is set up, you can get a court order to enforce a correction without needing the consent of all parties, which is useful for fraud, theft, and even probate cases when one party is deceased and can no longer consent to a transaction. There are enough problems with our system to write an entire library of books ON TOP OF the library that already exists, but this feature is one of the few benefits.

[–] HaywardT@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 8 months ago

It could be done on a blockchain. It doesn't require a central authority.

It could be escrow-based. It could use majority rule or even Monte Carlo methods.

[–] zaphod@lemmy.ca 19 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (13 children)

the technology itself has its use cases.

Cool.

Name one successful example.

I mean, it's been, what, 15 years of hype? Surely there must be a successful deployment of a commercially viable and useful blockchain that isn't just a speculative cryptocurrency or derivative thereof, right?

Right?

[–] nothead@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (3 children)

I can't find the case study, but this blockchain project by IBM was implemented in Singapore and was shown to reduce customs processing times from several weeks to just several hours.

The general idea was that with a successful blockchain implementation, the Singapore government was able to expedite parts of their customs process which normally require intensive human labor, and the use of smart contracts removed the need for having documents sent and resent when all parties had access to the smart contract directly.

There are specific use cases where it can benefit existing processes, but people just think blockchain = crypto.

[–] paholg@lemm.ee 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The only selling point of blockchain is that it's trustless. This becomes a less-useful property when it comes to things in the real world, as you tend to need to trust at least one party.

For example, anything they achieved there with blockchain, they could have achieved with a simple government-run web service and a traditional database.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago

Except it's not though. Because you have to trust the majority, hence why you've had forks like Bitcoin Cash. Because those people wanted to trust someone else. "trustless" is just a buzzword, like everything else with Bitcoin

[–] reassure6869@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago

I can’t find the case study, but this blockchain project by IBM was implemented in Singapore and was shown to reduce customs processing times from several weeks to just several hours.

the real question is what part of this was specific to blockchain, something that would be difficult or impossible to do without it. if you want to put forward this argument you need to at least provide a simple, clear, coherent answer to that.

in this case, i could easily argue a sqlite db hosted on gitea would work better and theres no way to prove im wrong.

[–] Supermariofan67@programming.dev 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)
[–] kautau@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

Yes, both git and blockchain tech use merkle trees. No, that doesn't make git a blockchain

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 11 points 8 months ago (5 children)

There is nothing Crypto can do better than regular database. Immutability is not a desirable property.

[–] hglman@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It can coordinate disjoint actors without a 3rd party.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago

Does it though? Because to me the fact that the largest cryptos have had several forks is proof that no, in fact, the magic of crypto can't coordinate people. People coordinate people and then decide what to do with the technology.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Fisch@lemmy.ml 10 points 8 months ago (8 children)

Monero actually has very good uses. It does use POW but their algorithm is made to encourage using CPUs instead of GPUs and slower, power efficient devices, which makes it a lot less energy intensive than other POW cryptocurrencies.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] blackstampede@sh.itjust.works 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I find the actual technology very interesting. At one point I wanted to create a distributed research journal, and I spent some time trying to develop a trustless, immutable ledger that didn't have the high overhead that most blockchains have for proof of work. It was extremely cool, but nobody gives a shit unless it has coins lol

I look forward to 20 years from now when it gets resurrected and used for interesting things that don't involve cryptocurrency.

[–] kofe@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I remember reading a few years ago that the US postal service was looking into using it for voting. I haven't seen anything about it since, but it did peak my interest. I'd love to see it used for research if possible, too, but then I can barely understand these decentralized social media platforms so my opinion isn't worth much with tech

[–] blackstampede@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago

That, to me, seems like an ideal use case. My only reservation is that I think it would be bungled in implementation, then pushed without enough testing and validation, then hacked due to the bungled implementation, and then rejected forever because it was hacked once lol

[–] GamingChairModel@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

This makes them perfect for ledgers or transaction networks.

It doesn't scale well, so it generally works best for ledgers of relatively small scale. Anything that might need to go beyond that small scale will run into technical/performance issues.

[–] reassure6869@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago (3 children)

the technology itself has its use cases.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15RTC22Z2xI I would love to hear the counterarguments. video is <15 mins, academic setting.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

Just responding that I did see this, The video has peaked my curiosity and I plan on watching it later when I have more free time outside of midterm's season

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

His arguments are:-

We don't need blockchain to stop problems from happening because we have a [super efficient, cheap, accessible, well constructed] legal system to correct those problems when they occur.

We don't need distributed ledgers to store the data because we can just trust Amazon Web services.

[–] reassure6869@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That's a unique interpretation

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You wanted counter-arguments.

Trusting the legal system (9m23s,11m34s) and Amazon (12m35s) are vastly inferior to what blockchain offers.

[–] reassure6869@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago

I did, and am still

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=15RTC22Z2xI

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] reassure6869@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago

thats fine, but installing youtube-local and a redirector addon is probably better than relying on some bot to pick one of 10 possible alternative front ends.