undefined | Better HN

0 pointsscott_w3y ago0 comments

> The statement always takes the form: there are no use cases that aren’t better solved by (some centralized company).

2 things:

1. No it doesn’t.

2. Nobody cares.

“Centralised” isn’t a problem. If it causes problems you need to demonstrate that and then show how blockchain solves that problem and how existing solutions can’t. I’ve seen no examples of that (Uniswap isn’t an example).

0 comments

whatisweb33y ago

> No it doesn’t.

This statement verbatim is regularly repeated on HN - users pointing to Stripe, PayPal, Venmo, Apple, whatever as being better solutions than the proposed crypto/web3 ideas.

> “Centralised” isn’t a problem.

Not for you, maybe.

Some users will be happy to manage the additional complexity and risks of handling non-custodial assets on Ethereum L2s in order to achieve lower fees and take-rates, privacy preservation, censorship resistance, and programmable composability.

A very simple example is a domain name. Outside of blockchain networks, we have no mechanism for non-custodial ownership and peer-to-peer transfer of a domain name asset - like you would exchange cash where two parties simply swap the bills directly without the need for a third-party to oversee the exchange and potentially extract rent.

scott_wOP3y ago

> A very simple example is a domain name. Outside of blockchain networks, we have no mechanism for non-custodial ownership and peer-to-peer transfer of a domain name asset - like you would exchange cash where two parties simply swap the bills directly without the need for a third-party to oversee the exchange and potentially extract rent.

Prove it’s a problem

whatisweb33y ago

User Alice and Bob want to swap domain names they own, but using an escrow to facilitate the trade safely and mitigate counterparty risk - and they want to do this instantly, without sharing private data online, and without paying a % commission to a rent extracting corporate third party entity.

Blockchain enables this use case, for a small fixed fee that is directed to users upholding the protocol - which may include Alice and Bob themselves as token holders and block producers.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsscott_w3y ago0 comments

> The statement always takes the form: there are no use cases that aren’t better solved by (some centralized company).

2 things:

1. No it doesn’t.

2. Nobody cares.

0 comments

whatisweb33y ago

> No it doesn’t.

This statement verbatim is regularly repeated on HN - users pointing to Stripe, PayPal, Venmo, Apple, whatever as being better solutions than the proposed crypto/web3 ideas.

> “Centralised” isn’t a problem.

Not for you, maybe.

scott_wOP3y ago

Prove it’s a problem

whatisweb33y ago

Blockchain enables this use case, for a small fixed fee that is directed to users upholding the protocol - which may include Alice and Bob themselves as token holders and block producers.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse