TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Ask HN: Blockchains

8 pointsby sfrechtlingalmost 10 years ago
More and more noise seems to be appearing about blockchains. I see the small benefit of use in transactions between organisations, but am struggling for the case for private blockchains and some points of cryptocurrency in general. I don’t know if this is the best place to ask, but everything online is full of jargon and is inaccessible to me.<p>I have a few questions:<p>- What are the benefits of using a private blockchain (should I be thinking of it as a replacement to a General Ledger?)? Is this just another name for a ledger with auditable history?<p>- Can a blockchain exist without mining or without a currency&#x2F;coin? Will all private blockchains need a “coin”? (eg the Goldman Sachs coin or ABC plumbing coin?)<p>And another couple of broader questions<p>- What keeps people interested in a blockchain (and currency) once all of the easy mining is done eg, for people joining later?<p>- I see that transaction costs for bitcoin keep rising, is that related to the size of the blockchain?<p>- I thought bitcoin was supposed to be decentralised – doesn’t a group of centralised developers have the ability to change everything about the currency?

3 comments

olalondealmost 10 years ago
Disclaimer: I work full time on blockchain tech. My answers in order:<p>I&#x27;ve never heard the term private blockchain and therefore not sure what you are referring to. If you mean a blockchain that is exclusively mined and used by a single entity, I don&#x27;t see the point. Perhaps people are piggy backing on the &quot;blockchain&quot; buzzword while creating something that is quite different?<p>A blockchain cannot exist without a currency&#x2F;coin. Blockchains need a reward mechanism for miners who &quot;protect&quot; it and a cost for submitting transactions to prevent spam.<p>What keeps miners interested after all mining is done is an open question. As long as there is a reward for mining, there will be miners but if that reward drops too low, we could see the network&#x27;s hash rate drop substantially (miners quitting their job) and the blockchain would become more vulnerable to double spending attacks (a single miner intentionally &quot;undoing&quot; a large number of blocks).<p>There is no fixed transaction cost, each miner is free to decide how much they &quot;charge&quot; to mine transactions. I wasn&#x27;t aware that transaction costs had kept rising. Keep in mind that as the BTC&#x2F;USD price fluctuates constantly, the average transaction cost in USD might change often while remaining the same in BTC.<p>In theory, the Satoshi client (original bitcoin) developers could release a new Bitcoin software which changes the Bitcoin consensus rules and anyone downloading this new release would be participating in a new &quot;altcoin&quot; which would be separate from the original Bitcoin. They could send or receive Bitcoins to people using the old software. For the Bitcoin protocol to change in a significant way, a large number of people would have to agree on the new rules.
评论 #10033728 未加载
faithfonealmost 10 years ago
I&#x27;ll try and answer your last three questions in order. I&#x27;m not an expert though, only a casual observer.<p><i>- What keeps people interested in a blockchain (and currency) once all of the easy mining is done eg, for people joining later?</i><p>What keeps me and many others interested is the utopian vision of traditional banks and currencies being disrupted, and bitcoin becoming the de facto global currency of choice.<p><i>- I see that transaction costs for bitcoin keep rising, is that related to the size of the blockchain?</i><p>Raising the transaction fee gives miners incentive to verify your transaction before others. It&#x27;s not directly related to the size of the blockchain.<p><i>- I thought bitcoin was supposed to be decentralised – doesn’t a group of centralised developers have the ability to change everything about the currency?</i><p>It is decentralized. There is a group of developers overseeing the Bitcoin protocol, but for any change to be made, there must be consensus.
评论 #10033754 未加载
jabgrabdthrowalmost 10 years ago
&gt; Is this just another name for a ledger with auditable history?<p>Yes.<p>&gt; Can a blockchain exist without mining or without a currency&#x2F;coin?<p>Yes, but the interesting ones use currency&#x2F;coins because you can use incentives other than the legal system to secure the database.<p>&gt; What keeps people interested in a blockchain (and currency) once all of the easy mining is done eg, for people joining later?<p>Securing databases without using the legal system in order to outmaneuver some issues intrinsic to legal systems.<p>&gt; - I see that transaction costs for bitcoin keep rising, is that related to the size of the blockchain?<p>It is related to many things. In bitcoin&#x27;s case, the primary cost is the consensus algorithm, ie the network has to &quot;outpay&quot; any potential attacker.<p>&gt; I thought bitcoin was supposed to be decentralised – doesn’t a group of centralised developers have the ability to change everything about the currency?<p>This is a nuanced topic, we could go in depth about &quot;what does &#x27;decentralized really mean&quot;, or even worse, &quot;what does &#x27;bitcoin&#x27; really mean&quot; but I find this too hard to think about.