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.

Bitcoin P2P Cryptocurrency

31 pointsby micaelwidellalmost 15 years ago

9 comments

fexlalmost 15 years ago
I wrote the software used at <a href="https://loom.cc" rel="nofollow">https://loom.cc</a>. That is a site which allows anyone to create and issue new types of digital assets. Typically the issuer will write a contract pledging to redeem the digital asset for a specific quantity of physical assets or services. Owners of the digital asset may spend it freely on the server, similar to how they spend cash in the physical world.<p>One thing I like about Loom is that an asset type has a single issuer. This means that an issuer can store some physical assets in a vault, create a digital asset type redeemable for those physical assets, and issue the digital asset type in a strictly limited quantity.<p>Then there's no question what a digital asset type is good for, because even if no exchangers or merchants accept the asset type, at least the issuer is contractually obligated to deliver the assets in storage or the promised services.<p>I wish Mr. Nakamoto (the author of Bitcoin) could devise a way for a digital currency to have a single issuer, but still trade in the wild like Bitcoin does now without a central server. However, that may be a logical contradiction and thus fanciful thinking.<p>So the best I've been able to come up with is Loom, which does indeed depend on a central server. But I would like to see many Loom servers with trading networks between them. That might be a way to realize the benefits of central servers while avoiding much of their risk.<p><pre><code> (invite 42215c198e22c724d7cfd7887bda2a57) </code></pre> P.S. Various source code references here:<p><a href="https://loom.cc/view/eae93b14a717a7f43e6354bade2a199ca2e3bef4971eddc5dba1636f026c94e7" rel="nofollow">https://loom.cc/view/eae93b14a717a7f43e6354bade2a199ca2e3bef...</a>
评论 #1533118 未加载
illumin8almost 15 years ago
The problem with all cyber-currencies is that they can be used for money laundering, so the feds will shut them down. I know, you're saying, "it uses crypto so you can't track it and it's decentralized so you can't shut it down." This is true, however, if you want to spend your bitcoins you need to convert them into some recognizable currency, which means you need a bank to do so, which can and will be shut down by the feds.<p>See the case of E-Gold for a similar comparison. E-Gold was doing something very similar: letting people transfer money anonymously and untraceably, but backing it with real gold in a vault so that it had some legitimate worth. The feds shut them down.<p>Crypto currency sounds great, but unfortunately it always breaks down where the rubber meets the road, or where the crypto currency gets converted into real currency. These places are easy to shut down by any government.
评论 #1533870 未加载
评论 #1533958 未加载
评论 #1533574 未加载
TimothyFitzalmost 15 years ago
"Third parties can’t prevent or control your transactions." But they can devalue the currency by minting money and keeping it. Also the currently is worthless by definition as no one is willing to pay money for it.<p>Both of these are common problems among all new currencies, and the most common way to defeat both is to have the currency issuer back their currency with something of known worth (gold, a fiat currency, etc). If conversion to/from the backing currency is common, then most transactions become bound by the problems of both currencies, for example paypal is effectively a currency that is more or less worth USD * ##%, because of the currency switching costs.<p>I can't wait to see a crypto-based-currency jump these hurdles, but I can't yet imagine how they'll successfully do it (and perhaps some already have that I don't know about?).
评论 #1533254 未加载
1053ralmost 15 years ago
This currency suffers from the same major problem that all limited supply commodity-based currencies have (assuming someone doesn't figure out a way to counterfeit it) - deflation. Whether your fixed money supply is based upon gold or hard cryptographic problems, a fixed money supply encourages people to hoard money rather than invest it, because their money will be worth more later. This causes the amount of money in circulation to fall, which causes even more deflation, etc. (Google for "deflationary spiral").<p>Basically, you have 3 choices for currency. You can have debt-money (most modern economies). This has the advantage that money is effectively created by the market based upon the mutual agreement of a lender and a borrower, which means that money is created and destroyed by the invisible hand. This is a good thing. It is problematic, however, in that you get problems if large sections of the economy ever start paying off their debts through very large productivity gains because that destroys the money supply. Also, it tends to support a "banker class", who does nothing but loan money and gets paid for very little work (capital allocation isn't THAT hard compared to how much you make doing it).<p>You can have commodity money, which is great because you don't get runaway inflation. But because of deflationary spirals, you can get runaway deflation. Also, people tend to hoard whatever commodities you are using, which are typically useful for industrial or other uses.<p>You can have fiat money, but that only works if you have an incorruptible central bank. Otherwise you end up like Nigeria.<p>Personally, I think we should use the Joule as a basic unit of currency. Although energy supplies can fluctuate, they tend to grow and shrink with the economy, which prevents either inflation or deflation. Different banks could offer different baskets of energy types (wind farm or solar farm output futures, barrels of oil, coal, etc.), and you don't end up with a banker class living off of everyone else, but you don't end up with hyperinflation or deflation. 500 MJ today would tend to buy a similar amount of things 10 years from now as today (maybe a little more because of efficiency gains, but not a lot more).
评论 #1533880 未加载
Groxxalmost 15 years ago
&#62;<i>To prevent A from transferring the already used coin to another user C, a public (but anonymous) list of all the previous transactions is collectively maintained by the network of Bitcoin nodes, and before each transaction the coin’s unusedness will be checked.</i><p>Sounds like that'll cost a lot of CPU/bandwidth... * continues reading <i></i> * I'm curious how the whole thing is organized...<p>edit: technical paper link[1] is on the FAQ page.<p>[1]: <a href="http://www.bitcoin.org/sites/default/files/bitcoin.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.bitcoin.org/sites/default/files/bitcoin.pdf</a><p>-----------<p>edit2: from the technical paper:<p><pre><code> The steps to run the network are as follows: 1) New transactions are broadcast to all nodes. 2) Each node collects new transactions into a block. 3) Each node works on finding a difficult proof-of-work for its block. 4) When a node finds a proof-of-work, it broadcasts the block to all nodes. 5) Nodes accept the block only if all transactions in it are valid and not already spent. 6) Nodes express their acceptance of the block by working on creating the next block in the chain, using the hash of the accepted block as the previous hash. </code></pre> So, existing data is <i>always</i> re-"proved", continuously, to out-pace any would-be attacker (the longest chain is "correct"). A "proof-of-work" involves repeated hashing of the previous hash + a nonce until X number of 0s prefix the resulting hash. The theory goes that as long as more people are working within the rules, they'll out-pace anyone trying to break the rules, by sheer combined-computing-might.<p>I'm curious though: what happens when transactions get large compared to cpus-which-can-prove-transactions? Wouldn't that cause the average rate of growth of the histories to decline, making it easier to attack individual lines?<p>I don't see how this can scale. But please correct me if I'm wrong... I like the idea of a distributed currency, and I'd love one to work.
评论 #1533296 未加载
micaelwidellalmost 15 years ago
I remember reading the book "The Sovereign Individual" which was written in the 90's. The authors argue that as the internet becomes more abundant, cybercurrencies will become popular and over time make it very hard for governments to collect taxes. This would in turn change the world in a lot of different ways.<p>Since I read the book, I have been waiting for someone to create something like this. It will be exciting to see if this will work and if "cyber currencies" will become more widely used.
评论 #1533639 未加载
d4ftalmost 15 years ago
A long time ago, in a land far away, I wanted to develop a p2p betting network without a vig. This would have made that chore a million times easier. Very cool stuff. What other applications might this be useful for?
评论 #1533035 未加载
mootothemaxalmost 15 years ago
Personally, I've always liked the look of eCache: <a href="https://ffij33ewbnoeqnup.onion.meshmx.com/" rel="nofollow">https://ffij33ewbnoeqnup.onion.meshmx.com/</a><p>Plus points for the top pun as well.<p>However, I think if we're ever going to escape the problems mentioned in other comments here, what we really need is a huge PayPal-style system to take off, integrate with common systems etc. Can you imagine the potential if eBay supported this? Shame it won't happen, as that's the kick it needs in my opinion :)
carl_almost 15 years ago
For anyone considering this, it's already been exploited by people running it across 1000s of vms/processors causing massive rate fluctuations.<p>One to skip imho.
评论 #1533689 未加载
评论 #1533338 未加载