News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The DAO, the Hack, the Soft Fork and the Hard Fork by ricksharp on Friday July 21, 2017 @09:14AM (#14820210)
From my reading, many comments are negative. I was interested in crypto currency, but after reading enough HN, it has made me very cautious. I especially enjoyed learning about the horrible design flaws of the Solidity language.

I think HN plays a vital role and these opinions by very intelligent people are very helpful to me.

Your comment also made me wonder about a sentiment analysis of HN comments. Something like:

"What does HN Think about It?" App

Re:The DAO, the Hack, the Soft Fork and the Hard Fork by heliumcraft on Friday July 21, 2017 @10:00AM (#14820578)
I would be wary about basing too many decisions based on HNs advice (or any other internet forum for that matter). Although you find some jewels sometimes, HN comment section is famous for typically having cynical comments, and you'll find that over the years a lots of tech that later became big were considered "hype" or plain bad here, from stuff like ruby on rails to VR to Deep Learning, to name just a few. With crypto currencies there is the additional aspect that for a lot of ppl this is a sort of religion with money involved, so comments and submissions can be very biased or downright nasty. By reading certain cryptocurrency forums or publications you even risk getting a very distorted version of the real story due to mountains of disinformation and an echo chamber effect.
Re:The DAO, the Hack, the Soft Fork and the Hard Fork by flush on Friday July 21, 2017 @09:20AM (#14820245)
Careful--there is a tendency for engineers to conflate superior technology with the success of a product.
Re:The DAO, the Hack, the Soft Fork and the Hard Fork by saurik on Friday July 21, 2017 @12:12PM (#14821641)
FWIW, many of these negative comments that I read and most remembered as making powerful points happily admitted, as part of the criticism (not a hedge against it), that the security issues inherent in Ethereum are due to the very factors that might have made it successful (such as making web developers think they can now write smart contracts by offering a language that looks like JavaScript and is even as quirky as JavaScript, and sweeping verification under the rug).

I actually see lots of parallels to companies like StackMob, Parse, and Firebase, which launched incredibly insecure "serverless" database products that didn't even support any notion of security and even as they added security would almost encourage "anyone can read and even write all of your data" in the documentation as even mentioning security in a tutorial made the product look hard to use.

But the result, of course, was that there were even companies offering dating apps that even claimed in their marketing "we are actually secure, unlike others", which were listed as featured users on the StackMob website, where you could just dump their entire database--including both offline Facebook access tokens for all the supposedly-anonymous users as well as the entire database of what they were saying to each other in their supposedly-private messages--as it was all public.

The market is fundamentally incapable of optimizing for secure products in the same way it is incapable of optimizing for open products. Both of these properties of a product are too complex for users to analyze and the benefits often come in some difficult to measure effect that happens on some difficult to predict timescale. We need to work on this problem before the "Internet of things" becomes too popular and we hit truly dystopian levels of insecure centrally-controlled products.

Re:The DAO, the Hack, the Soft Fork and the Hard Fork by graphitezepp on Friday July 21, 2017 @09:30AM (#14820342)
A meta sentiment analysis of HN comments about <subject> would be fascinating to me. Quantify the opinion of the "hivemind".
Re:The DAO, the Hack, the Soft Fork and the Hard Fork by willholloway on Friday July 21, 2017 @11:47AM (#14821431)
Be careful with these negative HN comments, they have cost me millions.

I first heard about bitcoin right here, when it hit $3 per coin for the first time. That was a huge event.

I had my own reservations about investing in bitcoin, but reading the comments here prejudiced my view.

VC's say it's not the losses that get to you, it's the companies you miss out on that scar you.

Not investing in Bitcoin at $3-5 was the single worst strategic decision of my life.

It was something that could have saved me years of toil, it was an easy ticket into the Big Game. A massive influx of economic energy, a fantastic counterstrike to entropy was right there, and it was easy. So easy to buy, granted it would have been not easy to hold through the dark times, the dips, the panic.

Oh, but if one did!

None of the hard work of starting a company, finding product-market fit, hiring a team, raising funds, fighting off the inevitable bandits that will come for their extortion money in the form of frivolous patent lawsuits...

None of that. Just easy, huge, beautiful, juicy investment capital right at my fingertips.

Oh the land that could have been bought! The development deals that would have flowed and the opportunities that could have been pursued. Instant entrance to Ruling Class, a ticket to the best club on earth.

'The most important men in town would come to fawn on me! They would ask me to advise them, Like a Solomon the Wise. "If you please, Reb Tevye..." "Pardon me, Reb Tevye..." Posing problems that would cross a rabbi's eyes! And it won't make one bit of difference if i answer right or wrong. When you're rich, they think you really know!"'

- If I Were A Rich Man, Fiddler on the Roof

And it's that emotion thats fueling crypto asset valuations right now, along with actual riches created by people who didn't give in to the negativity, the doubt, the fear.

The thing has value. People like this thing. They like it all over the world. There are infinite uses for something like money + code + global computer networks.

And a thing doesn't have to be perfect or solve every problem to have value.

The standard that commenters here hold crypto to is not the same standard they hold startup companies to.

With companies if they do something some people like enough to use, they say wow what a success, look they are a real company with profits!

I mean even if the only use for crypto currency is regulatory/legal arbitrage, that's insanely valuable and would have merited an investment.

Re:The DAO, the Hack, the Soft Fork and the Hard Fork by mikeash on Friday July 21, 2017 @12:29PM (#14821780)
HN comments might have saved you a ton, too. If you focus only on the missed opportunities and not the things you've done right, you're just making yourself unhappy for no good reason.
Re:The DAO, the Hack, the Soft Fork and the Hard Fork by willholloway on Friday July 21, 2017 @01:23PM (#14822239)
Personal happiness doesn't factor in to it, missing very early bitcoin was a result of flawed thinking, which I intend to correct.
Re:The DAO, the Hack, the Soft Fork and the Hard Fork by mikeash on Friday July 21, 2017 @01:50PM (#14822449)
Was it flawed thinking, or was it correct thinking that doesn't give correct results 100% of the time because the world is complicated and nothing can give correct results 100% of the time?