Re:Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later
by joosters on Sunday November 24, 2019 @02:03AM
(#21618893)
If you have to trust an oracle, you have essentially thrown away all of the plusses of decentralisation/trustlessness. At that point, the blockchain becomes pointless busywork, useful only for duping mug investors.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later
by nootropicat on Sunday November 24, 2019 @06:55AM
(#21619854)
The impossibility of a full elimination of trust, for any particular problem, doesn't mean a partial reduction isn't valuable.
If you disagree, would you be fine with changing the political and justice system of your country into a fully opaque black box? As in, you still can vote for the policies you want, but it's impossible to know how the government functions, what are the reasons for its decisions, or even who personally forms the government, to the point it could be run by aliens or an ai. Sometimes people are arrested for crimes, but it's impossible to know what's the evidence or even what the crime was, even after sentencing.
If you don't consider this equivalent to the currently utilized system in your country, you have to agree that there's value in trust minimization.
Re:Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later
by SpicyLemonZest on Sunday November 24, 2019 @01:25PM
(#21622253)
I think we're detached from the original discussion. "That's what oracles do" was a response to the problem that "smart contracts cannot be easily modified if they are found to be buggy". Trust minimization is valuable, but a smart contract that allows an oracle to unilaterally override its terms doesn't minimize trust in any meaningful way.
Re:Hard Problems in Cryptocurrency: Five Years Later
by monospaceisgood on Sunday November 24, 2019 @07:21AM
(#21619976)
Infiltrate a government or a justice system require a lot of time and resources.
A blockchain? not so much
You basically replace trust (with doubts) with faith.