Bill Gates Says that Bitcoin is bad For the Planet

Re:Bill Gates Says that Bitcoin is bad For the Planet by knuthsat on Monday March 08, 2021 @11:44AM (#26387808)

Unfortunately, there really aren't that many better. Full transaction privacy (addresses not visible to public + amounts not visible to public) does not exist in any of the top 10.

+ offline transactions should be possible (allowing sync with the chain whenever), but also I do not think any have that.

A good crypto-currency is like cash, with a nice physical gauge theory (allowing offline transactions) guaranteeing security + any transaction processing rate.

Every single cryptocurrency now is still a research project first.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill Gates Says that Bitcoin is bad For the Planet by DennisP on Monday March 08, 2021 @11:50AM (#26387916)

I'm having trouble seeing how you could have offline transactions that prevent doublespending. Could you expand on "nice physical gauge theory (allowing offline transactions)?"

If you have a good idea here, it might be possible to implement as a second layer on a chain with smart contracts.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill Gates Says that Bitcoin is bad For the Planet by knuthsat on Monday March 08, 2021 @01:14PM (#26389327)

I'm aware of approaches similar to this: https://gist.github.com/DavidBurkett/32e33835b03f9101666690b...

describing offline transactions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill Gates Says that Bitcoin is bad For the Planet by dlubarov on Tuesday March 09, 2021 @03:52AM (#26396742)

That title might be misleading; the doc is just about generating transactions without the sender and recipient needing to engage in an interactive protocol. It doesn't address double spending.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bill Gates Says that Bitcoin is bad For the Planet by DennisP on Tuesday March 09, 2021 @08:47AM (#26398682)

Ah, so this is a thing just because mimblewimble's private transactions are interactive. Regular blockchain transactions are already non-interactive.

[ Parent | on HN ]