Skip to content

Comment on Ask HN: Blockchain success stories that did need to be decentralised?

Comments

I've been studying the space for a few years now and from what I gather is similar to what @saurik is saying. Blockchain-based applications are prime candidates for adversarial networks where a centralized entity will at some point be incentivized to take actions that benefit itself and not the network.

This is why I believe that these applications have little use in spaces other than finance. For example, the NYSE is governed by a central entity that acts as a market maker, buying and selling securities to "make" the market. This is all done behind closed doors in a way that the vast majority of people do not understand. A Blockchain-based market maker provides much more transparency and stability than a centralized one governed by human decisions and thus emotions.

However, very few, if any Blockchain projects are truly decentralized as they are still developed and changed by a central organization. We need more projects that are simple, efficient, financial tools that are immutable on the Blockchain that people can use and there is no incentive from a central authority to change the system in order to achieve their goals or boost their profits.

The owner of NYSE isn't a market maker. ICE provides exchange and clearing services. Some of their largest customers are market makers.

There is no evidence that a Blockchain based approach would provide more transparency or stability. In fact the opposite is likely true.

These kinds of errors - claiming an exchange is a market maker for example - seem to be minor errors. But every single argument in favor of a blockchain seems to have one or two of them which make the argument flawed.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.