this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2023
226 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37739 readers
565 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm a fan of cryptocurrencies, and I would dearly love for the "speculative investment scam" aspect of it to be dead. It's been a massive drag on the technology's reputation for many years, preventing it from being used for all kinds of applications that would really benefit from some form of cryptocurrency integration. Unfortunately even if the "speculative investment scam" aspect dies the bad reputation will linger, so hopefully those applications will find ways to sneak it in where useful without drawing too much attention.
It's been 13 years and the only applications found have been in fraud.
Over and over, blockchain is a solution to a question nobody asked.
Hey. Biplanes are actually much more relevant in today's world than crypto. They aren't common, but there are still new biplanes made because they are a valid solution for certain problems. Unlike blockchain.
It’s nice-to-have if shit really did hit the fan economically and hyper inflation took over. Glad the hype is over though.
I'm not actually interested in the value of the tokens, I only own a few tens of dollars' worth myself. I'm interested in the application-related aspects of it.
For example, something applicable to the Fediverse that comes to mind is the Ethereum Name System. That's a blockchain-based mechanism that allows for DNS-like "domain names" to be claimed by users. Something like it could serve as a way of registering a username for the Fediverse and then having it be completely portable between instances without the need to rely on any centralized authentication provider. Since they do cost a small amount of actual money to register they'd make for a good spam prevention method - a regular user only needs to register a name every once in a rare while, but a spammer needs to register a new one each time their existing name gets blocked. It'd get expensive real fast for a spammer.
Unfortunately this adds some complication to the registration process that the Fediverse really can't afford right now. And worse, it has the dreaded "NFT" label hanging around its neck because technically a username registration is indeed an NFT if you want to categorize it like that. So I can only sigh and watch a perfectly useful technology go unused due to the bad name it's been given.
Oh well. Someday the usefulness will overcome the perception.
The one SIMPLE trick crypto bros HATE: Blockchain -> "Distributed Ledger" NFT -> "Unique Identifier"
Like and share with your friends
Tons of people already can't handle signing up for a simple account. You think having to get a crypto wallet, figure out how to use it, and pay money into it before you can even start actually signing up for a social media account is ever gonna fly? Not in a million years.
NFTs truly are the best imaginable example of a solution in search of a problem. Every single use case I've ever heard someone pitch is something that already exists and works. But like.. what if your hotel key was an NFT, bro? Whoa. What if your softball team's schedule was an NFT? What if your social media account was an NFT? 🤯
I explicitly said in my comment:
You don't appear to have actually read it all the way through, just triggered a standard anti-NFT rant off of the fact that the word "NFT" was present in it. Which is ironically exactly the problem I was complaining about.
I read it. And I disagree. stupid.
It isn't that it can't handle it "right now." It will never handle it. Nobody wants it.
But I bet "you can't read, you're just triggered by a word" is way easier to fantasize about than actually paying attention to reality.
Have you heard of hashcash, it’s POW precursor to bitcoin. It stops spam, was originally developed for email but could be incorporated into Lemmy eventually on sign up. Principal is similar to what you suggest.
@Senseibu @FaceDeer POW was one of the biggest issues with crypto in general. Let's not kill a tree everytime someone wants to sign up
@shipp Ethereum switched to Proof-of-Stake consensus nine months ago, it no longer burns a significant amount of energy to operate. I'm primarily interested in Ethereum because it's got smart contracts, allowing a huge variety of applications that older, simpler cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin can't handle.
It’s a small foot print for a real user and expensive for bots who are generating enmasse. It worked on Windows 98 PCs so isn’t really an issue like you describe.
@Senseibu PoW should just be straight up illegal everywhere. It's a plague on the planet.
Except it’s been around for decades and put to good use but you’ve only heard of it from crypto and are referring to crypto.
@Senseibu so has crime lol, doesn't mean it's good. There's also a reason it hasn't caught on. If you ignore the whole killing the planet thing, it's very inaccessible.
Hasn’t caught on pfft dude why are you even replying when you clearly know nothing about the tech except for it’s bad for the planet we haven’t even got into how it could be powered with renewables (when its applied within a crypto currency that is)
Good day to you sir
PoW is indeed an interesting solution to protect against DDoS in some situation, like how Tor Onion Services does it.
Not all applications of PoW are bad.
Yeah i guess you're right, a biplane would be pretty useful in that scenario.
Technology rarely advances for reasons that benefit the majority. It advances to make a few people rich, kill people very efficiently, or to increase profit margins on porn sales (see item 1, I guess).
If you think about the really good applications of things like crypto, NFTs, blockchain, etc., you quickly realize that they are things that aren't marketable or profitable for the entities that would need to implement them. If all the banks and credit companies bought into something like blockchain or NFTs, then transaction fraud and identity theft would disappear overnight... but what would THEY get out of it? The only way it's ever going to happen is with coordinated government mandates, and nobody running for office has the faintest idea of what crypto tech is other than "dumb way for the nouveau riche to waste their money"
I don't think transaction fraud or identity theft would disappear overnight, they would just take on different forms.
I think a big part of why cryptocurrencies don't take off as actual currencies (beyond speculative investors ruining everything), is the fact that there are a lot of clear benefits to a centralized system that blockchains have yet to adequately replace.
1: Scale. The amount of processing power it would require to process all McDonald's daily credit card transactions on a blockchain is many orders of magnitude greater than that of using Visa or Mastercard. Even when you account for proof-of-stake coins like Ethereum. Maintaining a single large centralized database will always be more energy efficient than maintaining many large decentralized databases, especially when the latter comes wrapped in a dozen layers of cryptography.
2: Reversibility. If I buy something from a stranger on the internet and use my debit or credit card, my bank can issue a chargeback if said stranger tries to screw me over. This is fundamentally impossible on a blockchain without relying on some kind of middleman to hold funds in escrow, at which point you're basically back to using big centralized banks to do all the heavy lifting. Sellers may view this as a positive aspect of using a blockchain, but they can't realistically force buyers to use a payment processor more amenable to their desires. If they could, PayPal would have vanished years ago.
On top of that, one of the big problems that blockchain solves can be solved through centralized systems as well. The big one that people bring up is credit card fraud, but what a lot of people don't realize is that credit card fraud is a lot less common outside the US than within. This is because places like the EU have mandated security measures such as chip-and-pin (the US only requires the chip part). Smartphone-based contactless payment systems like Apple Pay also provide effective 2-factor authentication at the point of sale. And while blockchain is theoretically more secure, in practice these mechanisms are "good enough" for everyday use.
How does crypto stop identity theft or transaction fraud? Crypto does nothing for credit, which is basically what identity theft is, and if you're missing how widely there's transaction fraud on crypto you haven't been paying attention.
It's not the cryptocurrency itself that prevents fraud, it's the surrounding technologies such as blockchains and NFTs.
Using NFT to own the address to a PNG is hilariously stupid and worthless, but what it's actually great for is receipts. If I buy a donut and get an NFT proving that I now own the donut (along with metadata about where and when I purchased the donut) and months later I am on trial for murder, I can prove to the court with absolute mathematical certainty that I couldn't have killed anyone at that time because I was eating a donut halfway across town.
Using blockchain similarly is great for proving your transaction history. Maybe I somehow faked that NFT about the donut? Well, I couldn't have, because it was months ago and blockchain history is cryptographically impossible to spoof.
These are obviously contrived examples, but when applied at scale it becomes an extremely powerful way to verify truth. Yes, I did in fact buy those tickets, here's my NFT, now let me on the plane. No, I did not spend $3000 on knock-off accessories, here is my blockchain. The odds of someone being able to fake these is extremely low.
But, again, this will never come into practice, at least not in the near future. As @beefcat pointed out, implementing these systems would be expensive for the established financial institutions, and would present new challenges for them to create new processes for handling. An awful lot of work to create something that is stronger and safer when there is little motivation for them to do so.
I don't know, this sounds a lot like DNA evidence. Sounds great in theory, but doesn't actually mean what TV implies it to mean. In terms of a receipt, you still need to tie that to a person, or the wallet to the person. Given how easily people have lost their wallets, it'll be a similar issue to "My credit card was used at that time". Yes, the wallet / CC was used at a place at a time, but who was the person using it? In either case, they'll want to use the security video or clerk witness testimony to tie it together.
I'm not even sure what situation you're thinking that the airline would not accept their own printed ticket or shot of the ticket PDF or whatever they send you today, but the NFT would make all the difference. Again, either the Airline system reads your ticket data, whether it's NFT, barcode, or traditional digital and can tie it to a sale in their system or they can't. They can lose the NFT link just as well as the barcode link, and the gate agent isn't going to understand or care that you have an NFT that cryptographically proves "blah blah blah". They're already checking ID. For someone to fake the barcode version, they would also need a fake ID or Passport to match it.
I sort of see what you're saying if you went to court, and the airline wouldn't do discovery or purposefully shredded their records of your ticket for some reason, but we already have receipts and bank statements and the like that do the same thing, and an NFT doesn't change needing to prove you bought it in this case, presumably via linking a wallet rather than a bank account, though wallets don't have the ID requirements bank accounts do, so in court that could actually be rather harder to do.
Looking at each piece in isolation it's hard to see the real world value. You have to put it all together. Let's do the airline ticket example.
Real world today, the information involved in purchasing a ticket is controlled by three parties: The customer, the airline, and the financial institute (assuming you didn't walk up and pay cash). Anybody involved here screw up or be malicious. You lost your ticket. The airline had a database malfunction. The bank/creditor improperly recorded the transaction. All parties are aware of these potential failures, so there are contingencies in place in case of a missing ticket, a ticket that can't be found the system, a bad or missing financial transaction. But these backup plans also open the door to fraud, so there need to be even more plans on top of the backups: How to verify the integrity of a seemingly real ticket, protocol for re-verifying a financial event, etc.
It's simple because it's familiar, but it's really ridiculously complicated and error prone.
Let's introduce NFTs and blockchain.
You buy the airline ticket and the following things happen:
The bank performs the transaction and records it to the blockchain, which is decentralized and owned by no one, so it is verified by all parties before anything else happens. Bank errors are now impossible.
You and the airline perform a mutual authentication, which generates an NFT proving existence of the ticket and attaches it to your identity. From your perspective, this would be unlocking your phone and clicking "approve."
Now you approach the airport kiosk and there's a problem.
Airline has no record of purchase - well, the blockchain does, so it's their fuck up and they have no reasonable argument. You win.
Airline can't match your ticket to their database - You show them your NFTicket, which their system verifies is a valid, unspoofable, immutable ticket for what you say it is. Again, it's their fuck up and they have no reasonable argument. You win.
Conversely, you say you have a ticket for today, they say it's for tomorrow. You inspect the ticket, it is in fact for tomorrow. You fucked up, no further argument.
The only way any of this goes wrong is one of the following:
Multiple forms of your identification are stolen - phone, password, biometrics. Obviously a lot harder than nabbing a CC number.
Multiple parties lose their records at the same time. Possible but unlikely.
State-level villains sabotage the entire system. Possible, sure, but this is an apocalypse-level event and probably an act of war.
It's effectively impossible for someone to steal or fake a ticket or transaction in this system, and because of that, anybody who has receipts is automatically proven right and you don't need to jump through any more hoops or threaten to sue anybody. It's complex behind the scenes but it makes life for businesses and consumers braindead simple. There are so many layers of trust in action that no individual party can reasonably claim something did or did not happen just because THEY messed up.
@dreadgoat@kbin.social @beefcat@beehaw.org there's a whole insurance industry for covering legal fees regarding improperly titled real estate and it generated over $20 BILLION dollars in premiums in 2022!
If the title to a house were an #NFT, you could verify it's validity in seconds!
I don't see why a distributed blockchain is actually necessary to solve this problem though. Basic public-key cryptography is enough to sign and validate documents like real estate titles, without all the overhead incurred by NFTs. Our problem is that we aren't even making effective use of technology we've already had for decades to solve this.