|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Voice: You need to give us the password...
Of course, there will be no passwords in the future so that is ridiculous. 
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, already sat through a presentation on BC with an offer to help me set up my first BC (for a fee of course). When I saw the word "trust" I ran.
"Trust me": how 14 year old girls get pregnant. 
If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, perhaps you don't understand the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
BC doesn't require trust; it is not fiat.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
While I really like the idea of blockchain I do think it's being hyped a lot.
Sure, some bigger companies are hopping on the hype train, but I don't see a lot of value for regular businesses.
It's not as secure as they make you believe.
BitCoin (and blockchain) can be hacked or tampered with or whatever it is they do.
More importantly, it's really expensive to generate those hashes (or nonces to be precise)!
The fact that mining them can make you money says enough.
It's like saying "we need ID's for our database, let's ask consumers to rent us their computers so we can get those ID's!"
Not going to happen for about 99.999999% of the businesses.
Maybe I just don't know blockchain well enough, but I know a lot of people talking about blockchain, but no one who's actually doing it.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: BitCoin (and blockchain) can be hacked or tampered with or whatever it is they do.
I believe you may be misinformed. Bitcoin maybe. Not sure if something happened there. But do you know that each node in the blockchain has a SHA-256 hash of the next node, etc? Quite difficult to hack.
There is a time-based part to the value also and then the decentralized check that goes on.
So not sure if you've just heard it was less secure or something. You'd have to bring more facts to this story that it is insecure than just that it's not as secure as they say. I'm not sure either though, but if you read the part of how a blockchain is a merkle tree you would probably agree it would be quite difficult to alter the data.
But I do understand that nascent tech (and especially overhyped nascent tech like blockchain) often makes people think it is just a bunch of noise. Maybe it is, but the details behind it are very interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
While it is true that hacking a SHA-256 is practically impossible, the problem with blockchain is elsewhere:
1. The HASH at any node is the combined HASH of all the nodes below it, all the way down... It makes the HASH creation a time and computation consuming when the blockchain (tree) grow...
2. The second security measure of a blockchain structure is distribution. You can not temper with the chain at one position, as the other instances will refuse to that... But that immediately rises the problem of the owner of the chain... Let take a bank - it moves to blockchain, but - obviously - all the instances will be owned by the bank, so that can give larger security against attacks from the outside, but can be hacked still from the inside... Not to mention a blockchain owned by a private company to store your data...
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge". Stephen Hawking, 1942- 2018
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: You can not temper with the chain at one position, as the other instances will refuse to that
Unless you flood the network with bad actors. I guess it's fortunate we don't have massive countries like China and Russia with masses of resources and an active interest in disrupting such a thing. I mean when blockchain runs everything, even American government systems, thank God there are no Chinas or Russias.
People saying blockchain is "secure" is like people saying Apple Macs are secure. They're not, it's just that no-one has the motivation to attack them. Yet.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: People saying blockchain is "secure" is like people saying Apple Macs are secure. They're not, it's just that no-one has the motivation to attack them. Yet.
There are a LOT of people with motivation to attack it; even verbally, arguing from ignorance. There is a financial interest in manipulating it, as well as a political interest.
It is hard to "hack" the hash; it is nigh-impossible to attack a chain of hashes on different computers, regardless of your (computing) power.
Doesn't mean that it cannot be stolen or taxed, but that was not your premise
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: It is hard to "hack" the hash; it is nigh-impossible to attack a chain of hashes on different computers, regardless of your (computing) power.
It's ironic you talk about ignorance yet clearly don't understand what I mean by using many bad actors to take over the network. I'm not talking about using computer power to hack the hashes.
|
|
|
|
|
Take your argument and prove it; shouldn't be too hard to get a lot of bad actors to influence BC 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have the resources, but governments do.
|
|
|
|
|
No, they don't.
If they did, they would have used it by now.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: If they did, they would have used it by now.
To gain what? You think China or Russia are going to deploy a huge tech project to disrupt bitcoin? Why would they care about that?
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: To gain what? You think China or Russia are going to deploy a huge tech project to disrupt bitcoin? Why would they care about that?
No, the US. Where politicians shout it is used for tax-evasion and by criminals and terrorists
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
So you expect the US to disrupt a private enterprise like bitcoin because they say it is used for tax evasion and crime? So is the internet so why isn't the US shutting that down too? If they wanted to shut it down they'd legislate, no need to do something underhand that might harm their reputation and democracy.
|
|
|
|
|
F-ES Sitecore wrote: So is the internet so why isn't the US shutting that down too?
Dunno. If someone told Trump that he can shut down something Al Gore invented, he'd probably do so
F-ES Sitecore wrote: If they wanted to shut it down they'd legislate, no need to do something underhand that might harm their reputation and democracy.
There's no need to shut it down directly; discrediting works well enough. Harming US reputation and democracy is left to the Americans themselves, doesn't look from here like you need help with that.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Dunno
The same reason they haven't shut down Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: Since it's a cryptocurrency I assume they use blockchain as well.
Their own hand-rolled version, yes.
Sander Rossel wrote: I get it, blockchain is great and awesome and super secure, but it's still "just" technology and I simply refuse to believe any technology is "unhackable" no matter how secure it is.
Believing is done in church, as a programmer we do not believe but research. The hashcode itself would be hard to crack; please explain how you would replace the lists of hashcodes on multiple computers that you have no acces to?
Write one, and you'll get a much better idea what you are talking about. Start here:
A blockchain in 200 lines of code – Lauri Hartikka – Medium[^]
Sander Rossel wrote:
However, for most practical uses it's not security that's the issue, but, as said, the mining of hashes
That's not an issue; if mining was cheap, then BC would not work. It takes less resources than getting gold out of the ground and is a lot less polluting.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: Please explain how anything is hacked?
I don't know, I'm not a hacker, but it still happens a lot!
How often is SHA256 hacked again?
Sander Rossel wrote: And then there's this: Bitcoin Mining is more Polluting than Gold Mining - Digiconomist[^]
Aw, come on; BC is generated by using electricity, in some cases even "green". Mining gold means using a lot of environmentally unfriendly chemicals, which are often dumped nearby, polluting the area. There is no way of environmentally friendly gold.
Digiconomist is spouting crap 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: How often is SHA256 hacked again?
Once every mihoye? 
And it should be doable with quantum computers or so I'm told, which isn't a very distant future.
Anyway, they should've used MD5 instead!
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Digiconomist is spouting crap
They're the only ones comparing it to gold, but they all say BC is quite polluting!
I for one don't want to live next to a polluting BC mining serverfarm 
Anyway, I've learned from this thread that the BC mining process is just their implementation of blockchain, so the expensive/pollution point only goes for BC and not other blockchain implementations.
That makes it a lot more doable for regular businesses as well, I might even look into it!
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: Once every mihoye?
And it should be doable with quantum computers or so I'm told, which isn't a very distant future.
Haha, and so it would be "theoretically" possible? How?
It is not even the hash that is the problem, but the amount of ledgers
Sander Rossel wrote: They're the only ones comparing it to gold, but they all say BC is quite polluting!
And you believe them? Seriously?
Sander Rossel wrote: I for one don't want to live next to a polluting BC mining serverfarm
Afraid of loose bits that come to byte you?
Sander Rossel wrote: Anyway, I've learned from this thread that the BC mining process is just their implementation of blockchain, so the expensive/pollution point only goes for BC and not other blockchain implementations.
No, it's not; a blockchain and mining are two different things altogether. Mining should be expensive.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Like any security system its only as good as its weakest link - Somewhere there will be one, irrespective of the technology used and usually it will be at the human interface!
Hi
Welcome to your super secure Blockchain protected bank account
Please can I have your first and third pin number
Sorry didn't quite catch that, please say again your second and fourth pin numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
That link you described (the human factor) is present in all currencies; it is even there for gold.
Doesn't make crypto's more secure or insecure than gold. Your argument is therefore m00t.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
