Dude, my name literally contains “coding” you made the assumption I didn’t understand it…
Yeah banking needs to be controlled because what if something goes wrong, you can’t be this dense, stolen credit cards, stolen identity wring transaction, what if the validators disagree what is the truth ala bitcoin split?
Blockchain is woefully inadequate to manage finances…
I have literally explained to you what I meant, there is nothing to admit, lmao.
This is the issue with cryptobros you just think you are so much smarter than everyone else, and everyone else must be stupid and just not understand how crypto works.
Meanwhile you cant even see the huge flaws with the technology, you think " just wait and don’t be dishonest" while there is a disagreement and unrecoverable split in the network is a viable solution… fucking hell that’s such a childish take
When was last time a fork caused an unforseen problem in a popular blockchain?
There are plenty of things about blockchain technology you could have mentioned that are not yet perfect (privacy, scalability, accessibility, governance, regulation, interoperability etc.) but the best attack you have is that cryptography is meaningless.
Meaning, in a DB, the admin could change roles and modify anything.
Database triggers can have bugs, and we generally don’t let third parties log into the database directly because it’s a huge attack surface
In blockchain, without a key you’re cryptographically locked out. The only way around that is if the network as a whole changes their code to a version that allows something like that
It’s just a ledger where every entry is signed by a private key. That’s a fantastic structure for certain specific use cases…
Cryptography - means that only you can make changes. No database administrator. No hacker. No-one but you.
Limited actions - means the changes you make must follow rules that cannot be altered by anyone.
Both impossible to implement on a normal DB, which is why bitcoin was revolutionary.
thats not what cryptography means, and is a huge fucking downside especially for banking which us centrally controlled
It’s called triggers, user roles etc, once again you dont want this to be unalterabale for banking because what if regulations change…
Only thing bitcoin revolutionized was the speed with which scammers can dupe people out of their money.
You didn’t even know what “those big words” meant a second ago.
Banking doesn’t need to be centrally controlled. It only has been for the past few hundred years.
Why pay and trust a 3rd party control those?
You update the smart contracts
Almost true. Scams are not the only thing revolutionized.
Dude, my name literally contains “coding” you made the assumption I didn’t understand it…
Yeah banking needs to be controlled because what if something goes wrong, you can’t be this dense, stolen credit cards, stolen identity wring transaction, what if the validators disagree what is the truth ala bitcoin split?
Blockchain is woefully inadequate to manage finances…
No. You admitted those words mean nothing to you.
You plan for each eventually and ensure all responsibilities are understood.
Multisignature, limit controlled wallets
Wait for a few blocks before assuming your transaction is confirmed. Don’t be dishonest during a fork event.
The general public is woefully uneducated and unsupported for blockchain managed finances, but the technology is fine.
I have literally explained to you what I meant, there is nothing to admit, lmao.
This is the issue with cryptobros you just think you are so much smarter than everyone else, and everyone else must be stupid and just not understand how crypto works.
Meanwhile you cant even see the huge flaws with the technology, you think " just wait and don’t be dishonest" while there is a disagreement and unrecoverable split in the network is a viable solution… fucking hell that’s such a childish take
When was last time a fork caused an unforseen problem in a popular blockchain?
There are plenty of things about blockchain technology you could have mentioned that are not yet perfect (privacy, scalability, accessibility, governance, regulation, interoperability etc.) but the best attack you have is that cryptography is meaningless.
They were saying what it meant in this context
Meaning, in a DB, the admin could change roles and modify anything.
Database triggers can have bugs, and we generally don’t let third parties log into the database directly because it’s a huge attack surface
In blockchain, without a key you’re cryptographically locked out. The only way around that is if the network as a whole changes their code to a version that allows something like that
It’s just a ledger where every entry is signed by a private key. That’s a fantastic structure for certain specific use cases…