A more direct example of a good faith violation is China putting a 25% tariff on American imported automobiles or the EU having a 10% tariff on them. Free trade doesn't exist in its purest form.
They are just trying to bootstrap their auto sector. China's a couple of decades late in development, so they need to do these kinds of things.
The United States has done the same thing, when it was behind in industrialization to the United Kingdom. Heavy tariffs on foreign goods, in order to prop up its own domestic sector.
Once they get their auto industry together, to the same level of quality as US manufacturers, they won't need that tariff.
The irony about "saving the planet" here is that solar panels manufacturing plants in China have virtually no regulations, which allows them to skirt the normally heavy costs of toxic waste disposal. So in the process of making these planet saving devices, they've done all kinds of damage to the environment to begin with. There is a reason, after all, panels are cheaper to make in China.
The market values the future not the present. Heard this argument about Amazon going back over 10 years. I've come to the conclusion that when a general consensus is that stock XYZ is overvalued, its usually a great buy.
It's not perfect for that either. There have already been cases where tokens were stolen and blockchains were forked to recover them. The very last thing I want for my money is for errors and/or malicious acts to be permanent and uncorrectable.
> being able to undo transactions is a feature not a bug of the modern financial system.
Best takedown of cryptocurrencies that I've seen. Explains, as succinctly as possible, the fatal flaw in the idea. I'm gonna steal this line for the future.
yeah that’s also why cash and gold are worthless XD. who in the world would take cold hard cash or gold bullion in exchange for goods??!! you can’t reverse it!! and guess what, someone can hold a gun to your head and take it.
> and guess what, someone can hold a gun to your head and take it.
Those are contradictory statements. The government can absolutely reverse a criminal taking your money by arresting them and returning the stolen cash.
Can't the government do the same with cryptocurrencies though? They can also "arrest the criminal and return the stolen cryptocurrencies". Not very practical 99% of the time though...
> it also protects you in cases where someone holds a gun to your head and forces you to make a transaction.
No. The only case when someone ever threatened to hold gun to my head and demanded money was taxation. With cryptocurrency it's possible to avoid that, because they don't know how much money you have. And even when they do know, it's much harder for them to take it, they need to know password.
Because there's no point in going through all the steps, but that's exactly where it would end if you absolutely refused to pay taxes and refused to pay fines or go to jail for not paying.
I fail to see how having a gun to your head is in any way true. Can you give any examples of this happening?
Tax evasion is a crime and you should go to jail (you are exploiting the benefits you have received from society). But big companies find tax loopholes all the time and they go to white-collar prisons or get away with it anyways.
Transactions aren't "undone". In the event of fraudulent charges to your bank account, they simply eat the cost and comp you. As a result, some portion of the fees that you pay to bank are dedicated to these fraudulent charges.
> they simply eat the cost and comp you. As a result, some portion of the fees that you pay to bank are dedicated to these fraudulent charges.
It is important to note that "they" is usually the company that charged the card, not the bank or merchant processor. It is very similar to receiving a refund.
In the real world, ownership is more complicated than that, which is why the law is interpreted by judges and not computers.
E.g., courts can transfer ownership of your car from you to someone else for a variety of reasons, without your consent. How does this work in a blockchain world?
Your answer might be that the State (or the judicial system, I suppose) should have some special private key that lets them sign transactions transferring anything to anyone, even if the previous owner doesn't consent.
If so, why is that better than just having a plain old centrally controlled, publicly accessible database that the State signs with their private key? What does blockchain technology give you over that?
Agree there is much hype over blockchain, but there is some advantage in the context you raised.
Currently, if you want to buy or sell real-estate, you have to record that transaction on a central government database. These "databases" used to be paper documents, but are now slowly moving to electronic systems. But they are still centrally controlled, and often even new systems are horribly out-of-date and require specialized real-estate companies to record transactions and pull transaction history, with hefty service fees, often several thousand dollars per sale.
If this real-estate system was based on the blockcahin, it could remove the government as a central source of trust and title companies that specialize in interacting with it would face far more competition. In theory, it could reduce transaction costs to buy and sell real-estate. Admittedly, this may solve some problems but create others, but the benefit is quite clear.
Just a transaction record from one account to another of $2M isn't proof that ownership of that property was transferred.
You need to connect that transaction to a contract and the contract in turn needs to be verified by some third-party and some process. In a develop country, that process is going to be tied to government.
"Proof" is a legal definition, and legal definitions are defined by the government. Accordingly, I entirely agree that any real property transaction must be tied in some way to the government.
That said, you should take a look at the current system. In many counties, it's still a large ledger of transactions in pencil and paper. In "modernized" counties, but with with extremely restricted access, made intentionally hard-to-access to keep title insurance companies in business.
Title insurance companies charge thousands of dollars on every sale to insure legal claims to property. Any trustworthy publicly accessible database, crypto-based or not, would be a huge improvement over the current system.
why should the state have any claim to my property? that’s your best argument. regardless, i’ll answer your question.
blockchain are immutable and public. therefore the government can’t be corrupt and steal/funnel people’s property like they do in the real world now. we can all scrutinize the transactions.
That sounds like you're arguing against the idea of the government having a judicial system... If I steal someone's car, and the police catch me and have proof it's stolen, the justice system can take the car away from me and return it to its rightful owner.
How does that work in a blockchain world? If I stole the car's digital title (via hacking, coercion, etc.) and after getting caught, I refuse to cough up my private key... I can effectively prevent any transaction returning the car to its rightful owner. At that point either the ledger is broken and useless OR you need a judge to be able to force a hard fork, and system is no longer decentralized.
Your second paragraph about having an immutable public record to prevent corruption seems like it could be solved more simply by just having the government continually publish a record of transactions, which anyone can archive or mirror to verify the government never tries to secretly rewrite the past. I.e., a public git repo could solve that, no?
Aren’t these sites powered by self reported data, which, I would imagine, skews high instead of low. As averages I totally believe them. Reading HN, you’d think everyone makes $300k but these comp packages are for outlier employees at super outlier companies. Find me a software developer at a small mom-n-pop company that makes that much. That company’s president doesn’t even make that much!
I was really disappointed when Apple started making their IPod's into touch screens. When I'm going for a run or walking around with my ipod in my pocket, theres nothing i despise more than pulling out my ipod, having to tap the specific spots of the screen 3 times just so i can skip to the next song. The click wheel used to be very easy to use. I could skip songs without taking it out of my pocket.
I can't help but nitpick. Companies lower guidance and expectations all the time. Share price almost always falls when this happen, but it's not uncommon and not cause for the CEO being ousted.
Why not? Most companies do - since most webservers are configured to log every request by default. Of course, with facebook volumes they probably don't use "default" solutions for anything - but logging every click is a norm for most sites.
This is a valid point, and I can only assume you are being downvoted due to "stereotyping." The sample group IS an important factor. For example, Milgram's famous "electric shock" experiment was repeated in many different countries. Germans for example, were very susceptible to authority figures, Australians were lesser so. Results are going to change based on the group being tested. It still doesn't change the fundamental finding of the study, however.
