Bitcoin: no angel investors, only Faustian bargains

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Bitcoin: no angel investors, only Faustian bargains

drk: Jan 16, 2005

Head of the CFTC posted:

Not only do I think that unlicensed DeFi markets for derivative instruments are a bad idea, I also do not see how they are legal under the CEA. The CEA requires futures contracts to be traded on a designated contract market (DCM) licensed and regulated by the CFTC.[20] The CEA also provides that it is unlawful for any person other than an eligible contract participant to enter into a swap unless the swap is entered into on, or subject to, the rules of a DCM.[21] The CEA requires any facility that provides for the trading or processing of swaps to be registered as a DCM or a swap execution facility (SEF).[22] DeFi markets, platforms, or websites are not registered as DCMs or SEFs. The CEA does not contain any exception from registration for digital currencies, blockchains, or �smart contracts.�

Apart from the legality issue, in my view it is untenable to allow an unregulated, unlicensed derivatives market to compete, side-by-side, with a fully regulated and licensed derivatives market. In addition to the absence of market safeguards and customer protections in the unregulated market, it is unfair to impose the obligations, restrictions, and costs of regulation upon some market participants while permitting their unregulated competitors to operate wholly free of such obligations, restrictions, and costs. Experience with the development of the �shadow banking� system shows that competition between regulated and unregulated entities in the same market can result in the regulated entities assuming either more risks in order to generate the higher yields necessary to compete with the unregulated competition, or seeking less regulation for themselves to level the playing field.[23] Either of these reactions can introduce significant risks into the financial system. For all these reasons, we should not permit DeFi to become an unregulated shadow financial market in direct competition with regulated markets. The CFTC, together with other regulators, need to focus more attention to this growing area of concern and address regulatory violations appropriately.

Remarks from earlier today

# ? Jun 9, 2021 01:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 01:41

novamute: Jul 5, 2006; o o o

About time. All very valid points. We'll see if they do anything more than put out a strongly worded statement though.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 03:02

HugeGrossBurrito: Mar 20, 2018

i sincerely hope everyone in this thread died and kills themslves and sucks off their own dicks

# ? Jun 9, 2021 03:08

Facebook Aunt: Oct 4, 2008; wiggle wiggle

Arsenic Lupin posted:

Oh, lordy. I'm looking for a cleaner of Oriental rugs, and found this at the foot of their Yelp page.

I know, right? I'm in a local aquarium facebook group and sometimes we do group mail orders to save on shipping. Anyway a few weeks ago this one aquarium mail order business proudly announced they now accept crypto and I was all :chloe:

"well, that's disappointing".

I'm not sure why, but seeing a business takes butts makes me less likely to do business with them.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 03:09

Karia: Mar 27, 2013; Self-portrait, Snake on a Plane
Oil painting, c. 1482-1484
Leonardo DaVinci (1452-1591)

My advisor asked one of his classes if they had any ideas about the future of cybersecurity for protecting manufacturing operations. He was looking to start some discussion about potential attack vectors, issues with industry adoption. Some of the big issues right now are how to securely transfer classified military part designs and manufacturing processes so they can't be stolen or altered in-transit.

First response: "All of that's going to go the direction of non-fungible tokens and get put on a blockchain."

I, uh, don't think the dude understands what a blockchain is.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 03:15

Somfin: Oct 25, 2010; In my🦚 experience🛠️ the big things🌑 don't teach you anything🤷‍♀️.; Nap Ghost

Karia posted:

My advisor asked one of his classes if they had any ideas about the future of cybersecurity for protecting manufacturing operations. He was looking to start some discussion about potential attack vectors, issues with industry adoption. Some of the big issues right now are how to securely transfer classified military part designs and manufacturing processes so they can't be stolen or altered in-transit.

First response: "All of that's going to go the direction of non-fungible tokens and get put on a blockchain."

I, uh, don't think the dude understands what a blockchain is.

I'm hopeful that your advisor immediately asked the moron "okay how does an NFT keep anything secure against attack" and then recorded the flummoxed response

# ? Jun 9, 2021 03:26

Karia: Mar 27, 2013; Self-portrait, Snake on a Plane
Oil painting, c. 1482-1484
Leonardo DaVinci (1452-1591)

Somfin posted:

I'm hopeful that your advisor immediately asked the moron "okay how does an NFT keep anything secure against attack" and then recorded the flummoxed response

No, but he did change the subject immediately and went on a rant about how bullshit any grant proposal that says they'll use "machine learning" or "AI" to improve a process is.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 03:52

salt shakeup: Jun 27, 2004; 'orrible fucking nights

Blockchain is an immutable ledger, It's obvious how that would prevent designs being altered in transit.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 04:00

Klyith: Aug 3, 2007; GBS Pledge Week

Somfin posted:

I'm hopeful that your advisor immediately asked the moron "okay how does an NFT keep anything secure against attack" and then recorded the flummoxed response

based on every interaction you've seen with bitcoiners ITT, why would you think that?

you'd get a 5 minute spiel about unbreakable crypto and decentralized blockchain, and it would be both complete nonsense and delivered with utter certainty

# ? Jun 9, 2021 04:06

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

HugeGrossBurrito posted:

i sincerely hope everyone in this thread died and kills themslves and sucks off their own dicks

bitcoin is the dick that i suck. oh yeah. dip it baby

# ? Jun 9, 2021 04:10

Karia: Mar 27, 2013; Self-portrait, Snake on a Plane
Oil painting, c. 1482-1484
Leonardo DaVinci (1452-1591)

salt shakeup posted:

Blockchain is an immutable ledger, It's obvious how that would prevent designs being altered in transit.

I think it should be immediately obvious why the Department of Defense is not interested in publishing information on all their literally Top Secret military designs on a public blockchain.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 04:18

drk: Jan 16, 2005

But the crypto in cryptocurrency is encryption, which was invented by Dorian "Satoshi" Nakamoto in 2014.

checkmate

# ? Jun 9, 2021 04:24

salt shakeup: Jun 27, 2004; 'orrible fucking nights

Karia posted:

I think it should be immediately obvious why the Department of Defense is not interested in publishing information on all their literally Top Secret military designs on a public blockchain.

Then don't use a public blockchain, pretty simple.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 04:27

Shumagorath: Jun 6, 2001

salt shakeup posted:

Then don't use a public blockchain, pretty simple.

is your lovely personality an immutable public blockchain or can you also keep it to yourself

# ? Jun 9, 2021 04:32

kw0134: Apr 19, 2003; I buy feet pics🍆

Yes, use a "private" blockchain, or as some people call it, a "database."

# ? Jun 9, 2021 04:34

The Glumslinger: Sep 24, 2008; Coach Nagy, you want me to throw to WHAT side of the field?; Hair Elf

Or even just a checksum of the file?

# ? Jun 9, 2021 06:03

ikanreed: Sep 25, 2009; I honestly I have no idea who cannibal[SIC] is and I do not know why I should know.

syq dude, just syq!

Man, I was thinking about blockchain for securing secret files in transit.

But then I had an idea. What if you can some kind of "private key" you could use to encrypt a file and a "public key" you could use to decrypt it.

And and and what if the recipient had their own "private key" and you used their "public key" to encrypt the same file again so only they could decrypt it.

And what if there was some kind of "signing authority" who could verify that a certain key was both specifically you, and not easily broken, so the recipient didn't need to personally track your public key to verify your identity.

I know that's a really complicated scheme and there's not way that's easier or more secure than getting everyone involved to track every single transfer operation and decide individually if they think it's the real owner of the file. Sadly my vision is just too impossible.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 06:32

nnnotime: Sep 30, 2001; Hesitate, and you will be lost.

tehinternet posted:

I unironically dig the song, is there a source

Sorry, friend: but remember: you asked for it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vB-qWovaCLo

# ? Jun 9, 2021 06:37

Mad Dragon: Feb 29, 2004

ikanreed posted:

Man, I was thinking about blockchain for securing secret files in transit.

But then I had an idea. What if you can some kind of "private key" you could use to encrypt a file and a "public key" you could use to decrypt it.

And and and what if the recipient had their own "private key" and you used their "public key" to encrypt the same file again so only they could decrypt it.

And what if there was some kind of "signing authority" who could verify that a certain key was both specifically you, and not easily broken, so the recipient didn't need to personally track your public key to verify your identity.

I know that's a really complicated scheme and there's not way that's easier or more secure than getting everyone involved to track every single transfer operation and decide individually if they think it's the real owner of the file. Sadly my vision is just too impossible.

That sounds like a lot of work when we can just put it on the blockchain.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 06:49

Ghost Leviathan: Mar 2, 2017; Exploration is ill-advised.

HugeGrossBurrito posted:

i sincerely hope everyone in this thread died and kills themslves and sucks off their own dicks

In that order?

# ? Jun 9, 2021 07:20

Alan Smithee: Jan 4, 2005; A man becomes preeminent, he's expected to have enthusiasms.

Enthusiasms, enthusiasms...

HugeGrossBurrito posted:

i sincerely hope everyone in this thread died and kills themslves and sucks off their own dicks

but your in it

# ? Jun 9, 2021 08:42

Somfin: Oct 25, 2010; In my🦚 experience🛠️ the big things🌑 don't teach you anything🤷‍♀️.; Nap Ghost

salt shakeup posted:

Then don't use a public blockchain, pretty simple.

Just one of the smoothest brains on this entire website

# ? Jun 9, 2021 09:42

Doccykins: Feb 21, 2006

ikanreed posted:

Man, I was thinking about blockchain for securing secret files in transit.

But then I had an idea. What if you can some kind of "private key" you could use to encrypt a file and a "public key" you could use to decrypt it.

And and and what if the recipient had their own "private key" and you used their "public key" to encrypt the same file again so only they could decrypt it.

And what if there was some kind of "signing authority" who could verify that a certain key was both specifically you, and not easily broken, so the recipient didn't need to personally track your public key to verify your identity.

I know that's a really complicated scheme and there's not way that's easier or more secure than getting everyone involved to track every single transfer operation and decide individually if they think it's the real owner of the file. Sadly my vision is just too impossible.

um excuse me why do i need a ""trusted"" ""authority"" when i can just bring a derelict power station online and guess numbers instead

# ? Jun 9, 2021 10:23

Spatial: Nov 15, 2007

What if we invented a machine that, instead of producing a useful product, produced only externalities?

The experiment is going great so far

# ? Jun 9, 2021 15:10

InternetJunky: May 25, 2002

kw0134 posted:

Yes, use a "private" blockchain, or as some people call it, a "database."

Is there a single, real world example of a use case for a private blockchain where a different solution doesn't exist or wouldn't be far superior in cost/effort/etc?

# ? Jun 9, 2021 15:52

Jose Valasquez: Apr 8, 2005

InternetJunky posted:

Is there a single, real world example of a use case for a private blockchain where a different solution doesn't exist or wouldn't be far superior in cost/effort/etc?

Getting dumb VCs to give you money

# ? Jun 9, 2021 15:56

shame on an IGA: Apr 8, 2005

novamute posted:

About time. All very valid points. We'll see if they do anything more than put out a strongly worded statement though.

Look at the audience he's speaking to: the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association convention. This is a room full of high level banking and wall street guys being reminded "Hey, all that compliance poo poo you guys have to spend tens of millions of dollars jumping through hoops over? You just gonna let these assholes walk all over your walled garden?"

The message is very much telling these influencers it would be in their interest to make some calls and bring legislative pressure.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 16:07

novamute: Jul 5, 2006; o o o

InternetJunky posted:

Is there a single, real world example of a use case for a private blockchain where a different solution doesn't exist or wouldn't be far superior in cost/effort/etc?

Well no. Without a need for decentralization there isn't any reason to blockchain at all.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 16:30

LanceHunter: Nov 12, 2016; Beautiful People Club

novamute posted:

Well no. Without a need for decentralization there isn't any reason to blockchain at all.

Private doesn't necessarily mean non-decentralized. You can have consortiums made up of several competing businesses who want/need to share data but who don't want to grant each other access to their databases.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 16:35

Shumagorath: Jun 6, 2001

The one sane application for blockchain and smart contracts anyone has expressed to me is E-health / medical research data where you want decentralized record keeping with full auditing in a trust-but-verify scenario. It sort of makes sense if you take anonymity out of it and every entity has one vote on a block regardless of compute power.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 16:42

Potrzebie: Apr 6, 2010; I may not know what I'm talking about, but I sure love cops! ^^ Boy, but that boot is just yummy!; Lipstick Apathy

Shumagorath posted:

The one sane application for blockchain and smart contracts anyone has expressed to me is E-health / medical research data where you want decentralized record keeping with full auditing in a trust-but-verify scenario. It sort of makes sense if you take anonymity out of it and every entity has one vote on a block regardless of compute power.

No because eventually someone fatfingers inputs and oops that is forever in there now and we have to add a layer of "ignore bad data from source" and then what the gently caress is the point?

# ? Jun 9, 2021 16:48

InternetJunky: May 25, 2002

LanceHunter posted:

Private doesn't necessarily mean non-decentralized. You can have consortiums made up of several competing businesses who want/need to share data but who don't want to grant each other access to their databases.

So what advantage would a block chain provide over how this scenario would typically be handled now (by producing a report that gets sent out)?

# ? Jun 9, 2021 16:48

Klyith: Aug 3, 2007; GBS Pledge Week

Potrzebie posted:

No because eventually someone fatfingers inputs and oops that is forever in there now and we have to add a layer of "ignore bad data from source" and then what the gently caress is the point?

You can totally remove blocks or edit the history of a blockchain. Go back to the blocks you want to change, make changes, recompute the hashes for subsequent blocks forward to the present. That's how Ethereum returned all the stolen DAO money despite the steadfast iron will of unstoppable code. Blockchains aren't magically permanent.

In bitcoin & other cryptos you need over 50% of miners agreeing to it. In a hypothetical other blockchain controlled by a group of authorities, you'd do it with some voting system or whatever.

The question is, as always, is there any actual benefit?

Shumagorath posted:

The one sane application for blockchain and smart contracts anyone has expressed to me is E-health / medical research data where you want decentralized record keeping with full auditing in a trust-but-verify scenario. It sort of makes sense if you take anonymity out of it and every entity has one vote on a block regardless of compute power.

Did this person give specifics?

Databases can also audit. "Trust but verify" is a thing that requires a human decision, blockchain doesn't do that by itself somehow. And why does medical data want to be decentralized?

# ? Jun 9, 2021 17:17

Ad by Khad: Jul 25, 2007; Human Garbage
Watch me try to laugh this title off like the dickbag I am.
I also hang out with racists.

so that you can log in to silk road and buy a kidney

# ? Jun 9, 2021 17:23

Ad by Khad: Jul 25, 2007; Human Garbage
Watch me try to laugh this title off like the dickbag I am.
I also hang out with racists.

oh word, the kidney was a rock? thanks for the bits coin, guess you're dead lmbo

# ? Jun 9, 2021 17:25

Potrzebie: Apr 6, 2010; I may not know what I'm talking about, but I sure love cops! ^^ Boy, but that boot is just yummy!; Lipstick Apathy

Klyith posted:

You can totally remove blocks or edit the history of a blockchain. Go back to the blocks you want to change, make changes, recompute the hashes for subsequent blocks forward to the present. That's how Ethereum returned all the stolen DAO money despite the steadfast iron will of unstoppable code. Blockchains aren't magically permanent.

Ok sure, one could 51% decide anything is true, but then even more, WHAT'S THE loving POINT? Just use this new disruptive tech I've invented called rumours instead. The most persistent rumor is assumed to be correct at all times.

Now give me $1,000,000,000 in VC capital please

# ? Jun 9, 2021 17:27

Blotto_Otter: Aug 16, 2013

Klyith posted:

Did this person give specifics?

Databases can also audit. "Trust but verify" is a thing that requires a human decision, blockchain doesn't do that by itself somehow. And why does medical data want to be decentralized?

I'm curious about specifics too, because I've seen people occasionally toss out some variant of "medical information" as a use case and it doesn't make sense to me. Why is "decentralization" (which implies "duplication", as I understand blockchains) a virtue when it comes to private health information? How does access to reading at writing private health information get controlled/restricted? Who are the parties who would run the nodes/keep a copy of a medical record blockchain, and what's their incentive for running a node?

# ? Jun 9, 2021 17:39

Shumagorath: Jun 6, 2001

Broadly speaking, it was something to do with competing entities being able to access a shared data set rather than total decentralization. This was a tangent conversation to me sending them coin crash memes, so while it might be That Dumb I am also probably Explaining It Wrong.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 17:42

necrotic: Aug 2, 2005; I owe my brother big time for this!

Read only is a thing if reading the data is all that matters. Still not sure what benefit blockchain provides here.

# ? Jun 9, 2021 18:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 01:41

Blotto_Otter: Aug 16, 2013

Shumagorath posted:

Broadly speaking, it was something to do with competing entities being able to access a shared data set rather than total decentralization. This was a tangent conversation to me sending them coin crash memes, so while it might be That Dumb I am also probably Explaining It Wrong.

More likely the person you were talking to was Explaining It Wrong, unless they actually deal with the storage and transmission of protected health information. Medical data is fraught with privacy issues that make any sharing of medical data a very complex exercise, and I've yet to see anyone articulate how "privacy" and "blockchain" mix in a way that offers any real-world benefit versus some conventional form of database.

If you've got a bunch of medical data that can be linked to a real human being, there's no point to putting that on a blockchain even if you make it pseudonymous, because 1) the data is only as good as the party that collected it in the real world, so you're trusting that they got it right, and 2) some central authority still has to retain the mapping of real-world IDs to pseudonyms on the blockchain. (And if they suffer a data breach and their mapping becomes public, the data on the blockchain isn't pseudonymous anymore and anybody who has a copy of the blockchain now has a wealth of PHI.)

If you've got a bunch of medical data that's been anonymized and is intended for research purposes, then there's still no point to putting that on a blockchain, because 1) the data is only as good as the party that collected it in the real world, so you just have to trust that they collected it correctly, and 2) the data is what it is, why do you need a distributed decentralized immutable append-only ledger to house a collection of historical data?

I think "medical info" is a popular hypothesized use case because people intuit that medical records and data shouldn't be the property of any one business, but most don't think through the privacy implications (or understand "database" vs. "blockchain") enough to realize that putting that kind of data on a blockchain is a nonstarter for privacy reasons alone.

e: forget all that, realism's never going to get me any of that sweet dumb VC money. I am now announcing "buttcoin", a utility coin for putting colonoscopy results on the blockchain

Blotto_Otter fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Jun 9, 2021

# ? Jun 9, 2021 18:17

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Bitcoin: no angel investors, only Faustian bargains

«‹›2271 »