• gila@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    9 months ago

    Oh nice, that’s how high Solana’s TPS has gone in testing (in practice it hovers around 5-10k TPS). There’s also newer chains like Aptos that claim to be able to handle 150k TPS with subsecond finality. Of course, neither of these chains are very decentralised, but at least they aren’t fully permissioned and centralised. Especially on a network belonging to a partisan, anti-competitive, anti-trust law-breaking, Wikileaks funding thieving Israel supporters like Visa.

    • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      And of course we can rest assured that nobody profiting off bitcoin is morally questionable

      • gila@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        9 months ago

        Ah yes, Bitcoin bad because some people that use it are bad, how did I never think of that

        • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I’m not saying that, rather I’m saying that I don’t see how either thing is clearly morally superior.

          • gila@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            9 months ago

            Bitcoin is open-source software, a network of nodes running Bitcoin core, the source code for which you can find here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

            Morals are a consequence of free will, which Bitcoin does not have. There are valid moralistic concerns about Bitcoin, but they are related to the impact of Bitcoin, rather than whether it is a moral system.

    • TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      General question, because I don’t give a shit about blockchain to research it.

      Does it have a way to quickly and effectively handle fraud? And don’t tell me “there’s no way to commit fraud” because people can steal wallet passwords no fucking problem. With most banks they will actively track fraud, cancel those transactions, and restore your funds and possibly shut down the card automatically while still allowing the account to exist so you can access your money. Is that the case with blockchain?

      • gila@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        It depends on whether you’re interacting with the blockchain directly, or via a custodial solution more appropriate for end consumers. Same like how you don’t get a refund if you operate a western union branch and fuck up the wire.

      • parpol@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Yes. There are Escrow services in crypto that hold and issue chargebacks, but it is to to you if you want to use such a service.

        centralized crypto exchanges also have fraud combatting teams. An example is that exchange that sponsors kitboga, the youtuber who screws around with Indian scammers. They lock scammers’ accounts from withdrawing but not depositing so they keep sending victims’ money to these accounts, and then eventually they lock the accounts and transfer the money back to the victims.

        Obviously an issue with this approach is the scammers can just use decentralized wallets, but recently exchanges started blocking transactions to these too unless you provide KYC info about them, so they’re trying at least.

        If you do things right, you can be relatively safe from fraud and scams, but most people won’t do things the right way.