| 1)
> "You haven't used DropBox in a year, so we are closing your account". The cost of storing data long-term is non-zero. How would Filecoin offer free storage? > No more "This video has been demonetized for all advertisers in our network." YouTube creators want community guidelines. They don't always like the way that they are interpreted and enforced. I'm sure a small minority wants to build something where they can upload absolutely anything without being censored. For those folks there is Gab.ai. It will never become mainstream though and the advertisers with big budgets will opt out. > Limewire, Bittorent, Popcorn Time, DC++, Napster, Kazaa Users chose Netflix and other centralized streaming services because of their ease of use. Also, copyright enforcement may have played a small role. Some users were claiming that they weren't using the above software to download pirated content. That was a bunch of bullshit. 2) > Decentralized peer2peer content delivery is currently owned by centralized players, like Akamai. I see no reason why it could not work when it is owned by its users. There's no reason why it couldn't work, but there's also no business need driving it. 3) Once an account is compromised in a trustless environment there is no way for the owner to take ownership of that account again. Also, in a trustless environment it's always possible for A) a smart contract to be hacked and B) a bug in the virtual machine to be exploited. Both centralized and decentralized face security issues. 4) They will still be contentious though. Look at Bitcoin. Imagine the last election but applied to software. It's not going to end pretty and unlike a normal company people in the community may not "move on." 5) There may be services in the future, but that would be anathema to the movement. The cryptocurrency apologists want each individual to manage their private keys. They would argue that 1) if you don't have control of your private keys you do not have control of your cryptocurrency 2) it's centralization. 6) This didn't address my criticism. There is no proof that anything like this is even remotely possible. |
Actually, a hybrid solution is possible using multisig and secret sharing algorithms. Many crypto enthusiasts are aware of how the "real world" works. People need to be able to recover access to their accounts if they lose their keys. It's not all black and white like you make it out to be.
For example, I implemented a solution for a mobile app that stores a users private key in their phone's keychain. It also splits the key into two parts, and emails the user 1 part, and stores the other part on a centralized server. If a user loses their key, they can get the first recovery part from their email, and by verifying their identity via 2 factor, the centralized server provides them with the second recovery part.