4 ms·
I'm not too familiar with cryptocurrency or generally blockchain implementations, so I wonder: shouldn't it be normal that at least the reference clients of any
by prance 10y ago
I'm not too familiar with cryptocurrency or generally blockchain implementations, so I wonder: shouldn't it be normal that at least the reference clients of any such protocol should be proven correct, and follow a rigorous scheme accepting contributions?
I mean, all the mathematical rigor and proofs of the underlying theory and protocols are basically useless if the rigor isn't carried over to at least the reference implementations. (If people choose to use alternative, non-proven clients, fine, that's their own decision and risk.)
- rebuilder 10y agoThat's not really how the whole scene works. There's little upfront demand for such rigour, because the potential userbase for any given coin largely don't know to demand it. Instead, poor implementations fail and either get discarded or patched, and eventually, hopefully, whatever remains will be solid. What I'm trying to say here is, the whole cryptocurrency field is much, much messier than you seem to expect.
- prance 10y agoWell, maybe I was indeed too optimistic about a field that's both open source and has the word "crypto" in it :(