5 ms·

> Oh please, a lot of people keep saying this, but the reality is that Ethereum and Solidity devs simply didn't do enough research. FUD. What are you talking

> Oh please, a lot of people keep saying this, but the reality is that Ethereum and Solidity devs simply didn't do enough research. FUD. What are you talking about? Solidity is not so unsafe, nor is it correct to imply that Vitalik "didn't do his research". MAYBE he did his research and came to a different conclusion? Maybe hhis priorities were different? Regardless, he's exceptionally bright and by no measure just a hasty dev trying to make a quick buck. And your link does not point to any inherent flaws in Solidity, just opinions on language fit. Ethereum development IS in it's infancy. It WILL improve over time - like it or not.

bllguo 9y ago
This is almost cult-like. The cult of Vitalik. What we're talking about are a slew of successful attacks in the ETH ecosystem. What we're talking about are what appear to be questionable decisions in Solidity. What do you think of this thread earlier? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14810008 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14810008 It is clearly unsafe, judging from these attacks. It is clearly not designed with security in mind, which should have been a top priority. "Maybe his priorities were different" is even more damning than if people did prioritize security and failed.
- meesterdude 9y ago
  I disagree. I have no cult-ties to Ethereum. I simply did not find the argument made to be well reasoned - and the attack on the devs to be highly questionable. Have you seen Vitalik talk? he's not an idiot. I know he's smarter than me. So - i'm going to take baseless claims about competence and due-dilligence with a grain of salt. You say "clearly unsafe" but there has been, to my knowledge, only one serious flaw identified, and that is what lead to the fork. Many of these ICO thefts have been suspected internal jobs, not as the result of a new vulnerability identified. correct me if i'm wrong. If ETH is doomed, i'm happy to let best of breed win. But I'm not seeing an argument made with facts here - I'm seeing Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.
naasking 9y ago
> And your link does not point to any inherent flaws in Solidity, just opinions on language fit. I suggest you read the links in that thread that talk about the requirements of REAL smart contracts, and then come back and tell me Solidity is not hopelessly flawed. As a language for writing smart contracts, Solidity is a total minefield of unsafety. As for the reasonableness of "different conclusions", if Vitalik was responsible for Solidity, then I can't disagree more with everything you've said.
- meesterdude 9y ago
  Do you have any additional resources on the tenants of smart contracts, outside of that link? I read through it but did not see any deal breakers that could not be addressed in other ways.
  - naasking 9y ago
    The thread on LtU is ongoing as we discuss the inherent limitations of the platform. More links and discussion is still taking place (I just posted more), so check over the next few days.
    - meesterdude 9y ago
      so... nothing besides that thread? part of my issue with that thread is the time span and inactivity. it started over 2 years ago, and is not part of a large, long-running dialog within a community weighing the pros and cons. This seems small, and thus less trustworthy as a resource for me. Akin to a post on reddit with 10 upvotes and a handful of comments. I'm going to need to see more than that before I start taking those concerns seriously. If it's obviously flawed, I'd expect more dialog and drum beating outside of one thread and among a larger group of people. I am not seeing that, presently.
      - naasking 9y ago
        Nothing besides a thread populated by programming language theorists with links to over two decades of research on smart contracts and smart contract languages, all of which are safer and more composable than Solidity and Viper both, and whose linked threads have hundreds of comments from other PLT researchers? Yeah, that sounds totally useless.

bllguo 9y ago

This is almost cult-like. The cult of Vitalik. What we're talking about are a slew of successful attacks in the ETH ecosystem. What we're talking about are what appear to be questionable decisions in Solidity. What do you think of this thread earlier? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14810008 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14810008 It is clearly unsafe, judging from these attacks. It is clearly not designed with security in mind, which should have been a top priority. "Maybe his priorities were different" is even more damning than if people did prioritize security and failed.

meesterdude 9y ago
I disagree. I have no cult-ties to Ethereum. I simply did not find the argument made to be well reasoned - and the attack on the devs to be highly questionable. Have you seen Vitalik talk? he's not an idiot. I know he's smarter than me. So - i'm going to take baseless claims about competence and due-dilligence with a grain of salt. You say "clearly unsafe" but there has been, to my knowledge, only one serious flaw identified, and that is what lead to the fork. Many of these ICO thefts have been suspected internal jobs, not as the result of a new vulnerability identified. correct me if i'm wrong. If ETH is doomed, i'm happy to let best of breed win. But I'm not seeing an argument made with facts here - I'm seeing Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.

naasking 9y ago

> And your link does not point to any inherent flaws in Solidity, just opinions on language fit. I suggest you read the links in that thread that talk about the requirements of REAL smart contracts, and then come back and tell me Solidity is not hopelessly flawed. As a language for writing smart contracts, Solidity is a total minefield of unsafety. As for the reasonableness of "different conclusions", if Vitalik was responsible for Solidity, then I can't disagree more with everything you've said.

meesterdude 9y ago
Do you have any additional resources on the tenants of smart contracts, outside of that link? I read through it but did not see any deal breakers that could not be addressed in other ways.
- naasking 9y ago
  The thread on LtU is ongoing as we discuss the inherent limitations of the platform. More links and discussion is still taking place (I just posted more), so check over the next few days.
  - meesterdude 9y ago
    so... nothing besides that thread? part of my issue with that thread is the time span and inactivity. it started over 2 years ago, and is not part of a large, long-running dialog within a community weighing the pros and cons. This seems small, and thus less trustworthy as a resource for me. Akin to a post on reddit with 10 upvotes and a handful of comments. I'm going to need to see more than that before I start taking those concerns seriously. If it's obviously flawed, I'd expect more dialog and drum beating outside of one thread and among a larger group of people. I am not seeing that, presently.
    - naasking 9y ago
      Nothing besides a thread populated by programming language theorists with links to over two decades of research on smart contracts and smart contract languages, all of which are safer and more composable than Solidity and Viper both, and whose linked threads have hundreds of comments from other PLT researchers? Yeah, that sounds totally useless.