3 ms·

Ethereum had a master node too. Other than that, yeah it's weird. Although I'm not sure why there's so many announcements of businesses like Microsoft, Fujitsu

Ethereum had a master node too. Other than that, yeah it's weird. Although I'm not sure why there's so many announcements of businesses like Microsoft, Fujitsu doing partnerships with IOTA. Sounds very weird and overpumped.

gst 9y ago
> Ethereum had a master node too. Ethereum never depended on a centralized master node.
- rocqua 9y ago
  There were the canary contracts, which while they were active (they've been deactivated in mid 2016). These simply stated whether a chain was good or bad, and they were controlled by the makers of ethereum. I don't know if they were ever used to mark a chain as bad, but they certainly represented centralized control. I do see your point that most of the time, ethereum functioned using the decentralized protocol, but there was a centralized fallback.
  - bhaak 9y ago
    From what I gathered from the links below, they were intended to stop mining if an unintentional hard fork would have happened. Or maybe also to force miners to upgrade? Did the Frontier release not yet have the ice age mechanism? The wiki page suggests that there was an option to ignore the canary contracts. So you could mine nevertheless without recompiling the source. There's no such option with IOTA as the coordinator is closed source. https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Bad-Chain-Canary https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Bad-Chain-Canary https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/07/22/frontier-is-coming-what-to-expect-and-how-to-prepare/ https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/07/22/frontier-is-coming-what...
JohnJamesRambo 9y ago
Businesses do that all the time, it has no drawback for them. I suspect it is like the ones with Ethereum, that will never mean they actually use Ethereum, they are just learning about it.
csomar 9y ago
That's not the point. The coordinator gets to decide their "blockchain". They don't have mining or another election mechanism.
Legogris 9y ago
Microsoft has been very promiscuous with partnerships in the recent years. It doesn't really signify much in terms of promise of individual projects.

gst 9y ago

> Ethereum had a master node too. Ethereum never depended on a centralized master node.

rocqua 9y ago
There were the canary contracts, which while they were active (they've been deactivated in mid 2016). These simply stated whether a chain was good or bad, and they were controlled by the makers of ethereum. I don't know if they were ever used to mark a chain as bad, but they certainly represented centralized control. I do see your point that most of the time, ethereum functioned using the decentralized protocol, but there was a centralized fallback.
- bhaak 9y ago
  From what I gathered from the links below, they were intended to stop mining if an unintentional hard fork would have happened. Or maybe also to force miners to upgrade? Did the Frontier release not yet have the ice age mechanism? The wiki page suggests that there was an option to ignore the canary contracts. So you could mine nevertheless without recompiling the source. There's no such option with IOTA as the coordinator is closed source. https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Bad-Chain-Canary https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Bad-Chain-Canary https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/07/22/frontier-is-coming-what-to-expect-and-how-to-prepare/ https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/07/22/frontier-is-coming-what...

JohnJamesRambo 9y ago

Businesses do that all the time, it has no drawback for them. I suspect it is like the ones with Ethereum, that will never mean they actually use Ethereum, they are just learning about it.

csomar 9y ago

That's not the point. The coordinator gets to decide their "blockchain". They don't have mining or another election mechanism.

Legogris 9y ago

Microsoft has been very promiscuous with partnerships in the recent years. It doesn't really signify much in terms of promise of individual projects.