4 ms·

I don't mean this as an attack or to be argumentative but could you elaborate on why it's so much more than a single dimensional configuration slider? A commen

by Youden 8y ago

I don't mean this as an attack or to be argumentative but could you elaborate on why it's so much more than a single dimensional configuration slider? A comment with a statement or assertion and no reasoning is very difficult to discuss.

dlubarov 8y ago
I think "centralization" is pretty ambiguous. Is Bitcoin centralized? Full nodes can be run on home PCs, so verification is decentralized, but only ASIC mining is profitable, so mining has become highly centralized. The Lightning Network adds additional roles, like payment hubs and watchtowers, with varying degrees of centralization. So we can't characterize Bitcoin as a whole as centralized or decentralized. We should talk about specific roles, and the various attacks that could be performed by coordinated members within each role. Like we could talk about the possibility of Bitmain coordinating a 51% double spend attack, or the possibility of a major LN hub bribing watchtowers to ignore foul play.
colordrops 8y ago
I could create a long list, but to start, it's not directly controlled by a single individual or organization. The mechanism used to assert leverage is different than typical centralized systems. It's not a contract or a special governmentally assigned right or physical intimidation that "centralizes" the network. It's simply computing resources. But unlike other centralized systems, anyone anywhere with enough of those resources could assert the same leverage on the network as anyone else. Furthermore, because of its distributed nature, even if someone had a majority of computing resources mining the network, the protocol is designed to disincentivize participants from cheating as it would destroy the value of the network. And they couldn't even tamper with the ledger, as public key cryptography is used to sign transactions, so they could only stop transactions from happening. It is also fully visible and transparent. This is fundamentally different from your typical centralized database sitting behind physical walls with physical security and governmental protection that a single entity could mutate and obfuscate at will.
- cryptobeanbaby 8y ago
  Technically the Ethereum network is majority owned by Vitalik Buterin and the folks who payed 0.50 USD (likely much less, if paid in BTC mined earlier). 72,009,99 of the 101,684,297 Ether means the Ethereum network has a worse Gini coefficient than North Korea or really any Fiat based economy. See also: "Quantifying decentralization" https://news.earn.com/quantifying-decentralization-e39db233c28e https://news.earn.com/quantifying-decentralization-e39db233c...
  - jobserunder 8y ago
    >likely much less, if paid in BTC mined earlier). You realize that bitcoin is money, right? It's like saying "You can afford to sell me your house for $10k today, afterall you only bought it for $5k back in 1910". When the BTC was spent at the time of the ETH crowdsale... the person doing the buying compared options of: A) Selling BTC at prevailing prices B) Doing nothing C) Spending BTC on ETH at prevailing prices Another analogy: Because you bought a car today for 30k, funded by the 150 shares of AAPL you sold just now.... means you only realy paid 3k for that car because you bought AAPL shares cheaper in the 1990's. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the statement and the significant misunderstanding about the nature of capital. Then going on to talk about the Gini coefficient as though it means anything at all seals the deal that you are out of your depth and just trying to sound smart
    - cryptobeanbaby 8y ago
      You realize Bitcoin/Ethereum are simply computer software right? And you missed the essential caveat; aprox 4.11% of Bitcoin addresses control 96.53% of all BTC in circulation. This is a conservative estimate, as anyone familiar with how Bitcoin addresses and wallets work, would know one user is likely controlling many addresses. A perfect example of this, is a few days ago 1933phfhK3ZgFQNLGSDXvqCn32k2buXY8a created a script to subdivide 111,114 BTC into several hundred addresses, from 60,000 / 30,000 / 20,000 / 10,000 / 5,000 / 500 and then to 100 BTC accounts, over the course of a few hours. [2] Following the movement here now leads to recent deposits into the Binance and Bitfinex wallets. And most importantly, on the computer science behind Ethereum - In any DLT network with an adversarial threat model it's impossible to create a smart contract with any functionality relying on external data inputs (betting on the outcome of a sports game, or tracking any real world data input) within the network as there's no way to validate the authenticity of that data unless a trusted 3rd party is designated, at which point the network becomes useless. Not even to mention the question of why anyone would want to use a token with such wildly fluctuating market price, and who's supply is controlled by a small userbase of oligarchs. Additionally, the entire cryptocoin market has an Achilles' heel.. Tether, and Bitfinex are widely suspected of counterfeiting aprox $4,000,000,000 USD (by producing USDT for free anytime they want) [3] [4] [5] [1] https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/cboebzx/2018/34-83520.pdf https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/cboebzx/2018/34-83520.pdf [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/9bfnff/near_1b_are_currently_on_the_move_from_a_silkroad/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/9bfnff/near_1b_are... [3] https://medium.com/@bitfinexed/latest https://medium.com/@bitfinexed/latest [4] https://blog.chainalysis.com/reports/tether-aug https://blog.chainalysis.com/reports/tether-aug [5] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-24/not-even-515-million-in-new-tether-can-help-this-crypto-dump https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-24/not-even-...

by Youden 8y ago

dlubarov 8y ago

I think "centralization" is pretty ambiguous. Is Bitcoin centralized? Full nodes can be run on home PCs, so verification is decentralized, but only ASIC mining is profitable, so mining has become highly centralized. The Lightning Network adds additional roles, like payment hubs and watchtowers, with varying degrees of centralization. So we can't characterize Bitcoin as a whole as centralized or decentralized. We should talk about specific roles, and the various attacks that could be performed by coordinated members within each role. Like we could talk about the possibility of Bitmain coordinating a 51% double spend attack, or the possibility of a major LN hub bribing watchtowers to ignore foul play.

colordrops 8y ago

I could create a long list, but to start, it's not directly controlled by a single individual or organization. The mechanism used to assert leverage is different than typical centralized systems. It's not a contract or a special governmentally assigned right or physical intimidation that "centralizes" the network. It's simply computing resources. But unlike other centralized systems, anyone anywhere with enough of those resources could assert the same leverage on the network as anyone else. Furthermore, because of its distributed nature, even if someone had a majority of computing resources mining the network, the protocol is designed to disincentivize participants from cheating as it would destroy the value of the network. And they couldn't even tamper with the ledger, as public key cryptography is used to sign transactions, so they could only stop transactions from happening. It is also fully visible and transparent. This is fundamentally different from your typical centralized database sitting behind physical walls with physical security and governmental protection that a single entity could mutate and obfuscate at will.

cryptobeanbaby 8y ago
Technically the Ethereum network is majority owned by Vitalik Buterin and the folks who payed 0.50 USD (likely much less, if paid in BTC mined earlier). 72,009,99 of the 101,684,297 Ether means the Ethereum network has a worse Gini coefficient than North Korea or really any Fiat based economy. See also: "Quantifying decentralization" https://news.earn.com/quantifying-decentralization-e39db233c28e https://news.earn.com/quantifying-decentralization-e39db233c...
- jobserunder 8y ago
  >likely much less, if paid in BTC mined earlier). You realize that bitcoin is money, right? It's like saying "You can afford to sell me your house for $10k today, afterall you only bought it for $5k back in 1910". When the BTC was spent at the time of the ETH crowdsale... the person doing the buying compared options of: A) Selling BTC at prevailing prices B) Doing nothing C) Spending BTC on ETH at prevailing prices Another analogy: Because you bought a car today for 30k, funded by the 150 shares of AAPL you sold just now.... means you only realy paid 3k for that car because you bought AAPL shares cheaper in the 1990's. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the statement and the significant misunderstanding about the nature of capital. Then going on to talk about the Gini coefficient as though it means anything at all seals the deal that you are out of your depth and just trying to sound smart
  - cryptobeanbaby 8y ago
    You realize Bitcoin/Ethereum are simply computer software right? And you missed the essential caveat; aprox 4.11% of Bitcoin addresses control 96.53% of all BTC in circulation. This is a conservative estimate, as anyone familiar with how Bitcoin addresses and wallets work, would know one user is likely controlling many addresses. A perfect example of this, is a few days ago 1933phfhK3ZgFQNLGSDXvqCn32k2buXY8a created a script to subdivide 111,114 BTC into several hundred addresses, from 60,000 / 30,000 / 20,000 / 10,000 / 5,000 / 500 and then to 100 BTC accounts, over the course of a few hours. [2] Following the movement here now leads to recent deposits into the Binance and Bitfinex wallets. And most importantly, on the computer science behind Ethereum - In any DLT network with an adversarial threat model it's impossible to create a smart contract with any functionality relying on external data inputs (betting on the outcome of a sports game, or tracking any real world data input) within the network as there's no way to validate the authenticity of that data unless a trusted 3rd party is designated, at which point the network becomes useless. Not even to mention the question of why anyone would want to use a token with such wildly fluctuating market price, and who's supply is controlled by a small userbase of oligarchs. Additionally, the entire cryptocoin market has an Achilles' heel.. Tether, and Bitfinex are widely suspected of counterfeiting aprox $4,000,000,000 USD (by producing USDT for free anytime they want) [3] [4] [5] [1] https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/cboebzx/2018/34-83520.pdf https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/cboebzx/2018/34-83520.pdf [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/9bfnff/near_1b_are_currently_on_the_move_from_a_silkroad/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/9bfnff/near_1b_are... [3] https://medium.com/@bitfinexed/latest https://medium.com/@bitfinexed/latest [4] https://blog.chainalysis.com/reports/tether-aug https://blog.chainalysis.com/reports/tether-aug [5] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-24/not-even-515-million-in-new-tether-can-help-this-crypto-dump https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-24/not-even-...