13 ms·

This actually makes me like blockchain technologies more. Finance has always been a game. A game in which the price of entry can be prohibitively high to a lot

This actually makes me like blockchain technologies more. Finance has always been a game. A game in which the price of entry can be prohibitively high to a lot of people. Blockchain really levels the playing field. People are free to play the game (and metagame) with virtually no cost of entry besides time. Granted this may change as the meta evolves. Bigger players with more resources may be able to find new "exploits". However the risk increases as well and there has never been this much financial leverage introduced as with blockchain.

croes 6y ago
ETH is a bad example. It had critical bugs and is more vulnerable to 51% attacks.
- zionic 6y ago
  [citation needed] Perhaps you meant ETC?
  - twox2 6y ago
    I would also like to see this claim backed up or at least offered with more context.
    - croes 6y ago
      https://bravenewcoin.com/insights/bug-causes-chaos-on-the-ethereum-blockchain https://bravenewcoin.com/insights/bug-causes-chaos-on-the-et... https://our.status.im/vitalik-escalates-eth-2-0-merge-as-miners-plan-a-51-attack/ https://our.status.im/vitalik-escalates-eth-2-0-merge-as-min...
  - Scoundreller 6y ago
    Wasn’t present-day ETH a 51% attack against now-called Ethereum Classic (ETC) because they wanted to roll-back a transaction/vulnerability they didn’t like?
    - crazydoggers 6y ago
      No. ETC was simply a hard fork of a minority of people that didn’t like a change to the blockchain that fixed that DAO contract bug. A 51% attack involves a group acquiring 51% of the hashing power in order to confirm transactions that otherwise would be rejected (like double spends) Any group of miners (less than 51% in the case of ETC) are free to update or not update their clients as they choose. When any set of groups begin to diverge, then you have a hard fork. The difference being with a 51% attack there’s one chain everyone agrees on, however, someone’s been able to get everyone to agree on fraudulent transactions. A hard fork creates 2 chains that those two groups then maintain totally separate transaction histories on.
      - Scoundreller 6y ago
        Okay, but which coding errors/vulnerabilities get on the agenda to fix via rollback and which don’t? That couldn’t be the first or last contract bug like this. If I come across a bug, will it only be fixed if I only exploit it to a large degree? What’s the limit to “sorry for your loss”?
        crazydoggers 6y ago
        It’s a democracy. If you can convince enough people that it makes sense then you can implement a change. The ETC fork occurred because ETH was in its infancy and it was deemed by that majority that there was a legitimate bug that wasn’t in the interest of anyone to allow to go unfixed. Anyone is free to disagree. The value in the blockchain is in its democracy. As soon as you fork, if you have enough people you still maintain value in both forks, so it’s no loss to anyone.
        Scoundreller 6y ago
        Sounds like a terrible place to execute MY code. A rollback has occurred and there’s no policy on when/why they’d encourage it again.
        6y ago
  - croes 6y ago
    https://our.status.im/vitalik-escalates-eth-2-0-merge-as-miners-plan-a-51-attack/ https://our.status.im/vitalik-escalates-eth-2-0-merge-as-min...
purple_ferret 6y ago
>People are free to play the game (and metagame) with virtually no cost of entry besides time. Fees make using small amounts of money prohibitively expensive. When I casually looked into yield farming, for instance, I saw a lot of 'small' players struggling not to lose a significant portion of it just from setting things up.
- dgellow 6y ago
  You have other blockchains than Ethereum, with lower fees.
  - jl2718 6y ago
    But there are no onramps available to US citizens for anything but eth.
    - 7sidedmarble 6y ago
      What does that mean?
      - jl2718 6y ago
        An on-ramp meaning an exchange that sells stablecoins to be used on a defi chain. There are several PoS defi chains with orders of magnitude lower fees, which exclude US citizens from the onramps. Some of them actually offer some degree of consumer protection from predatory contracts and exploits, as well as promoting fair-launch projects with low fees.

croes 6y ago

ETH is a bad example. It had critical bugs and is more vulnerable to 51% attacks.

zionic 6y ago
[citation needed] Perhaps you meant ETC?
- twox2 6y ago
  I would also like to see this claim backed up or at least offered with more context.
  - croes 6y ago
    https://bravenewcoin.com/insights/bug-causes-chaos-on-the-ethereum-blockchain https://bravenewcoin.com/insights/bug-causes-chaos-on-the-et... https://our.status.im/vitalik-escalates-eth-2-0-merge-as-miners-plan-a-51-attack/ https://our.status.im/vitalik-escalates-eth-2-0-merge-as-min...
- Scoundreller 6y ago
  Wasn’t present-day ETH a 51% attack against now-called Ethereum Classic (ETC) because they wanted to roll-back a transaction/vulnerability they didn’t like?
  - crazydoggers 6y ago
    No. ETC was simply a hard fork of a minority of people that didn’t like a change to the blockchain that fixed that DAO contract bug. A 51% attack involves a group acquiring 51% of the hashing power in order to confirm transactions that otherwise would be rejected (like double spends) Any group of miners (less than 51% in the case of ETC) are free to update or not update their clients as they choose. When any set of groups begin to diverge, then you have a hard fork. The difference being with a 51% attack there’s one chain everyone agrees on, however, someone’s been able to get everyone to agree on fraudulent transactions. A hard fork creates 2 chains that those two groups then maintain totally separate transaction histories on.
    - Scoundreller 6y ago
      Okay, but which coding errors/vulnerabilities get on the agenda to fix via rollback and which don’t? That couldn’t be the first or last contract bug like this. If I come across a bug, will it only be fixed if I only exploit it to a large degree? What’s the limit to “sorry for your loss”?
      - crazydoggers 6y ago
        It’s a democracy. If you can convince enough people that it makes sense then you can implement a change. The ETC fork occurred because ETH was in its infancy and it was deemed by that majority that there was a legitimate bug that wasn’t in the interest of anyone to allow to go unfixed. Anyone is free to disagree. The value in the blockchain is in its democracy. As soon as you fork, if you have enough people you still maintain value in both forks, so it’s no loss to anyone.
        Scoundreller 6y ago
        Sounds like a terrible place to execute MY code. A rollback has occurred and there’s no policy on when/why they’d encourage it again.
        6y ago
- croes 6y ago
  https://our.status.im/vitalik-escalates-eth-2-0-merge-as-miners-plan-a-51-attack/ https://our.status.im/vitalik-escalates-eth-2-0-merge-as-min...

purple_ferret 6y ago

>People are free to play the game (and metagame) with virtually no cost of entry besides time. Fees make using small amounts of money prohibitively expensive. When I casually looked into yield farming, for instance, I saw a lot of 'small' players struggling not to lose a significant portion of it just from setting things up.

dgellow 6y ago
You have other blockchains than Ethereum, with lower fees.
- jl2718 6y ago
  But there are no onramps available to US citizens for anything but eth.
  - 7sidedmarble 6y ago
    What does that mean?
    - jl2718 6y ago
      An on-ramp meaning an exchange that sells stablecoins to be used on a defi chain. There are several PoS defi chains with orders of magnitude lower fees, which exclude US citizens from the onramps. Some of them actually offer some degree of consumer protection from predatory contracts and exploits, as well as promoting fair-launch projects with low fees.