3 ms·

I think you missed that the user went beyond just using something to swap ETH for WETH and instead interacted directly (manually) with the contract, effectively

I think you missed that the user went beyond just using something to swap ETH for WETH and instead interacted directly (manually) with the contract, effectively bypassing the safe-guards that are already in place (even without exchanges) to prevent issues. The user basically guessed that this is how you turn ETH into WETH and vice-versa, without actually reading anything about it. If the user searched for "How do I turn ETH into WETH?" and read the first few links, they would have avoided this problem. If they made a mistake of entering an invalid address in a wallet for a transfer, the wallet wouldn't allow the transfer in the first place. > The entire point of Crypto/Blockchain is that is decentralized and is accessible to everyone Yes, indeed. That also implies that you're responsible enough to have a basic understanding of what you're doing. Or at least recognize that you don't have a basic understanding, and seek to attain one when needed.

jollybean 5y ago
It doesn't really matter that 'someone did something they should not'. People will always press the Magic Red Button without knowing what it does with some, if rare, consistency. That's human nature, ergo, our systems must accommodate. The fact it's possible to lose $500K whereupon 'nothing can be done about it' is a 'dealbreaker' for this tech. The truth is, when one goes down the rabbit hole, one discovers that ETH doesn't really solve any problems and creates a bunch of problematic side-effects. When you solve those side-effects you end up with something that looks like a regulated banking system. There needs to be a new angle/twist or use case that we haven't thought of yet, in order for any of this to make sense. We risk getting into accidents when we drive a car, because the 'upside' of fast travel is worth the risk. There's just no real upside with Crypto yet. NFT was a neat idea, but that's not it either.
- capableweb 5y ago
  > People will always press the Magic Red Button without knowing what it does with some, if rare, consistency. That's human nature, ergo, our systems must accommodate. Are you also frustrated that you can run `rm -rf --no-preserve-root` on your computer and it's not possible to get back your data unless you had backups since before? Clearly, this is a dealbreaker for UNIX because it allows you to delete your root partition. Why would you ever need that? > NFT was a neat idea, but that's not it either. Yeah, no, NFTs were and remain a disgusting idea, but thanks for revealing your opinion on that, makes it easier to understand where the falsehoods in the rest of your message comes from.
  - jollybean 5y ago
    "makes it easier to understand where the falsehoods in the rest of your message comes from. " Oh, yes, I'm one of those 'normies' or 'MBA Suits' (!) who can't possibly understand the genius and vision of Crypto and Blockchain. We see it is a 'Pyramid Scheme Scam' at worst, and completely useless distraction at best, because we're just not enlightened. You got me.
Adrox 5y ago
It was not “manual”. It was using MetaMask, one of the most used wallets and most recomended one! Its not like going to a shell and putting a random command. It was one of the most used GUIs for crypto!
- landemva 5y ago
  MetaMask, and any wallet, lets the user sign transactions. Wallets can't know nor validate contract internals.
  - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
    They could.
CRConrad 5y ago
> the user went beyond just using something to swap ETH for WETH and instead interacted directly (manually) with the contract Isn't it the "contract" that is supposed to be the "smart" thing here? > effectively bypassing the safe-guards that are already in place (even without exchanges) to prevent issues. YTF aren't these "safe-guards" built into the "contract", if it's supposed to be so "smart"? Even the most stupid ordinary non-"smart" conversion program has the "smarts" to reject invalid input, not confiscate it. This whole Crypto/Blockchain business is so obviously bullshit all the way down.

jollybean 5y ago

It doesn't really matter that 'someone did something they should not'. People will always press the Magic Red Button without knowing what it does with some, if rare, consistency. That's human nature, ergo, our systems must accommodate. The fact it's possible to lose $500K whereupon 'nothing can be done about it' is a 'dealbreaker' for this tech. The truth is, when one goes down the rabbit hole, one discovers that ETH doesn't really solve any problems and creates a bunch of problematic side-effects. When you solve those side-effects you end up with something that looks like a regulated banking system. There needs to be a new angle/twist or use case that we haven't thought of yet, in order for any of this to make sense. We risk getting into accidents when we drive a car, because the 'upside' of fast travel is worth the risk. There's just no real upside with Crypto yet. NFT was a neat idea, but that's not it either.

capableweb 5y ago
> People will always press the Magic Red Button without knowing what it does with some, if rare, consistency. That's human nature, ergo, our systems must accommodate. Are you also frustrated that you can run `rm -rf --no-preserve-root` on your computer and it's not possible to get back your data unless you had backups since before? Clearly, this is a dealbreaker for UNIX because it allows you to delete your root partition. Why would you ever need that? > NFT was a neat idea, but that's not it either. Yeah, no, NFTs were and remain a disgusting idea, but thanks for revealing your opinion on that, makes it easier to understand where the falsehoods in the rest of your message comes from.
- jollybean 5y ago
  "makes it easier to understand where the falsehoods in the rest of your message comes from. " Oh, yes, I'm one of those 'normies' or 'MBA Suits' (!) who can't possibly understand the genius and vision of Crypto and Blockchain. We see it is a 'Pyramid Scheme Scam' at worst, and completely useless distraction at best, because we're just not enlightened. You got me.

Adrox 5y ago

It was not “manual”. It was using MetaMask, one of the most used wallets and most recomended one! Its not like going to a shell and putting a random command. It was one of the most used GUIs for crypto!

landemva 5y ago
MetaMask, and any wallet, lets the user sign transactions. Wallets can't know nor validate contract internals.
- baobabKoodaa 5y ago
  They could.

CRConrad 5y ago

> the user went beyond just using something to swap ETH for WETH and instead interacted directly (manually) with the contract Isn't it the "contract" that is supposed to be the "smart" thing here? > effectively bypassing the safe-guards that are already in place (even without exchanges) to prevent issues. YTF aren't these "safe-guards" built into the "contract", if it's supposed to be so "smart"? Even the most stupid ordinary non-"smart" conversion program has the "smarts" to reject invalid input, not confiscate it. This whole Crypto/Blockchain business is so obviously bullshit all the way down.