3 ms·

No, laying out a power grid is very much not a private sector thing. In most stable countries, the grid is either operated outright by the government or the gov

No, laying out a power grid is very much not a private sector thing. In most stable countries, the grid is either operated outright by the government or the government leases the grid out to the private sector. The same thing is true with the internet cabling. >Trustless. No authority. This is very, very wrong. It's another one of those marketing lines repeated by blockchain companies that is blatantly wrong if you look into it even just a little. At minimum, you need to trust the "swarm" that you just mentioned. It's effectively acting as the authority and you're trusting it to make the right decisions. And if the swarm goes away, you can't make your transactions anymore; the value of your tokens will drop to zero. >The trade off is worth it. To this date, no one has been able to explain to me clearly what this trade off is. "It's trustless" is not a trade off, that's not communicating what the actual benefit is. And it's also just wrong.

randomhodler84 4y ago
No, you don’t have to “trust the swarm”. You broadcast it at the swarm that can present the highest valid block that satisfies the difficulty equation. This is an expensive proof to fake. The trust we have is the trust in math and physics; eg: not trust. The swarm isn’t going away. It’s grown a lot in the last 14y. You don’t get it because you DONT WANT to understand this. You keep talking about censoring and governments and trust. You can’t accept it because it is.
- hnthrow1010 4y ago
  >You broadcast it at the swarm that can present the highest valid block that satisfies the difficulty equation. And you have to trust that the swarm will not drop your transaction or devalue your tokens through various means that they have available to them. >The trust we have is the trust in math and physics That makes no sense. The "math and physics" you describe are specific equations that were chosen by the swarm operators to ensure their own profits via block rewards. The swarm can change that math at any time by changing the protocol, and they have already done so several times. You don't get to decide what the math is or whether it's favorable to you, the swarm does, and you're trusting them to keep doing it that way. They are quite literally acting as the sole authority to the system; most bitcoin users are not ever going to run a full node. >The swarm isn’t going away. It’s grown a lot in the last 14y. I should remind you, past performance is not an indicator of future results. >You don’t get it because you DONT WANT to understand this. I understand it very well. What you have been told are marketing lies. If you actually inspect the system you'll see that they're not true.
  - randomhodler84 4y ago
    They cannot devalue your token. The (taproot/segwit) tx is immutable. They can withhold it, yes. That’s why we have fees — humans are greedy, and will likely accept the tx fee as a bribe. There are always other miners that WILL take the money. The Bitcoin difficulty equation has never changed. The math has not been changed. We have newer tx formats, and a newer signature scheme. We also have complete backwards compat. Do you really understand this?
    - hnthrow1010 4y ago
      >They cannot devalue your token. Actually they can, they can technically just print more BTC by changing the protocol. Also I should remind you, Elon Musk (who is not even a miner) can devalue your token just by making a few tweets. >There are always other miners that WILL take the money. They can't do this if the other miners force a protocol change through as their blocks will start to get rejected, the only option then is to fork the chain. >The Bitcoin difficulty equation has never changed. The math has not been changed. We have newer tx formats, and a newer signature scheme. We also have complete backwards compat. This doesn't matter, the point is they have the ability to change all of it. Look at any of the bitcoin forks, this has already been done countless times. Saying "this will never happen to BTC" is certainly an opinion you can have, but it's not one based on any kind of objective "math and physics" reality of what they can or can't do. It's an opinion based on trust that they won't change it. You're trusting them to be the sole authority over the network. >Do you really understand this? Yes. Do you understand that all distributed systems have weaknesses and constraints, and are subject to change by their operators? Blockchains are not special here. Please don't trust anyone who designs these kind of systems and isn't forthcoming with a full description of the pros and cons.
      - randomhodler84 4y ago
        There are trade offs. I am acutely aware of them. In other conversations I will freely explain. I also know history, probably better than most on this board. This conversation is about trying to find the crux of your disbelief. The thing is, you and Bruce are not being original in your arguments. Some of the things you have said are absolutely undeniable the truth. I am saying it doesn’t matter. Nothing you have proposed is existential for an internet protocol, you are throwing gotchas that we mostly disregarded years ago. Sometimes, In practise, worse is better.

randomhodler84 4y ago

No, you don’t have to “trust the swarm”. You broadcast it at the swarm that can present the highest valid block that satisfies the difficulty equation. This is an expensive proof to fake. The trust we have is the trust in math and physics; eg: not trust. The swarm isn’t going away. It’s grown a lot in the last 14y. You don’t get it because you DONT WANT to understand this. You keep talking about censoring and governments and trust. You can’t accept it because it is.

hnthrow1010 4y ago
>You broadcast it at the swarm that can present the highest valid block that satisfies the difficulty equation. And you have to trust that the swarm will not drop your transaction or devalue your tokens through various means that they have available to them. >The trust we have is the trust in math and physics That makes no sense. The "math and physics" you describe are specific equations that were chosen by the swarm operators to ensure their own profits via block rewards. The swarm can change that math at any time by changing the protocol, and they have already done so several times. You don't get to decide what the math is or whether it's favorable to you, the swarm does, and you're trusting them to keep doing it that way. They are quite literally acting as the sole authority to the system; most bitcoin users are not ever going to run a full node. >The swarm isn’t going away. It’s grown a lot in the last 14y. I should remind you, past performance is not an indicator of future results. >You don’t get it because you DONT WANT to understand this. I understand it very well. What you have been told are marketing lies. If you actually inspect the system you'll see that they're not true.
- randomhodler84 4y ago
  They cannot devalue your token. The (taproot/segwit) tx is immutable. They can withhold it, yes. That’s why we have fees — humans are greedy, and will likely accept the tx fee as a bribe. There are always other miners that WILL take the money. The Bitcoin difficulty equation has never changed. The math has not been changed. We have newer tx formats, and a newer signature scheme. We also have complete backwards compat. Do you really understand this?
  - hnthrow1010 4y ago
    >They cannot devalue your token. Actually they can, they can technically just print more BTC by changing the protocol. Also I should remind you, Elon Musk (who is not even a miner) can devalue your token just by making a few tweets. >There are always other miners that WILL take the money. They can't do this if the other miners force a protocol change through as their blocks will start to get rejected, the only option then is to fork the chain. >The Bitcoin difficulty equation has never changed. The math has not been changed. We have newer tx formats, and a newer signature scheme. We also have complete backwards compat. This doesn't matter, the point is they have the ability to change all of it. Look at any of the bitcoin forks, this has already been done countless times. Saying "this will never happen to BTC" is certainly an opinion you can have, but it's not one based on any kind of objective "math and physics" reality of what they can or can't do. It's an opinion based on trust that they won't change it. You're trusting them to be the sole authority over the network. >Do you really understand this? Yes. Do you understand that all distributed systems have weaknesses and constraints, and are subject to change by their operators? Blockchains are not special here. Please don't trust anyone who designs these kind of systems and isn't forthcoming with a full description of the pros and cons.
    - randomhodler84 4y ago
      There are trade offs. I am acutely aware of them. In other conversations I will freely explain. I also know history, probably better than most on this board. This conversation is about trying to find the crux of your disbelief. The thing is, you and Bruce are not being original in your arguments. Some of the things you have said are absolutely undeniable the truth. I am saying it doesn’t matter. Nothing you have proposed is existential for an internet protocol, you are throwing gotchas that we mostly disregarded years ago. Sometimes, In practise, worse is better.