3 ms·

Thanks for your lengthy reply! This is all fine and good, but you're forgetting about a central aspect of reality: In the end, a user realistically has to dec

Thanks for your lengthy reply! This is all fine and good, but you're forgetting about a central aspect of reality: In the end, a user realistically has to decide for one piece of software. You can't expect a single user to store their money across 5 different vendor's software. Probably not even 2. So each user must decide. Now how are they supposed to do so? Throw a dice? Have randomness decide what secures potentially thousands of $ worth of your money? That seems like an impressively reckless thing to ask of your users. And beyond that it's just unrealistic. You can't expect that people will be fine with storing their money in an effectively random fashion. If money is involved, people will want clear guidance on what is the most secure way, not "what are 5 different ways of which we don't tell you which one is the best". If they decided to go for a sane approach and provide a known-good client, they could still develop N others and use them as unit tests to test the primary client against. Or just get people to use them without forcing them to do so. E.g. they could just ask users nicely.

ChadNauseam 4y ago
This is like saying the problem with linux is that there’s too many distros. How do you expect users to choose one? How can you compete with Windows, which has one easy answer for what to install, when every linux user needs to first become an expert on whether they want to use arch, ubuntu, nix, debian, etc. I think it would be kind of silly to say that, because the whole point of linux is that it’s open and if you put the work in you can set everything up just the way you like it. Equivalently, the whole point of ethereum is that there’s no boss. Imagine if the EF could push an auto-update that everyone’s clients and wallets automatically pulled. If that were possible, ethereum would just be a centralized service with extra steps. If you want a centralized service for moving your money around, there are plenty. The single most important design principle of ethereum is that it’s not centralized, so saying “but it would be so much easier to use if it were a bit more centralized!” will fall on deaf ears.

ChadNauseam 4y ago

This is like saying the problem with linux is that there’s too many distros. How do you expect users to choose one? How can you compete with Windows, which has one easy answer for what to install, when every linux user needs to first become an expert on whether they want to use arch, ubuntu, nix, debian, etc. I think it would be kind of silly to say that, because the whole point of linux is that it’s open and if you put the work in you can set everything up just the way you like it. Equivalently, the whole point of ethereum is that there’s no boss. Imagine if the EF could push an auto-update that everyone’s clients and wallets automatically pulled. If that were possible, ethereum would just be a centralized service with extra steps. If you want a centralized service for moving your money around, there are plenty. The single most important design principle of ethereum is that it’s not centralized, so saying “but it would be so much easier to use if it were a bit more centralized!” will fall on deaf ears.