3 ms·
There will never be enough "adversarial hardening". It will never be possible for people to verify that their Lego blocks of finance are actually robust. The on
by acjohnson55 4y ago
There will never be enough "adversarial hardening". It will never be possible for people to verify that their Lego blocks of finance are actually robust. The only thing that will create trust is time elapsed without an exploit, but that means that the only thing trustworthy will be the oldest, most ossified pieces. But as soon as you start composing those pieces with anything custom, you're back in danger. Welcome to the dark forest.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago<< It will never be possible for people to verify that their Lego blocks of finance are actually robust. Eh. Tbh, I am not sure what robust means in this context. From what I have seen so far, a ridiculously high amount of finance moves through simple text files ( once you get down to that level ). From technical perspective, it is not hard to mess with ACH, but there are levels of compliance enforced by live humans that keep it together. I do think I agree with your conclusion though. The most ossified piece wins.
- based69 4y agoBlacklisting/censorship of tokens/addresses is an existential crisis for defi that noone wants to talk about. Most of defi is based on collateral, and if locked collateral can be debased by censorship, the whole thing falls apart. A good reminder as to why crappy old dumb rock ossified btc with no features and 13 years of track record and no founder is something pretty special
- rnk 4y agoI get the potential existential crisis issue - but bitcoin is subject to that, because can't governments blacklist a wallet? Then that person can't effectively take their btc away, just like in regular banking, based on some on govt identifying a criminal action, people lose their bank money when it is identified (drug dealers or whatever).