everfree

65 ms·

691.
by everfree 5y ago
IIRC they have written blog posts in the past saying just as much. Without losing their stake to slashing penalties, though, the worst kind of attack 66% (not 51% iirc) can do anyways is a censorship or denial of service attack. Which is ba
692.
by everfree 5y ago
I don't believe they could - the protocol has some mitigations against this including an inactivity/censorship fee that applies equally to every staker.
693.
by everfree 5y ago
In addition, certain classes of attack will cause the attacker's stake to be automatically forfeit via slashing. So in that case not only is the wealth of the attacker obliterated, but their stake itself is destroyed and the network ca
694.
by everfree 5y ago
Everyone gets the same percentage, not the same amount in absolute terms.
695.
by everfree 5y ago
Looks like a way to purposefully create a biased (center-weighted) random number generator out of multiple calls.
696.
by everfree 5y ago
AWS does not rent out bitcoin mining rigs and really has no incentive to. To mine at a profit requires expensive, extremely specialized single-purpose hardware that can only be used for bitcoin mining and can't be re-used for anything
697.
by everfree 5y ago
Basically, at the point of the merge, nodes stop paying attention to what the PoW calculations are saying about the head of the execution chain, and start to pay attention to what the beacon chain (PoS chain) is saying about the head of the
698.
by everfree 5y ago
I've seen people increasingly buy stablecoins to earn interest from lending them (higher rates than a bank or bond gives you), which I would argue is inherent utility. Plus, the idea of holding USD stablecoins in countries with poor ba
699.
by everfree 5y ago
RAI is a lot easier to understand than the US dollar, in my experience. Unless you mean "understand how the price behaves", in which case RAI is pretty simple too.
700.
by everfree 5y ago
Letting people hold interest-bearing dollar equivalents (USDC, DAI) in countries with weak finance infrastructure.
701.
by everfree 5y ago
It's different in terms of inflation schedule, contract support and of course that it's not trying to be anything but a meme. Would you mind elaborating on your thoughts?
702.
by everfree 5y ago
I read about 2 articles per month from each of 5 news sites. Each site wants me to pay a $10/mo subscription. I'm not paying $50/mo for 10 articles. They need to figure out a way to fix their pricing model as a group.
703.
by everfree 5y ago
This is uninformed. What do you call USDC, which is directly redeemable for US Dollars by anyone with a Coinbase account? Every USDC is backed by one USD of deposits in a US-based bank. USDC is a stablecoin, and there are plenty of others o
704.
by everfree 5y ago
The Compound Finance smart contract, and similar contracts, let you deposit digital assets, including digital dollars, and earn borrowing fees from others who want to take on leverage. Unlike in traditional finance, the barrier to entry is
705.
by everfree 5y ago
That is absolutely true, but even legal contracts can't help you with bad assumptions that underpin the entire contract itself.
706.
by everfree 5y ago
Is there something about formal verification of systems that I don't understand?
707.
by everfree 5y ago
If the current financial system really can fix itself and become better than cryptocurrency through democracy, then I don't really get what it has to fear from cryptocurrency. Under that hypothetical, cryptocurrency would be inferior,
708.
by everfree 5y ago
> Trusting any smart contract of sufficient complexity is like trusting that a code base has absolutely zero bugs and zero unanticipated edge cases. I just don't see that as realistic. You can do this to some extent using formal ver
709.
by everfree 5y ago
What are the real worries then?
710.
by everfree 5y ago
With slashing PoS, if stakers tried to rewrite the left 2 weeks of the chain they could have their stake taken away as a penalty for signing votes on multiple forks.
711.
by everfree 5y ago
> this is a HUGE problem for PoS The problem of exchanges not keeping proper liquid reserves has nothing to do with PoS. If they stake customer ETH without permission, that ETH leaves their full custody and therefore they are lying to th
712.
by everfree 5y ago
I think you're jumping to the "risky" conclusion a bit prematurely. > What if they die or go bankrupt and no one agrees on who owns ETH? By "owner", do you mean the core developers who own the protocol repositori
713.
by everfree 5y ago
Ethereum regularly undergoes hard forks to change its parameters. There's no schelling point over protocol specifics with Ethereum like there is with, say, Bitcoin.
714.
by everfree 5y ago
>Is that because the mined blocks themselves are still valid (i.e. the hashes check out), regardless of the presence of an attacker? Yes. A censorship attack is just that - it's about mining valid blocks that ignore transactions fro
715.
by everfree 5y ago
1. Under PoW, a 51% attacker can continuously attack profitably. All the energy they expend gets returned as mining rewards just like normal, and they can potentially even (up to) double their rewards if they censor the other 49%. The only
716.
by everfree 5y ago
>You can't fork an exchange off of the network without also disrupting every single user that parks funds on that exchange. Anyone who willingly opts into staking on a shady exchange, agreeing to a contract saying that they might be
717.
by everfree 5y ago
Ethereum's PoS design is censorship-proof up to 33% and censorship-resistant up to 66% of staked Ether. Compare to PoW's 51% and you'll see that they're somewhat comparable.
718.
by everfree 5y ago
This property is called Weak Subjectivity and is indeed a compromise that PoS makes over PoW. However, in practice, the trust assumptions aren't much higher than when you, say, download node software from a source that you trust. >
719.
by everfree 5y ago
> it might be possible to achieve wide enough consensus among stakers in Western countries to punish China (for some reason), e.g. willingly losing part of their stakes to empty major Chinese wallets. According to Ethereum's PoS imp
720.
by everfree 5y ago
This isn't really true. You also have to buy equipment and run specialized software to participate in PoS. It requires keeping a node connected to the internet with high uptime, and maintaining its software and hardware. Plus, due to s

More ›