frankenst1

12 ms·

61.
by frankenst1 6y ago
How ironic that the forks of Bitcoin with bigger block sizes appear to be the coins more likely to be manipulated by "influential leaders" - resulting in numerous and continuous coin splits.
62.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> The power footprint of miners is easy to find. it could be shut down probably overnight. This only works for single large-scale miners after you raided all factories/households with above average energy consumption. Many small min
63.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> You think the likelihood of all these things are comparable? Epstein contributed funding to MIT Media Labs which run the Digital Currency Group which provided funding to Bitcoin developers. Boom. Conspiracy confirmed. Conspiracy theori
64.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Impressive, I wouldn't know where to begin. Could you expand on which items you included and how you decided on how they were weighted?
65.
by frankenst1 6y ago
>> It is huge, I agree. But ridiculous in comparison to what? > The current system, which is far more efficient. You keep repeating that. Do you have any sources to back that claim?
66.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Don't forget Epstein and the Illuminati.
67.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> the core group controlling bitcoin decided a tiny block size limit suited their interests Even if there was some conspiracy going on, this happened in what 2017? The price of Bitcoin rose from ~2K to ~60K up to today. So whatever &#x27
68.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> A BTC transaction is currently estimated to take 821 kWh. That's ridiculous. It is huge, I agree. But ridiculous in comparison to what? How much energy/CO2 does the traditional financial system consume/produce (incl. bui
69.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> For now, the cost of Bitcoin is on top of the cost of the existing system, not instead of it. You can have a closed loop of exchanging Bitcoin for goods and services without any legacy financial system involved. Just because you prefer
70.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> The "legacy financial system" is far, FAR more energy efficient in comparison. Citation needed. The legacy financial system has a huge infrastructure behind it to secure and maintain it (buildings, transport, security, ...).
71.
by frankenst1 6y ago
They can be faster than `Map` but: 1) Slower than hash tables 2) `{}` is not empty but has default keys 3) `{}` has multiple read-only keys 2 and 3 are caused by the prototype chain (properties not present on the initial object will be atte
72.
by frankenst1 6y ago
JavaScript also lacks a proper hash table. I wonder how much faster a native implementation could possibly be over say `Map()` (which keeps insertion order by maintaining linked lists and does not have constant op).
73.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> The claim is that [...] one of those [forks] is going to be dead. This is much weaker claim than your original one (~"the market values popularity over technical features") and a much less controversial one. > something li
74.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> I was saying that "in the realm of blockchain forking, the less popular one will get demolished". Sorry I still find myself reading your words the same way. If you can only determine if a fork was "demolished" by ra
75.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> It's not tautological to say that you get 100% or 0%. I was referring to your argument that "popularity contests don't think much of unpopular (i.e. minority) forks". > The thing called 'ethereum' at th
76.
by frankenst1 6y ago
If you redefine 'forks' to refer to the minority chains you are of course correct that "popularity contests don't think much of forks", but this would be a) tautological and b) not the correct use of a well-defined
77.
by frankenst1 6y ago
The second most popular (i.e. valuable) cryptocurrency (ETH) is a fork of Ethereum, while the original (now called ETC) is practically dead.
78.
by frankenst1 6y ago
> the block size could never be touched without ruining the vaguely-defined “decentralization” Fun fact: All forks of Bitcoin which attempted to remove it actually ruined their decentralization in the process and are now either dead or
79.
by frankenst1 6y ago
crystal build --no-debug --release simple.cr -o simple-cr
80.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Clocks in at 1.48s for me which is faster than Ruby but slower than JavaScript.
81.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Yep, this is probably the most readable implementation of all languages so far. I ran it and got 3.59s (Go 0.82s, Rust 1.55s, Shell 42.6s(?)) For accurate diff results, one would need `puts` instead of `p` to get rid of the additional quote
82.
by frankenst1 6y ago
One of the specs is to not read the file in full but to parse it in chunks from stdin. You also need to sort the output by count.
83.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Could you update it so that you have "word count\n" on each line?
84.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Here are my results with JavaScript (node.js v14.15.4) added: Language | Simple | Optimized | Notes ------------- | ------ | --------- | ----- `wc -w` | 0.17 | 0.16 | `wc` reference; optimized sets `LC_ALL=C`
85.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Probably because twice the amount of transactions do require as much energy as half of the amount of transactions or as much energy as no transactions at all, i.e. Bitcoin's energy usage depends on the difficulty of mining a block whic
86.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Very cool, auto-conversion is really awesome, I think I found a bug though: 5 kg + 5 kg = 10 kg but 5 kg + 6 kg = 11.000 kg
87.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Tesla's SEC filing ( https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/0001... ): > Thereafter, we invested an aggregate $1.50 billion in bitcoin under this policy and may acquire and h
88.
by frankenst1 6y ago
The 51% attack you are thinking of applies only to transaction ordering and inclusion in blocks and does not apply to consensus rules (like the 21M limit). Anyone (one miner, 5%, 51%, 80%, ...) who decides to change these rules is free to d
89.
by frankenst1 6y ago
Bitcoin is permissionless and bootstrapped. It had to start with 0 users and $0 value. 10 years later it is now worth $50K and has 100M users (doubling every ~2 years). We are currently living in a world in which the rich get richer (bailou
90.
by frankenst1 6y ago
10%, 50%, 80% doesn't matter. Any node who wants to change Bitcoin's code and rules is free to do so. It just creates an additional coin and it already has happened dozen of times (Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin SV, Bitcoin ABC, Bitcoin Ca

More ›