fredfoobar

11 ms·

61.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Satoshi fixed a bug (that reverted it back to the initial rules everyone agreed upon). The DAO hack actually was an exploitation of the rules that everyone agreed upon in the DAO, recursively calling a function in your smart contract layer
62.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
When there is a prominent founder, everyone usually tends to defer to them (in this case, Vitalik, see what happened to ETC vs ETH).
63.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
How can you verify that? currently everybody just listens to what he has to say, when he decided to undo the DAO hack, the original "immutable" chain just died off because Vitalik put his vote on ETH. Sincerely, I really wish he h
64.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
> Our current financial system doesn't give people the ability to independently verify anything at all; it's even worse than the most centralized chains in that regard. I'm sorry, that sounds incorrect, many people have be
65.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Yeah yeah, everything can always be changed in the future.
66.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
looks like you missed "controls a large percentage of total ETH"
67.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
> Bitcoin already uses a very high percentage of the total energy that the global financial services industry does, and it moves a very small amount of money around to show for it. Citation needed. Citation that counters that perception:
68.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
I'm here to help that transition, It's already happening, many folks I know are transitioning to a hardware wallet. I've personally helped people onboard on to lightning and running their own node. The whole process of runnin
69.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
You're somehow implying that bitcoin can't do that, how'd you come to that conclusion.
70.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
[responding to the pre-edit question about PoW] I just did, you don't need any capital to run a node. The book documents an incident where there was majority hash-rate (miners) wanting to change the rules against the wishes of the user
71.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
> Compare this to PoW, where only 51% of hashrate needs to be participating/complicit to censor certain transactions, the other 49% have no way of fighting back, and the only tool the community has to fork away is to change the PoW
72.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
There's a whole book written about the history of this: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/57429394-the-blocksize-w... "Roughly 90% of the hash power once threatened to change the rules of #Bitcoin beli
73.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Thanks, A carbon tax will be a boon for stranded/wasted energy as well, I wouldn't see why a bitcoin mining operation can't use better sources of energy to mine and be more profitable. It's based on consuming electricit
74.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Yeah, now you are proposing a system that is going to be secured purely on that stake everyone acquired, THAT's the issue.
75.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
https://bisq.network/ exists, you can trade bitcoin p2p already.
76.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
The crux of it is that you can't rewrite history trivially, you have to expend a lot energy to change history, and energy can't be created nor destroyed. For something specific to bitcoin/blockchain: https://www.yo
77.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrwgYDAoZV0
78.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
No, that wasn't my gripe. Bitcoin is a decentralized technological solution that almost completely replaces the banking system, I'd prefer that over the current Banking system, and bitcoin is global to boot. Transaction per day -&
79.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Sir, this has been discussed extensively whenever it comes up. Who will slash the slashers?? Just THINK about the complexity you're introducing, you're just obfuscating the system more and more to just avoid some loopholes, while
80.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Why is there such a strong status-quo bias among people I thought were technologists, and what do you guys defend? the banking system?? really? Do you all remember the energy FUD that the internet got back in the late 90s [1]? Please! lets
81.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Sorry, it was more for your "opinion" on PoW, not the carbon tax. > This would immediately make unproductive energy use (cough POW crypto cough) a lot less profitable, You seem to have just one target in mind that would get hit
82.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Everything in this universe is analogous to Proof of Work, it's the most natural system out there. If there is a base monetary layer for the internet, it should be Proof of Work based (and Bitcoin, because it's got the most work d
83.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Consider not rabbitholing into a narrative and understanding reality: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/bitcoin-uses-less-than-...
84.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Yeah, nope. Consider the amount of energy wasted right now and also in similar "industries". https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/bitcoin-uses-less-than-...
85.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
There is no place for a PoS protocol layer on the internet, I'm willing to die on this hill.
86.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Not to mention the cavalier attitude towards their tokenomics (quite literally monetary policy now), how often they can change it. It simply doesn't inspire confidence. A monetary layer should be immutable once a good set of rules have
87.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
The negative consequences were mentioned in another comment: You should first get "well versed into PoS systems", The stakers (and their adjoints) can collude and decide to reorg the chain for a different outcome. This can be done
88.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
The HN narrative engine is so biased towards ETH that some are even asking for advice on where to buy ETH. This is ridiculous, just think through the consequences of a PoS system, you all are smart folks, I presume.
89.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
Holy shit, lol. This is an insane take. Proof of Stake is NOT secure, the stakers can collude to reorganize the chain at almost no cost. This is like the exact system we tried to get away from, the USD system is also a Proof of Stake.
90.
by fredfoobar 5y ago
TBH, I believe we need another AI winter to come up with something better than the AI "black boxes" we have right now.

More ›