keymone

13 ms·

91.
by keymone 5y ago
Reminds me of when Russia tried to blame Ukraine for downing the MH17 by producing a satellite image of the plane being chased by a jet fighter and even capturing the moment of launching the missile. Of course none of the moving objects had
92.
by keymone 5y ago
It works by surrendering any pretense of eth being a decentralized cryptocurrency and turning every node into a glorified and bloated transport/identity layer. If you’re not validating transactions - you’re trusting a third party. Ther
93.
by keymone 5y ago
> Bitcoin is the scammers dream - remote, anonymous, irreversible transactions. s/scammers// also, not anonymous without huge effort and deep expertise. exactly what money of the future is supposed to be. want reversibilit
94.
by keymone 5y ago
what about getting paid in BTC?
95.
by keymone 5y ago
what is done on purpose?
96.
by keymone 5y ago
Well sure, but the important parts aren’t in JS. I can understand the argument that to provide npm library you may need to touch that garbage of a language, I’m just happy others do it for me.
97.
by keymone 5y ago
There are variants of PoS where stakers can delegate their "votes" to other stakers and there are variants where validators compete for "leader" timeslots. These words carry certain meaning and none of it is useful or ap
98.
by keymone 5y ago
GP didn’t pick JS for a rewrite either, so yes, I’m pretty sure GP is with me on that.
99.
by keymone 5y ago
You'd have to torture me before I would make a conscious choice to pick JS over Clojure.
100.
by keymone 5y ago
Good question. Some function of how much PoW each person can deploy in order to attack the chain and how much value is secured by the chain. It’s like a relation between price of a bike and price of a lock to secure the bike.
101.
by keymone 5y ago
let's see what they actually ship, if ever.
102.
by keymone 5y ago
nope, same standard as i have for bitcoin. consensus algorithm barely changed in 12 years. the only known consensus-breaking bug that caused a chain rollback was found long before bitcoin had any significant financial relevance in the world
103.
by keymone 5y ago
seems like it does, because it changes block validation function.
104.
by keymone 5y ago
exactly what i need from the foundation of a financial system, to grow quickly and patch bugs on the fly! what could possibly go wrong.
105.
by keymone 5y ago
sharding is a pipe dream. literally no different to just throwing your hands up, spinning up few more parallel ethereum networks and proclaiming you've solved a scalability problem.
106.
by keymone 5y ago
proof of stake has nothing to do with transaction throughput.
107.
by keymone 5y ago
from a guy that many years ago said that the more code a consensus algorithm has - the worse it is. and we've only seen more and more code, turning the knobs and coming up with workarounds, year after year.
108.
by keymone 5y ago
i in fact do insist on them not understanding the mechanism. trying to force incoherent terminology is just the largest red flag signifying that lack of understanding. snide remarks is my bad, i definitely lost my patience, it's hard t
109.
by keymone 5y ago
https://bitcoinminingcouncil.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/...
110.
by keymone 5y ago
https://mksm.dev/blog/2019-11-24__case-for-80-rule/ with some references
111.
by keymone 5y ago
Everybody has that choice before they win the election, so are they all leaders? You really don’t see how this terminology is completely incoherent for this scenario?
112.
by keymone 5y ago
You’re not paying attention. Does miner have a choice what transactions to include after they win the “election”? Don’t rush, take your time.
113.
by keymone 5y ago
But when conflict is resolved by energy expenditure, it involves even less suffering.
114.
by keymone 5y ago
The answer is no and you’re clueless if you think otherwise. The “leader” has no choice in blocks or transactions after they “win” the “election”.
115.
by keymone 5y ago
> Okay, and who chooses the block? well certainly not the winner of the "election", because by the time that "election" starts, the block is already constructed. and i'm not going to read any of your links until
116.
by keymone 5y ago
and now the weaseling starts. i asked a very specific question: 1. once the "leader" is "elected" 2. do they have a choice of what block to append? you said they do, which is fundamental lack of understanding of how bitc
117.
by keymone 5y ago
> Of course, they have a choice lol, no they don't. a certain hash wins, every ~10 minutes. that hash is calculated from sha(block, nonce), where nonce is the randomized part that miner mutates to get different hashes. once a hash t
118.
by keymone 5y ago
Obviously I can’t change your decision to use this terminology, but ponder this: when the leader is elected every 10 minutes, do they get a choice of what block they append to the chain? No they don’t. So was it election of the leader or el
119.
by keymone 5y ago
There is no leader election. You trying to insist on this terminology is like trying to explain that the earth is really flat by proposing some very special space metric. All miners “vote” by hashing and one of them wins. They don’t win bec
120.
by keymone 5y ago
> The leader who wins has the privilege of proposing the next block. No, the hash that you win with, deterministically points to the only possible block that you can “propose”. Your understanding is completely backwards. You seriously do

More ›