mattdesl

17 ms·

181.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Hooray for tech monopolies prohibiting the use of open source payment protocols and continuing to force a ridiculous rent on users and developers? Typical HN view, at least.
182.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Most artists using NFTs for revenue are not using IG, so are unaffected by this news. NFT is in many ways anti-Meta, just buy/sell/mint directly with your wallet. It is now dead in the water in any app, unfortunately. Apple charge
183.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Most artists using NFTs for revenue are not using IG, so are unaffected by this news. This is dead in the water in any app, anyways. Apple charges 30% fee on all in-app NFT sales, and on top of that Apple ToS prohibits any “functional” use
184.
by mattdesl 4y ago
You are describing centralized and walled-garden services run by middlemen. The significant difference of a blockchain is that it is a decentralized protocol that any individual or state can build upon, much like HTTPS. Pix, for example, is
185.
by mattdesl 4y ago
The article cites a tweet, which cites Ethernodes. According to that site, 63% of hosted nodes are run by Amazon, or about 39% of all nodes. The next largest host is Hetzner at 7% of hosted (far lower than it was a few months ago, because
186.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Users cede very little control to PoS validators in Ethereum. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34685482
187.
by mattdesl 4y ago
There are no mining pools in Ethereum today. The chain is "immutable" only up to the point that the social layer wants it to be; majority users can change the protocol as they see fit (see EIP 1559, PoS, and other forks).
188.
by mattdesl 4y ago
What you are describing does exist in some blockchains, like Tezos. But Ethereum's governance is social: not driven by token stake or "coin voting." In Ethereum PoS, users do not cede control of the protocol to validators - t
189.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Placing control of the world’s compute under a small handful of powerful megacorps is not exactly ideal. Imagining a future where we can use and participate in (as stakers/validators) decentralized compute, storage, transactions, con
190.
by mattdesl 4y ago
These services exist outside of the protocol and depend on a few centralized and trusted authorities. Another solution that is arguably more resistant to capture and censorship would be to use a blockchain to manage user name aliases - like
191.
by mattdesl 4y ago
That describes most centralized services on the web today. Nostr and other decentralized protocols aren’t aiming to recreate the Twitter and Amazon model.
192.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Two uses cases that would both be beneficial to nostr: Decentralized namespace registries - see Farcaster. Autonomous and decentralized mechanism that rewards & incentivizes users to run nodes/servers - see Ethereum staking, Fileco
193.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Or Oklab? https://bottosson.github.io/posts/oklab/
194.
by mattdesl 4y ago
WebAudio has had a couple: e.g. user gesture requirement which has broken many websites, and even things as simple as using AudioContext to decode a WAV file to a buffer. Another one is script processor nodes. Beyond API shifts, there are c
195.
by mattdesl 4y ago
I'm interested this for JS. Most codecs are either patent-heavy or hugely complex (requiring hundreds of kilobytes of WebAssembly), and a lot of the native APIs builtin to browsers have a tendency to shift every few years. It would be
196.
by mattdesl 4y ago
People don’t like running their own server. In public key infra like nostr and farcaster, you get the non-custodial ownership of your account without the technical and cost barriers involved in running a server.
197.
by mattdesl 4y ago
A lot of users depend on CEX withdrawals to pay crypto income and capital gains taxes. This is where regulation should step in: citizens should have a legally protected right to withdraw their crypto to fiat, if nothing else than to pay the
198.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Lots of resources here: https://github.com/matter-labs/awesome-zero-knowledge-proofs
199.
by mattdesl 4y ago
The scenario sounds extremely implausible; a chain with 90% colluding actors would be worthless, and the remaining 10% of honest users would likely exit to another chain that is not majority run by malicious nodes. For example: migrating to
200.
by mattdesl 4y ago
In your scenario, the 10% who are running forked software risk losing all their deposit by double-signing blocks on the same network and chain ID as the majority 90%. In practice, if 10% wanted to split off from the majority and run incompa
201.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Yes: much like other standardized software. Many people coordinate and agree on patches and new specs, and then developers work toward implementing and testing it across clients. This is how all forks have happened so far, including “patche
202.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Except, that is not how PoS works.
203.
by mattdesl 4y ago
In this scenario, the 10% would be forced to exit as their deposit would be slashed, and would drop below the required minimum for a security deposit. So within a short period, you would end up with 50% signing on A, and 50% signing on B. T
204.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Do you have a source for this? As I understand from the spec[1], any block proposer can submit a slashing report while including their block in the chain, and the protocol (ie: the client software that everybody runs) will reward them autom
205.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Any block proposer can submit a whistleblower report. There is a pretty significant bounty if you discover a slashable offence, so there is strong incentive to include these in any proposed blocks. https://eth2book.info/bell
206.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Are you referring to the “nothing at stake” problem? Ethereum’s PoS is designed to protect against validators signing transactions across multiple forks of the same network. The Gasper “finality” and “fork choice” rules ensure that one chai
207.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Here is a good visualization of this problem: [1]. You can see that 99% of restricted blocks will be included within 5 mins, given the current level of OFAC compliance. Even if 99% of nodes are OFAC compliant, it would only take 5 hrs for y
208.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Shifting the burden from the game developer to a walled garden store with digital assets (like Apple or Steam) has also not proven ideal.
209.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Benefits: decentralized, censorship resistant, permissionless. Can’t have your account suspended, assets censored, or API key revoked by the game publisher. Can decide to build competing clients on top of the same shared structure. Whether
210.
by mattdesl 4y ago
Not the case with an on-chain game! See Dark Forest. Also not really the case with on-chain NFTs or those hosted by IPFS (where as long as 1 user has the file on disk it can be recovered and re-seeded).

More ›