qqii

24 ms·

211.
by qqii 6y ago
I doubt it but we're also in uncharted waters. There are no technical definitions to own off chain items or legal rulings about what ownership of an NFT means for the off chain item. As I explain in this comment ( https://new
212.
by qqii 6y ago
I think it depends, strictly ownership means owning the NFT token. By itself a token is just data. Taking a step back the value of the token comes from Jack using the platform to mint it (which is purely off chain and you have to trust the
213.
by qqii 6y ago
I was of the same mindset before I heard of the opinion by crypto savy artists. As an example just listen to the enthusiasm and points from Rhett / Mankind ( https://myoutu.be/DYyW_tTPAhU ).
214.
by qqii 6y ago
It would if it worked that way, but it doesn't: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26372052
215.
by qqii 6y ago
What's unique here isn't just a plain hash but the tuple (ethereum contact id, nft token id, address public key) on the blockchain. Having the tuple is worthless becuase ownership is having the associated private key.
216.
by qqii 6y ago
He'd have to sell the same tweet on another platform who has an NFT that people interpret as representing tweets. The direct consequences for Jack are none, just as if a company that produced a limited edition stamped #001 of a product
217.
by qqii 6y ago
Jack Dorsey is likely not using this to launder money. If Jack Dorsey were to sell a signed piece of his own painting I doubt you'd be thinking the same thing. NFTs are good at laundering money not becuase they are NFTs but because the
218.
by qqii 6y ago
NFTs are good at laundering money not becuase they are NFTs but because they (most) are art - it's easy to launder money when the value of something can't be concretely measured. As an example if there was a limited run NFT that c
219.
by qqii 6y ago
Sticking specifically to art, NFTs solve a problem with digital art (non fungiblility) and some platforms provide artists with new benifits (tracking ownership, price and commission on sales, etc). I think it's an especially crypto cen
220.
by qqii 6y ago
Genuine question, do you understand the value buying a price of certified art and registering it as yours? To oversimplify, an NFT shares the following properties to art: * creator fame * non-fungible (my copy of your Mona Lisa isn't a
221.
by qqii 6y ago
This was discussed earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26365579 Here is the documentation on ERC-721 (NFTs): https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/standards/tokens/erc...
222.
by qqii 6y ago
Ownership in this case is a NFT (EIP-721, a smart contact standard for non fungible (unique and single ownership) tokens) on the L2 Matic sidechain for Ethereum return the public key to your public-private keypair. Duplicating the token mea
223.
by qqii 6y ago
The beauty of NFTs is that the owner cannot "autograph [it] again and we'll to other people", or at least can't on this platform. The tuple (contact id, token id, owner public key) will remain unique on the blockchain as
224.
by qqii 6y ago
To understand why this is a backdoor we need to look at more code: modifier ifAdmin() { if (msg.sender == _admin()) { _; // run the rest of the function being modified } else { // for our case t
225.
by qqii 6y ago
As a tangent there is this excellent Captain Disillusion video debunking the floating city which was attributed to the same phenomenon as seen here: https://youtu.be/Xmrn2IuSW-Q
226.
by qqii 6y ago
The video, although reported to be from the same phenomenon is actually a fake: https://youtu.be/Xmrn2IuSW-Q
227.
by qqii 6y ago
That's right, they've tried to obfuscate that their setter doesn't actually set. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26358876
228.
by qqii 6y ago
Perhaps it will be clear if I move all of the code together and add comments: bytes32 internal constant ADMIN_SLOT = 0xb53127684a568b3173ae13b9f8a6016e243e63b6e8ee1178d6a717850b5d6103; // this is the getter function _a
229.
by qqii 6y ago
In short the backdoor is the following: bytes32 internal constant ADMIN_SLOT = 0xb53127684a568b3173ae13b9f8a6016e243e63b6e8ee1178d6a717850b5d6103; // this is the getter function _admin() internal view returns (address
230.
by qqii 6y ago
The exploit is pretending to time lock your admin powers whilst still retaining them.
231.
by qqii 6y ago
Yes, but that doesn't capture the nature of the EVM, specifically addresses.
232.
by qqii 6y ago
Calling them simply scripts/programs is also a bit of a misnomer. It's easier to think of them as the rules to a game, like chess. The smart contact defines the pieces and valid moves. The EVM enforces the rules.
233.
by qqii 6y ago
Financial incentives, lost of trust? Ethereum once rolled back their blockchain for the DAO hack. The price dropped 25% and ethereum was forked into ETC.
234.
by qqii 6y ago
If you're interested you can follow the funds yourself: https://bscscan.com/address/0x9542966f1114eaa5859201aa8d3435... As far as I know BSC doesn't have any mixers, nor aomtic swaps exchanges.
235.
by qqii 6y ago
But they had a readable contract and it wasn't a bug but a backdoor. If we took this take into your analogy this would be a scam artist solicitating funds and having a contact cause that has a loophole. Investors signed without reading
236.
by qqii 6y ago
I did not know this, thank you for brining it up! From the story it looks like this is the classic issue of bridging blockchain with the real world. Am I right in understanding he's trying to withdraw USDC from Flow to Ethereum ( https
237.
by qqii 6y ago
Perhaps I did not explain clearly, your PR does not automatically run the workflow. Perhaps it would be more clear to imagine two files, a workflow file describing the CI steps and a permission file describing what can trigger the CI. The C
238.
by qqii 6y ago
Smart contacts doesn't prevent people from investing in ponzi schemes. What smart contracts do provide is a stricter framework to express guarantees. A good example of a real, everyday use case for smart contracts is NBA Top Shot. Unli
239.
by qqii 6y ago
You can find the details in this article (not written by me): https://obelisk.medium.com/meerkat-finance-and-the-0-that-wa... In short: * the smart contact is made in a way that allows upgrades by an administrator * the de
240.
by qqii 6y ago
Since it is assumed that Binance owns the validator they could simply blacklist the address from ever making transactions.

More ›