Because you must have coins in the prior ledger in order to have a proof of stake.
Whose prior ledger? The prior ledger of the node connecting? There is none, they've just connected to the network, and have no knowledge. The ledgers of the nodes offering their (differing) blockchains? They both are saying they have the coins, why wouldn't they? One is lying, but how would you figure out which?
You can't solve that without some independently verifiable method of correctness (this is what the longest chain serves), or a central authority (this is what Ethereum proposes).
Well if you make up a new ledger you cannot change the old coins... that would just be the same as making a new coin.
And what's stopping an attacker from just flat out doing that without some sort of centralized authority? It'd be incredibly obvious that it happened, of course, but how could it be stopped?
Well... its like... Why would it matter? Its like printing a bunch of monopoly money and saying you're a millionaire. Uhhh sure, but that doesn't mean anyone will accept it. Or that you've suddenly captured everyone elses money.
I am not saying that proof of stake is good. But its not so easy to fool as to just say you have all the stake.
There's a problem with the monopoly money metaphor, because you're participating in a system based on monopoly money, where even if nobody accepts your enforced ledger, they have no recourse against it.
No. The point is that with proof of stake attempting to submit a ledger when you do not have a stake in the prior ledger is akin to producing a new coin. You would have etheribum and not etherium.
Because you must have coins in the prior ledger in order to have a proof of stake.
Whose prior ledger? The prior ledger of the node connecting? There is none, they've just connected to the network, and have no knowledge. The ledgers of the nodes offering their (differing) blockchains? They both are saying they have the coins, why wouldn't they? One is lying, but how would you figure out which?
You can't solve that without some independently verifiable method of correctness (this is what the longest chain serves), or a central authority (this is what Ethereum proposes).
Well if you make up a new ledger you cannot change the old coins... that would just be the same as making a new coin.
And what's stopping an attacker from just flat out doing that without some sort of centralized authority? It'd be incredibly obvious that it happened, of course, but how could it be stopped?
Well... its like... Why would it matter? Its like printing a bunch of monopoly money and saying you're a millionaire. Uhhh sure, but that doesn't mean anyone will accept it. Or that you've suddenly captured everyone elses money.
I am not saying that proof of stake is good. But its not so easy to fool as to just say you have all the stake.
There's a problem with the monopoly money metaphor, because you're participating in a system based on monopoly money, where even if nobody accepts your enforced ledger, they have no recourse against it.
The recourse is nobody accepting your ledger though? Fooling a brand new node isn't terribly useful. It accomplishes nothing and it's not like you can prevent them from ever contacting the main chain
If you simply have more nodes than the main chain then that's just a PoS 51% attack which is very risky but might work, but the key is you needed to have that stake in the main chain before branching, otherwise your history will just be nonsense, and clients usually have some known existing hash in the chain somewhere that they can check for
Amazingly now the PA forums is the first site where the ad banner wants to sell me cryptocurrencies.
That is amazing because clearly PA is it's own ad company now and not just using Google Ads so I can't understand how that came to be.
Are we all genuinely surprised that a popular website that just did a comic about NFT's and crypto has advertisements around that part, or is this some Grade A+ sarcasm that I'm missing?
Remember, advertisers (and the algorithms) behind it, don't care about your opinion of things, just that you THINK about those things, so the fact that the comic was negative doesn't matter, It mentioned NFT's, this audience has *engagement*
the best part about that ad is the lttle disclaimer at the bottom that "75% of retails investors lose money with this provider. Make sure you can take that risk"
Coworker said to me today:
"So and so gave his notice. He's been investing in bitcoin since 2016 ave now he's loaded."
Blue collar guy who I won't expect to have a big nest egg to be investing with. I totally get why people chase each new crypto.
My manager, who's as clueless a blue collar worker as it gets, just put 1000$ into crapto because of FYOM. It's definitely hit the mainstream, but they have no idea what they're getting into and it's going to burn a ton of people.
A single dirty coal mine in China is responsible for ~30% of all bitcoin mining, fortune reports
The blackout halted no less than one-third of all of Bitcoin’s global computing power. “We’d seen estimates that high, but this shutdown confirms them,” says Alex de Vries, an economist who runs the website Digiconomist, which tracks Bitcoin’s energy consumption. “We also learned that the area in Xinjiang where all that mining happens is much smaller than previously believed.
The Turkish crypto exchange Thodex ceased operations and its chief executive officer has fled the nation amid allegations that hundreds of millions of dollars were stolen.
While not the largest Turkish crypto exchange, the shuttering of the platform has left the remaining assets of about 390,000 active users “irretrievable,”
“There was a decline in Thodex’s assets. When too many users demanded their money back, the company was unable to meet those,” the Thodex attorney said by phone, describing the situation as a “liquidity problem.”
Every time I mention something from Bitcoin's storied history, they counter with "and that's why Etherium is better"
And I can't be bothered to learn about Etherium to prove him wrong so I just stick with gif responses and telling him that he's destroying the planet with energy use, then the subject gets dropped and we play D&D
Ethereum is backed by a company that claims to have enough assets to actually back everything but declines to show any actual numbers. Seems not suspicious at all.
Ethereum is backed by a company that claims to have enough assets to actually back everything but declines to show any actual numbers. Seems not suspicious at all.
Oh cool
So a centralised authority which guarantees the value of the currency
Plus ça change
[Muffled sounds of gorilla violence]
+17
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Ethereum is backed by a company that claims to have enough assets to actually back everything but declines to show any actual numbers. Seems not suspicious at all.
Oh cool
So a centralised authority which guarantees the value of the currency
Plus ça change
Naw, the blockchain means that it's totally different. Somehow.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Ethereum is backed by a company that claims to have enough assets to actually back everything but declines to show any actual numbers. Seems not suspicious at all.
I've never seen this claim about Ethereum. Are you thinking of Tether?
Ethereum is backed by a company that claims to have enough assets to actually back everything but declines to show any actual numbers. Seems not suspicious at all.
Oh cool
So a centralised authority which guarantees the value of the currency
Plus ça change
But it's not a government, see?
"Simple, real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time." -Mustrum Ridcully in Terry Pratchett's Hogfather p. 142 (HarperPrism 1996)
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Ethereum is backed by a company that claims to have enough assets to actually back everything but declines to show any actual numbers. Seems not suspicious at all.
Oh cool
So a centralised authority which guarantees the value of the currency
Plus ça change
Naw, the blockchain means that it's totally different. Somehow.
Well, it murders the biosphere much more efficiently.
Ethereum is backed by a company that claims to have enough assets to actually back everything but declines to show any actual numbers. Seems not suspicious at all.
I've never seen this claim about Ethereum. Are you thinking of Tether?
Ethereum is backed by a company that claims to have enough assets to actually back everything but declines to show any actual numbers. Seems not suspicious at all.
I've never seen this claim about Ethereum. Are you thinking of Tether?
Hmmm, maybe. There's too many of these.
Nah Tether is a straight fraud scheme "backing" bitcoin with real dollars in a way that looks like snake oil from about a million miles away. It was a major cause of the rise this year and I assume will be the eventual destruction of the whole system.
It's wild to read into an still see people jumping on this rollercoaster
*edit* I meant it's not even one of these it's even more fraudulent.
Tether is on the ethereum chain, which is probably the confusion. Technically ethereum is just the tech, and the main ethereum crypto is Ether.
It's all stupid complex and just serves to obfuscate what is going on to anyone who isn't willing to dedicate themselves to figuring it out. Mostly ponzi schemes or various other cons all the way down.
But don't bother trying to figure it out because it is intentionally obtuse and confusing.
Tether is on the ethereum chain, which is probably the confusion. Technically ethereum is just the tech, and the main ethereum crypto is Ether.
It's all stupid complex and just serves to obfuscate what is going on to anyone who isn't willing to dedicate themselves to figuring it out. Mostly ponzi schemes or various other cons all the way down.
But don't bother trying to figure it out because it is intentionally obtuse and confusing.
Look, it's easy.
If you step in now, you'll start at 2 diamond tier. Now, you don't want that, you want to invest in your downstream to become black-diamond or higher.
Remember, though, to always redivert your residuals, together with your initial, to cover your weekly buy-in, this is important, because you don't want to incur your original seed costs, so... you need to sign here, and here...
and.....
your money is gone. Thank you.
Specifically saw a defense of this exchange failure in terms that "a fiat bank also breaks if people try to take out all their money at once."
There's an important difference, though: the bank can't handle withdrawals because they don't just sit on your money, they use it to write loans. It also *usually* takes more than just a withdrawal rush to break one, there are processes in the banking system to deal with it and ultimately a government safety net if eve those systems can't cope. And when one DOES fail strictly from withdrawal rush it usually doesn't kill the bank because they still have loan payments coming in, it takes more than that to actually kill a bank (widespread loan default combined with withdrawal runs only killed a few in 2008/9, many failed but most survived).
Crypto exchanges don't do this, they say they sit on your money and provide a back door to allow transactions between accounts or even different chains without going through the whole blockchain wallet transaction process every time. They are a payment processor, not a bank. So in principle they shouldn't be able to fail just from a withdrawal rush. But they keep doing just that, with no fallback position, no safety net, no bailout, nothing but evaporated wealth (but it isn't really evaporated, it's gone and spent).
It's almost like this is a solved problem for real money but an intractable failure point for crypto.
Every time I mention something from Bitcoin's storied history, they counter with "and that's why Etherium is better"
And I can't be bothered to learn about Etherium to prove him wrong so I just stick with gif responses and telling him that he's destroying the planet with energy use, then the subject gets dropped and we play D&D
Basically Ethereum can act as a distributed computer and can send money around based on coded 'smart contracts'. One of the first things anyone tried to do with it was create an automated VC fund that would invest in projects based on the voting power of investors. They called it the DOA (Decentralized Autonomous Organization). It raised $150 million worth of ETH at that time.
Two months after its creation it was hacked, a third of the money was stolen, and the Ethereum blockchain executed a hard-fork to give the victims their money back, which created two Ethereum blockchains, both of which still exist and claim to be the 'real' Ethereum (the one that was against the giving the people their money back is now called Ethereum Classic). Also a year later the SEC ruled that DAO tokens were unlicensed securities to everyone involved is technically a criminal. Oops!
So with two forks of Ethereum existing, did people that had coins before the split now have coins in both? Is one of them considered more "valuable" than the other after the split, and if so which one? Like it's still idiocy all around, I'm just curious as to how many layers of idiocy that DAO bullshit has generated.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Specifically saw a defense of this exchange failure in terms that "a fiat bank also breaks if people try to take out all their money at once."
There's an important difference, though: the bank can't handle withdrawals because they don't just sit on your money, they use it to write loans. It also *usually* takes more than just a withdrawal rush to break one, there are processes in the banking system to deal with it and ultimately a government safety net if eve those systems can't cope. And when one DOES fail strictly from withdrawal rush it usually doesn't kill the bank because they still have loan payments coming in, it takes more than that to actually kill a bank (widespread loan default combined with withdrawal runs only killed a few in 2008/9, many failed but most survived).
Crypto exchanges don't do this, they say they sit on your money and provide a back door to allow transactions between accounts or even different chains without going through the whole blockchain wallet transaction process every time. They are a payment processor, not a bank. So in principle they shouldn't be able to fail just from a withdrawal rush. But they keep doing just that, with no fallback position, no safety net, no bailout, nothing but evaporated wealth (but it isn't really evaporated, it's gone and spent).
It's almost like this is a solved problem for real money but an intractable failure point for crypto.
They're waiting for the collapse of the entire system
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
They're waiting for the collapse of the entire system
Based on the history of such collapses good luck using your dark web fun bucks when it happens.
History has also shown that gold hoarders will also be shit out of luck, but at least they have the right idea to think that infrastructure as a whole is unlikely to run smoothly with the financial system gone.
So with two forks of Ethereum existing, did people that had coins before the split now have coins in both? Is one of them considered more "valuable" than the other after the split, and if so which one? Like it's still idiocy all around, I'm just curious as to how many layers of idiocy that DAO bullshit has generated.
Yes anyone who owned tokens when the split occured would own tokens on both forks and then they trade independently. Ether, the one that reverted, is currently worth around 100x Ethereum Classic.
Posts
The recourse is nobody accepting your ledger though? Fooling a brand new node isn't terribly useful. It accomplishes nothing and it's not like you can prevent them from ever contacting the main chain
If you simply have more nodes than the main chain then that's just a PoS 51% attack which is very risky but might work, but the key is you needed to have that stake in the main chain before branching, otherwise your history will just be nonsense, and clients usually have some known existing hash in the chain somewhere that they can check for
That is amazing because clearly PA is it's own ad company now and not just using Google Ads so I can't understand how that came to be.
Are we all genuinely surprised that a popular website that just did a comic about NFT's and crypto has advertisements around that part, or is this some Grade A+ sarcasm that I'm missing?
Remember, advertisers (and the algorithms) behind it, don't care about your opinion of things, just that you THINK about those things, so the fact that the comic was negative doesn't matter, It mentioned NFT's, this audience has *engagement*
"So and so gave his notice. He's been investing in bitcoin since 2016 ave now he's loaded."
Blue collar guy who I won't expect to have a big nest egg to be investing with. I totally get why people chase each new crypto.
Steam ID: Good Life
My manager, who's as clueless a blue collar worker as it gets, just put 1000$ into crapto because of FYOM. It's definitely hit the mainstream, but they have no idea what they're getting into and it's going to burn a ton of people.
I hope he's already moved that money into something more stable.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
"But bitcoin is great because it's so decentralized!"
But seriously, do we know what the power output of that coal mine is? Because it should give us much better estimates on power consumption.
I'm a little shocked that one single coal mine was able to shut so much down.
Coal mines don't produce power, so 0.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I'm not a finance guy, but 'people wanting to get all their money out of an institution causing it to shut down' seems pretty similar
I'm also thinking of that It's a Beautiful Life bit, but with George Bailey frantically trying to explain the Blockchain to angry bank customers
Do they think crypto can't crash? Bitcoin did that a few years ago.
And I can't be bothered to learn about Etherium to prove him wrong so I just stick with gif responses and telling him that he's destroying the planet with energy use, then the subject gets dropped and we play D&D
And then again a few months after that. And then again a few months after that. And then again awhile after that. And then again etc.
Oh cool
So a centralised authority which guarantees the value of the currency
Plus ça change
Naw, the blockchain means that it's totally different. Somehow.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-bitcoin-is-bad-for-the-environment
Thanks to what I've gleaned from this thread, I was able to sound knowledgeable in reply.
Steam ID: Good Life
I've never seen this claim about Ethereum. Are you thinking of Tether?
But it's not a government, see?
Well, it murders the biosphere much more efficiently.
Hmmm, maybe. There's too many of these.
Nah Tether is a straight fraud scheme "backing" bitcoin with real dollars in a way that looks like snake oil from about a million miles away. It was a major cause of the rise this year and I assume will be the eventual destruction of the whole system.
It's wild to read into an still see people jumping on this rollercoaster
*edit* I meant it's not even one of these it's even more fraudulent.
It's all stupid complex and just serves to obfuscate what is going on to anyone who isn't willing to dedicate themselves to figuring it out. Mostly ponzi schemes or various other cons all the way down.
But don't bother trying to figure it out because it is intentionally obtuse and confusing.
Look, it's easy.
If you step in now, you'll start at 2 diamond tier. Now, you don't want that, you want to invest in your downstream to become black-diamond or higher.
Remember, though, to always redivert your residuals, together with your initial, to cover your weekly buy-in, this is important, because you don't want to incur your original seed costs, so... you need to sign here, and here...
and.....
your money is gone. Thank you.
Specifically saw a defense of this exchange failure in terms that "a fiat bank also breaks if people try to take out all their money at once."
There's an important difference, though: the bank can't handle withdrawals because they don't just sit on your money, they use it to write loans. It also *usually* takes more than just a withdrawal rush to break one, there are processes in the banking system to deal with it and ultimately a government safety net if eve those systems can't cope. And when one DOES fail strictly from withdrawal rush it usually doesn't kill the bank because they still have loan payments coming in, it takes more than that to actually kill a bank (widespread loan default combined with withdrawal runs only killed a few in 2008/9, many failed but most survived).
Crypto exchanges don't do this, they say they sit on your money and provide a back door to allow transactions between accounts or even different chains without going through the whole blockchain wallet transaction process every time. They are a payment processor, not a bank. So in principle they shouldn't be able to fail just from a withdrawal rush. But they keep doing just that, with no fallback position, no safety net, no bailout, nothing but evaporated wealth (but it isn't really evaporated, it's gone and spent).
It's almost like this is a solved problem for real money but an intractable failure point for crypto.
Here's one for Ethereum: The DAO
Basically Ethereum can act as a distributed computer and can send money around based on coded 'smart contracts'. One of the first things anyone tried to do with it was create an automated VC fund that would invest in projects based on the voting power of investors. They called it the DOA (Decentralized Autonomous Organization). It raised $150 million worth of ETH at that time.
Two months after its creation it was hacked, a third of the money was stolen, and the Ethereum blockchain executed a hard-fork to give the victims their money back, which created two Ethereum blockchains, both of which still exist and claim to be the 'real' Ethereum (the one that was against the giving the people their money back is now called Ethereum Classic). Also a year later the SEC ruled that DAO tokens were unlicensed securities to everyone involved is technically a criminal. Oops!
Also, the FDIC is a thing
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Based on the history of such collapses good luck using your dark web fun bucks when it happens.
History has also shown that gold hoarders will also be shit out of luck, but at least they have the right idea to think that infrastructure as a whole is unlikely to run smoothly with the financial system gone.
Yes anyone who owned tokens when the split occured would own tokens on both forks and then they trade independently. Ether, the one that reverted, is currently worth around 100x Ethereum Classic.