Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 95 posts

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#71

Post by Certhas »

nope96 wrote: post #40
stupidcar wrote: post #29

It strikes me as an (non-invested) outsider that Ethereum seems to benefit from having a figure like Vitalik who can act as a Torvalds-esque figurehead, setting the project's technical direction. And that, in contrast, the non-participation of Satoshi Nakamoto has left a power vacuum at the heart of Bitcoin, which results in the kind of bloody and attritional battles required to move it forward. Because everybody and…

> Ethereum seems to benefit from having a figure like Vitalik who can act as a Torvalds-esque figurehead If Vitalik got hit by a bus tomorrow Ether price would drop 95%. A currency does not need a leader who directs it. Also it should be very difficult to make changes to a 150 Billion $ currency.

The talk by Lagarde [1] recently convinced me that we're ahead of a threshold where some blockchain technology will get some sort of mainstream backing and actually break through[2].

This could be some central bank for example.

Between ETH and BTC I think ETH has a better shot at being at the core of that, unless the Bus accident actually happens.

[1] https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2017/09/28/sp092917-cen...

[2] And break through means: I can realistically get rid of my Visa card and use blockchain tech for day to day transactions at many stores.

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#72

Post by zaarn »

cryptodogemoon wrote: post #65
diegocerdan wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Early developers used this 12.5% to bootstrap projects and also to sustain themselves using ETH as a salary. On the early days ETH was pretty cheap so you can imagine them burning through a lot of it. I would say they hold much less nowadays. Lets say 4%. And the more they hold, the better for the community as a whole as they have more at stake for the project to succeed.

There's no evidence to support your claim. Even if one provided blockchain transaction logs, they might just be moving funds to wallets owned by the same user.

So basically, no evidence can convince you that they aren't doing this since the blockchain is afaik the only evidence.

There is no evidence on the contrary point either, many have lost the private keys to 2k ETH wallets at this point...

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#73

Post by nwah1 »

alexmat wrote: post #7
curiousgal wrote: post #2

Interesting to see how Ethereum pops up whenever technical aspects are revealed and how Bitcoin pops up whenever the price crosses some boundary.

Just because you don't know why something is going on, doesn't mean it's arbitrary. In this case it's because of a path to mass adoption: http://coinivore.com/2017/11/26/bitcoin-reaches-time-high-95...

Mass speculation

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#74

Post by celticninja »

cryptodogemoon wrote: post #20
celticninja wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In cryptocurrencies this coin was essentially a pre-mine which is done specifically to enrich the creators without any expense to themselves. Say what you want about bitcoin, but Satoshi Nakamoto earned his coins fairly (even though he may never access them) and created a fair and level playing field for everyone who started mining alongside him. Further the vague wording about the supply size means it is unlikely th…

Satoshi actually used a manipulative log curve for his minting algorhythm which effectively created a ponzi style distribution scheme. The majority of BTC was produced to the small userbase for minimal effort, whereas time passes the computational work and wattage required to produce coins for late adopters increases as presumably more users discover the system. Satoshi easily could have chosen a linear algorithm ant…

He didn't design it to exploit later adopters, he designed it so that the output was consistent regardless of the network size.

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#75

Post by celticninja »

cryptodogemoon wrote: post #60
makomk wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with the decrease in the mining reward over time, Bitcoin mining is now consuming enough energy to power a small county. I'm not convinced that having the mining reward increase over time to provide more reward to later miners would be a wise feature in any way.

As Satoshis minting algo was used, why should one user receive significantly more coins for such low effort simply for running the software at an early date? The end result is early users exploiting users who join the network after them. Ponzi style.

Because at the point he started the network the coins were worthless, he got paid less per block than someone who mines a block today even though the mining reward is 1/4 of what it was in 2009.

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#76

Post by bpicolo »

binocarlos wrote: post #51
stupidcar wrote: post #29

It strikes me as an (non-invested) outsider that Ethereum seems to benefit from having a figure like Vitalik who can act as a Torvalds-esque figurehead, setting the project's technical direction. And that, in contrast, the non-participation of Satoshi Nakamoto has left a power vacuum at the heart of Bitcoin, which results in the kind of bloody and attritional battles required to move it forward. Because everybody and…

Plus the fact that Vitalik seems genuinely interested in the development of the underlying technology and isn't too fussed about making more money than he already has. An example of this is offering to fund Ethereum infrastructure projects from his own pocket because he was seeing what was happening with ICO money: https://www.ethnews.com/vitalik-buterin-responds-to-raiden-i...

> isn't too fussed about making more money than he already has

To be fair, he's already beyond set for life

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#77

Post by superbrama »

crypt1d wrote: post #17
celticninja wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In cryptocurrencies this coin was essentially a pre-mine which is done specifically to enrich the creators without any expense to themselves. Say what you want about bitcoin, but Satoshi Nakamoto earned his coins fairly (even though he may never access them) and created a fair and level playing field for everyone who started mining alongside him. Further the vague wording about the supply size means it is unlikely th…

huh? btc was premined by Satoshi and early contributors too. while nobody can confirm which of the early wallets are his, the value of the premined btc coins is likely higher than the Ethereum premine. this is the nature of all the PoW coins. The early contributors take the most risk and the most reward (if the coin succeeds).

Risk is defined by what can be lost. If you bought a $200 video card early on and spent $200 on electricity mining than your risk was $400. Contrarily someone right now buying a single bitcoin is going to be risking a lot more than just that.

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#78

Post by cryptodogemoon »

celticninja wrote: post #75
cryptodogemoon wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As Satoshis minting algo was used, why should one user receive significantly more coins for such low effort simply for running the software at an early date? The end result is early users exploiting users who join the network after them. Ponzi style.

Because at the point he started the network the coins were worthless, he got paid less per block than someone who mines a block today even though the mining reward is 1/4 of what it was in 2009.

No, this is purely the internal economic model of bitcoin production concerning work/energy/value input versus output to workers.

Imagine someone tells you they've created a money printing machine that prints 21m BTC, and they design the machine to give them most of the BTC and when it arrives in your town the man says "well it looks like the rules have changed now and your work isn't worth as much as my work because you encountered the magic box after me"

The users who ran the software on the network in 2010 required much less value input to generate bitcoins. Acording to Satoshis design, a user running the software now on an identical computer would not produce the same rewards for their work. This is essentially an intentional ponzi design.

Users who aquired bitcoins for low capital input are incentized to psychologically convince late adopters to purchase their bitcoins for more than it cost to produce and acquire.

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#79

Post by cryptodogemoon »

celticninja wrote: post #74
cryptodogemoon wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Satoshi actually used a manipulative log curve for his minting algorhythm which effectively created a ponzi style distribution scheme. The majority of BTC was produced to the small userbase for minimal effort, whereas time passes the computational work and wattage required to produce coins for late adopters increases as presumably more users discover the system. Satoshi easily could have chosen a linear algorithm ant…

He didn't design it to exploit later adopters, he designed it so that the output was consistent regardless of the network size.

Completely wrong.

The output is actually completely inverse. More work, more users, less output.

The consistency you're thinking of is likely the algorithm that adjusts blocktime to 10 minute intervals.

Re: Vitalik Unveils Ethereum 2.0 Roadmap

#80

Post by celticninja »

cryptodogemoon wrote: post #78
celticninja wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because at the point he started the network the coins were worthless, he got paid less per block than someone who mines a block today even though the mining reward is 1/4 of what it was in 2009.

No, this is purely the internal economic model of bitcoin production concerning work/energy/value input versus output to workers. Imagine someone tells you they've created a money printing machine that prints 21m BTC, and they design the machine to give them most of the BTC and when it arrives in your town the man says "well it looks like the rules have changed now and your work isn't worth as much as my work because…

The rule change was fully known about in advance, it didn't suprise anyone. And you could contend that the work is now worth more. For a long time mining was economically unrewarding, miners created a blockchain and provided it with power at their own cost and without any guarantee of success or return. Those who joined later were joining when their work would be immediately rewarded with profit because it became economically feasible to mine. These late arrivers actually pushed out a lot of the early miners by using more powerful and efficient equipment. So they may have taken more of a capital risk but less of a risk in terms of knowing a return was possible and would repay their investment.
Post reply on HN