131–140 of 171 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do not own IOTA - thought about it some months back but decided against it because I don't fancy doing trades on or supporting Bitfinex. Another HN user swayed me away from Monero - which I owned a large part of as he told me about scaling issues. But my question is to your advice about: look to other experts. As someone coming outside the crypto-universe it is kind of hard to distill who the real experts are - so…
I'm also very interested in hearing the answer to this.
If people either a) didn’t show interest in something they don’t understand, or b) acquired the necessary level of knowledge to judge — by themselves — the validity of some concept, misinformation would be unable to survive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If all you needed was a way to order transactions you would not need proof of work at all. Here for example is the PTN: https://intercoin.org/technical.pdf
First, a paper written three weeks ago of an unproven currency is a bit of stretch. Second, I didn't say it was necessary to order transactions, I said that is what it is used for, which is correct. You are replying to a point that I didn't make.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The contentious state in bitcoin is a network fork. Fork A and Fork B. Both have equal chances. It is the next winning miner that decides which fork will be elected. So the responsibility is just pushed to the next guy. That's not the same with IOTA. Who gets to decide which fork is better? Based on what? Number of txs? That wouldn't work and I think it is obvious why.
The network fork is exactly what I described. With IOTA, it operates in a similar fashion. The winning chain is the one with the most successful hashes discovered. Just like bitcoin, except instead of a winning chain happening after ~2 hashes, it happens after hundreds(?) of hashes.
IOTA is built by a bunch of technical founders who know enough about blockchain to confuse a lot of non-experts into thinking they are really smart and credible. But you will see very consistently in the cryptocurrency space that the experts refuse to endorse iota, and frequently say strongly negative things about it. They are very effective at selling snake oil, but that's all their blockchain is. The tangle that th…
The tangle is live right now with real transactions going on. If it's so insecure, why don't you go take as many IOTA as you please?
IOTA is built by a bunch of technical founders who know enough about blockchain to confuse a lot of non-experts into thinking they are really smart and credible. But you will see very consistently in the cryptocurrency space that the experts refuse to endorse iota, and frequently say strongly negative things about it. They are very effective at selling snake oil, but that's all their blockchain is. The tangle that th…
Many people in the crypto space are peddling their own agendas. I've read the tangle paper. It seems as the node transaction weights grow, the double spend problem is solved (transaction nodes gain weight as others confirm). Arguably you could have bad actors confirming transactions but that is why the coordinator exists until there are enough transactions happening where a coordinated double-spend attack is not feas…
A single consumer machine can generate hundreds, if not thousands of transactions per second. A fleet of specialized machines costing less than 7 figures total can do millions, if not hundreds of millions, of transactions per second.
IOTA has a terrible security ratio.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The network fork is exactly what I described. With IOTA, it operates in a similar fashion. The winning chain is the one with the most successful hashes discovered. Just like bitcoin, except instead of a winning chain happening after ~2 hashes, it happens after hundreds(?) of hashes.
How do you reach a consensus and certainty though? What if there is low activity, few transactions; and then comes a big guy who was burning hash to generate txs and take over the chain?
I feel like we're going in circles. In both Bitcoin and Iota, we never reach an absolute certainty. In Bitcoin we reach a point where its infeasible for transactions to ever be overwritten. For high value transactions this is generally around 5 or 6 confirmations. I don't know the exact number people use with Iota, but I remember hearing it was some percentage of confirmations within the tangle.
> What if there is low activity, few transactions; and then comes a big guy who was burning hash to generate txs and take over the chain?
That's the big flaw I pointed out in my original comment, that I suspect may exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you reach a consensus and certainty though? What if there is low activity, few transactions; and then comes a big guy who was burning hash to generate txs and take over the chain?
> How do you reach a consensus and certainty though? I feel like we're going in circles. In both Bitcoin and Iota, we never reach an absolute certainty. In Bitcoin we reach a point where its infeasible for transactions to ever be overwritten. For high value transactions this is generally around 5 or 6 confirmations. I don't know the exact number people use with Iota, but I remember hearing it was some percentage of c…
That's not correct. You are only uncertain in bitcoin when there are two equal (hash wise) blocks. This happens very rarely. That's not the case in IOTA since it does happen all the time and I'm guessing somebody could calculate txs to make it happen on purpose.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything in that blog post is very much what the rest of the industry is agreeing with. Sources backing this up is even cited in the damn blog post man.
What industry? You mean the one that is less than 5yrs old? IOTA itself, with all its 'smarts' made a stupid mistake designing their own cryptographic hash function! This might seem like I'm hanging on a single point, but I guarantee, any sane security person on this site will tell you to stay far away from this coin if they see this. https://medium.com/@neha/cryptographic-vulnerabilities-in-io...
Recently, with the Foundation being established (therefore giving them access to sufficient funds), they hired CYBERCRYPT to vet and improve upon their prototype.
IOTA is built by a bunch of technical founders who know enough about blockchain to confuse a lot of non-experts into thinking they are really smart and credible. But you will see very consistently in the cryptocurrency space that the experts refuse to endorse iota, and frequently say strongly negative things about it. They are very effective at selling snake oil, but that's all their blockchain is. The tangle that th…
I do not own IOTA - thought about it some months back but decided against it because I don't fancy doing trades on or supporting Bitfinex. Another HN user swayed me away from Monero - which I owned a large part of as he told me about scaling issues. But my question is to your advice about: look to other experts. As someone coming outside the crypto-universe it is kind of hard to distill who the real experts are - so…