Ethereum 2.0 launches

Post by caffeinatedgoat » Wed, Dec 02, 2020, 12:23 PM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #542

pfundstein wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry for the tangent but isn't litecoin and dogecoin one and the same now? Why separate clients?

Nope one was started as a joke and the other one, the founder sold literally his entire holdings at the top of the market for $600/LTC, 8x current price (and ran away to an island somewhere, I assume) years ago, leaving the foundation on the brink of bankruptcy - the bankruptcy claim which to be fair they denied in 2019. Smart man!

Post by DennisP » Wed, Dec 02, 2020, 1:59 PM UTC

1996 wrote: post #519

this_user wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would mining be anything but selfish? The only reason miners are operating is because they expect a reward that is greater than their expenses. That means block rewards plus TX fees need to be greater than the cost of running the network. Block rewards are effectively a tax on existing holders through inflation of supply, but that will go to zero in the long run. As the rewards decreases, TX fees will need to inc…

I think you do not understand "selfish mining": it's a technical term for a miner trying to take the lead over the existing blockchain, but only in some very specific cases outside normal mining. It's predicted by game theory - google for it, it's interesting! The rest of your analysis is correct: as rewards decrease, TX fees may increase. You can also see that due to competition for the limited tps, as seen in 2017.…

Post by literallycancer » Wed, Dec 02, 2020, 2:13 PM UTC

KSteffensen wrote: post #569

sickygnar wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

KYC = know your customer = anti money-laundering. Yes, it is bureacratic, and it can be a pain for regular, non-money-laundering customers. With crypto, you can instantly create an account offline and trade around the globe. As far as programmable banking, I meant it in the sense that people can create "bank apps", aka contracts. It goes way beyond simple routing of funds, since it's turing complete. Financial censor…

Anti-money laundering regulations are a good thing to me. I want this, even though it means I had to get a passport made for my 4-year old son so that the bank could see he actually existed and his account total of $50 was not being used by some ukrainian oligarch. I also think it's ok to put in some speed bumps and force a tiny bit of due diligence before allowing people to gamble away their savings. I'm assuming th…

Post by ishishkin » Wed, Dec 02, 2020, 2:19 PM UTC

woah wrote: post #539

ishishkin wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They get slashed when anyone submits evidence of them doing this. Who will record this "evidence" to the blockchain? Anyway there will be two versions of the blockchain. In one of them attacker's stake was not slashed and there is no any "evidence" of his malicious actions.

The "evidence" is two blocks, with the same block height, both signed by the attacker. Not sure what these two versions of the blockchain you're talking about are. Signing two blocks at the same height with the same chain id is the slashable offense. It doesn't matter what's in them. If the attacker wants to have his own blockchain off in the corner where he has all the money, nobody cares.

Post by literallycancer » Wed, Dec 02, 2020, 2:26 PM UTC

wruza wrote: post #571

deeeeplearning wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same is true about the majority of the workings of the internet, or the electrical engineering that built their phones or dozens of other things people use everyday without understanding. How is that relevant in this case?

But crypto proponents describe use cases, not inner workings. Use cases for telecom were obvious much earlier that the internet itself, thousands of years of lost messages and messengers.