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

Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

our.status.im

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 532 posts

Re: Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

#251

Post by tom_mellior »

antimatter15 wrote: post #91
tom_mellior wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are deliberate redefinitions of the term "Turing complete". The reasonable interpretation is that evaluating a single block can involve an arbitrary computation (if given enough gas). Ethereum has this property, Bitcoin doesn't. These redefinitions say that you can take a few computation steps per Bitcoin block and save their state such that a later block can take a few more steps, so over time, very slowly, sp…

Ethereum blocks have a gas limit so it wouldn't be Turing complete under your definition either.

The universe is finite so no Turing complete computing devices can ever exist.

Ethereum has a Turing complete language that is only limited in practice by external constraints like the gas limit. Bitcoin doesn't have such a language.

Re: Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

#252

Post by chrisco255 »

jobigoud wrote: post #232
chrisco255 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"original" is a matter of debate. For example, which chain is the original Bitcoin: BTC or BCH? Prior to the fork, they both share the same history. The community aligned more behind BTC but surely there's a fork of the multiverse somewhere in the space-time continuum where the community rallied behind BCH and gave it more hashing power.

For ETC I don't think there is much debate. The original Ethereum paper and protocol still describes ETC whereas if you want to implement an ETH node that verifies the blockchain you need to write special code to introduce the block containing the collection of transactions reverting the hack.

Both have forked numerous times from when the whitepaper was written.

Re: Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

#253

Post by riffraff »

everfree wrote: post #236
keymone wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turing completeness is an anti feature in financial system like bitcoin. And pretty much zero contracts currently deployed to ethereum require Turing completeness. It’s just a buzzword to sell you this gigantic pre-mine scam.

I can't think of a single Ethereum dapp that could be implemented without an expressive scripting language.

a non-turing complete language can still be useful and "expressive" in a loose sense.

SPARK[0] isn't Turing complete but it's still pretty useful, and likely a better language than Solidity.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARK_(programming_language)

Re: Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

#254

Post by ur-whale »

Just read Vitalik's note and - interestingly enough - there isn't a single word about the potential damage to the miners, only how they could attack the proposal.

In other words, he's simply considering them an enemy when they've in fact been investing blood and treasure for the past 8 years supporting his brainchild.

People may call him a genius, but when they do, they're clearly not talking about his empathy abilities and leadership skills.

Re: Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

#255

Post by carlob »

belltaco wrote: post #85
hertzrat wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t half of our current money supply controlled by 1% of people? If the asset holders controlled things, why wouldn’t they just demand everyone else hand over their cash? https://www.cbsnews.com/news/richest-1-percent-control-more-...

Because the 1% isn't homogenous and a lot of them will want to keep the system working instead of killing the goose that lays the golden egg. The 1% is about 1.5 million people. Good luck getting most of them organized for a certain cause that will result in destruction of wealth mid term at the latest.

The 1% Is 1.5 millions iff the 100% is 150 millions, which is what population exactly?

Re: Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

#256

Post by darawk »

ur-whale wrote: post #254

Just read Vitalik's note and - interestingly enough - there isn't a single word about the potential damage to the miners, only how they could attack the proposal. In other words, he's simply considering them an enemy when they've in fact been investing blood and treasure for the past 8 years supporting his brainchild. People may call him a genius, but when they do, they're clearly not talking about his empathy abilit…

They've been investing money to make money. They're running a business, not a charity. Changes like these are part of the process of improvement, this is exactly what they signed up for.

Re: Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

#257

Post by andxor »

ur-whale wrote: post #254

Just read Vitalik's note and - interestingly enough - there isn't a single word about the potential damage to the miners, only how they could attack the proposal. In other words, he's simply considering them an enemy when they've in fact been investing blood and treasure for the past 8 years supporting his brainchild. People may call him a genius, but when they do, they're clearly not talking about his empathy abilit…

> they've in fact been investing blood and treasure

They have made a tremendous amount of money by investing in his "brainchild". How are they victims?

Re: Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

#258

Post by everfree »

keymone wrote: post #239
everfree wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't think of a single Ethereum dapp that could be implemented without an expressive scripting language.

Well, you’re misguided. It’s not the language, it’s platform features like kv store attached to blockchain that make these dapps possible to implement. And none of them require Turing completeness.

They may not require turing completeness in the strictest sense, but they do require branching logic and loops.

Re: Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack

#259

Post by ur-whale »

darawk wrote: post #256
ur-whale wrote: post #254

Just read Vitalik's note and - interestingly enough - there isn't a single word about the potential damage to the miners, only how they could attack the proposal. In other words, he's simply considering them an enemy when they've in fact been investing blood and treasure for the past 8 years supporting his brainchild. People may call him a genius, but when they do, they're clearly not talking about his empathy abilit…

They've been investing money to make money. They're running a business, not a charity. Changes like these are part of the process of improvement, this is exactly what they signed up for.

You're missing my point: yes, they have benefited from the whole thing, no doubt there.

But a responsible leader at the very least tries to address the fact that his proposal will throw a major chunk of the ecosystem under the bus and what's worse, on a completely unplanned timeline.

And maybe propose mitigating solutions.

Instead he immediately paints them as the enemy.

Some leader you got there.

Post reply on HN