331–340 of 577 posts
I honestly don't understand why this coin even makes the news. At $250K it was less than a microcap penny token. It's insignificant and not worth a print.
Because this is the kind of story that cryptocurrency detractors love, and that aligns with the general sentiment towards cryptocurrencies on HN.
These incidents really illustrate the main flaw of smart contracts: a single bug in your code can lead to incredible losses. I simply don't think it's possible for human beings to write good enough software for smart contracts.
Can there ever be 'bug free' software? As a lifelong programmer, I'm starting to think that it's impossible to write perfect software free from bugs.
This may interest you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice's_theorem
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Literally every day you trust your life, privacy and money to algorithms that make decisions without human intervention. The financial system trades trillions of dollars in automated systems that make split-second decisions in a way that precludes human supervision. ... but when that stuff goes wrong, which it does, we don't just say "geez that's too bad, the code is the code". Look at the 2010 flash crash: somethi…
Knight lost half a billion dollars in 30 seconds and not a single trade was reversed. If anything similar happened to any major hedge fund or market maker, nothing would get reversed. Every hedge fund and market maker knows that if their algorithms break, their money is gone. Period. No backsies. The point is billions in capital is already completely trusted to algorithms with no human fail safe.
I am pretty sure that NYSE canceled trades in six names after Knight; and the LULD pause rules that were introduced after the 2010 flash crash (unfortunately too late to save Knight) also create opportunities for human intervention.
These incidents really illustrate the main flaw of smart contracts: a single bug in your code can lead to incredible losses. I simply don't think it's possible for human beings to write good enough software for smart contracts.
That’s not even close to the main flaw. The main flaw is that it incentivizes crime, human trafficking and accelerates environmental destruction. None of these are huge problems if you can afford a private bunker in New Zealand. It’s a major problem for ordinary citizens, especially those of poorer countries. Everything involving code has bugs. Bugs aren’t a reason not to use code. Bitcoin isn’t a problem for the ver…
Unless you don't believe the narrative that Bitcoin stores/grows wealth very well, in that case...poor people can simply not use it.
Perhaps you mean to say that the distribution of coins is uneven. That's true, but not a problem Bitcoin aims to solve or can solve. Bitcoin is fair, the same rules apply to everyone. If a billionaire has a 1,000 Bitcoin and I have 0.1 Bitcoin, we both win or lose based on price action equally, relatively speaking. That's as fair as it gets. With Bitcoin, having lots of coins doesn't give you any new free coins, unlike fiat money.
The environmental destruction is overstated and rapidly changing as we speak. Soon the vast majority of mining happens based on renewables with a specific focus on stranded energy. And this isn't a vague promise, some 60/70% of the hashrate from China, which include most coal-based mining, is being wiped out in just a few weeks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doing illegal things, mostly. If you are working a w2 job and paying taxes and paying your mortgage / auto loan... crypto doesn't really help you. Blackmail? Awesome. Buying illegal substances? Awesome. Gambling? You got it...
To be fair illegal is not the same as immoral. For example, cryptocurrencies can also be used to transfer money out of financial system controlled by oppressive regime which is largely a positive use. The problem is that "oppressive regime" is a matter of opinion and therefore these transfers are indistinguishable from tax evasion and other financial crimes. Techno-libertarians see that as a feature, I think most of…
The fact that this is trending on HN shows how little hacker news knows about the cryptocurrency space. A relatively unknown, recently launched stablecoin collapsing is not big news in crypto. Now if dai, usdc or usdt had failed, that would be a big deal.
USDT failed a LONG time ago.
And if you believe USDT has been 1:1 backed by us dollars for its full history - dream on. If you believed they would actually get audited when they said they would - hahah.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mostly it involves people making systems that are too complex to trivially analyze. You can not write arbitrarily complex secure code. You need to limit your scope and do one very simple thing extremely tersely and correctly. You can make powerful systems with simple correct independent components. You can not make complex secure monolithic systems. It gets even worse when you look at contracts with delegation. The p…
I don't know much in the field, but formally verifiable programming methods come to mind. You'll potentially have less of a chance for contracts to be exploited (at least compared to what we have now). That said, you can't protect against infrastructure exploits as easily, mathematically flawless program or not.
My former professor (RIP) oversaw the formal verification of the F-16 computer software and it still had significant bugs in the end where the specification itself was incomplete or in error. And that was a multi-year, team-scale effort. No one is doing that for smart contracts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doing illegal things, mostly. If you are working a w2 job and paying taxes and paying your mortgage / auto loan... crypto doesn't really help you. Blackmail? Awesome. Buying illegal substances? Awesome. Gambling? You got it...
You can literally say that about cold hard cash. Blackmail? Pay cash. Buying illegal substances? Cash. Gambling? Get your cash out. It's all in how you use it. https://eandt.theiet.org/content/articles/2021/05/moon-missi... Anything is a store of value, wood, gold, water, dogecoin ect. If people want to accept something for something else this is a way of life. It's just sad that people only see the bad use cases. Ho…
That said, to deposit 10k of cash in a bank you need to fill out some forms.
I also don't have a great way to send you say 100k in cash. Suitcase full of dollars? But I can send you 2 BTC much easier.
The big hole in demanding giant ransoms was always taking delivery of the suitcase full of money. Not so hard to do with digital currency.
These incidents really illustrate the main flaw of smart contracts: a single bug in your code can lead to incredible losses. I simply don't think it's possible for human beings to write good enough software for smart contracts.
I've seen them described as "self-funding bug bounties".
The fact that this is trending on HN shows how little hacker news knows about the cryptocurrency space. A relatively unknown, recently launched stablecoin collapsing is not big news in crypto. Now if dai, usdc or usdt had failed, that would be a big deal.
> A relatively unknown, recently launched stablecoin collapsing is not big news in crypto. The fact that some people think a $250,000 heist followed by the collapse of a half a million dollar stablecoin is "not news" underscores how ridiculous the cryptocurrency space is right now.