131–140 of 303 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love how the crypto community encourages circumventing laws, UNTIL someone steals from them using their own “smart” contract then calls on authorities for help.
Can someone explain to me why HN is so anti-crypto?
but every once in a while great discussions pop up here, vitalik buterin himself even posts here sometimes, also that guy from coinbase etc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because there are similar mechanisms doesn’t mean they haven’t been improved on in some way. Lawyers and courts are notoriously inefficient if this implementation achieves efficiencies, even if the mechanisms are analogous, seems like progress.
>Lawyers and courts are notoriously inefficient if this implementation achieves efficiencies every if the mechanisms are analogous seems like progress. Lynching/mob justice is much more efficient than lawyers and courts, and that is what comes to mind seeing how the crypto reacts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can someone explain to me why HN is so anti-crypto?
It’s not that HN is anti crypto, it’s that most (if not all) smart people are. The only smart people that are pro crypto are ones trying to sell shovels in the gold rush (like Elon or Dorsey). It’s ironic you’re asking this question in a thread about news proving how stupid crypto is to begin with.
maybe they dont just understand it at all, too. and its a lot, wrapping your head around all the defi fiasco alone is mentally challenging as hell, haha.
I haven't seen any evidence there was in fact a hack at all. A digital contract was used in a way that complied with the contract that the bonehead writers of that contract did not intend. That's it. If bad contract writers get to cry "hack" and beg for their money back there is no point to digital contracts at all. If someone had physically or electronically broken into systems and illicitly copied private keys that…
Such a weak take. I guess we are also tools for using Ethereum after The DAO.
An error like this in the contract stack should have been caught by the auditor, Certik. It's not a fundamental flaw in PolyNet's system, just a very unfortunate oversight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because there are similar mechanisms doesn’t mean they haven’t been improved on in some way. Lawyers and courts are notoriously inefficient if this implementation achieves efficiencies, even if the mechanisms are analogous, seems like progress.
> It’s important to remember that when you start from scratch there is absolutely no reason to believe that you are going to do a better job than you did the first time. First of all, you probably don’t even have the same programming team that worked on version one, so you don’t actually have “more experience”. You’re just going to make most of the old mistakes again, and introduce some new problems that weren’t in t…
I haven't seen any evidence there was in fact a hack at all. A digital contract was used in a way that complied with the contract that the bonehead writers of that contract did not intend. That's it. If bad contract writers get to cry "hack" and beg for their money back there is no point to digital contracts at all. If someone had physically or electronically broken into systems and illicitly copied private keys that…
> You have to be an absolute tool to use the poly network for anything serious ever again. Such a weak take. I guess we are also tools for using Ethereum after The DAO. An error like this in the contract stack should have been caught by the auditor, Certik. It's not a fundamental flaw in PolyNet's system, just a very unfortunate oversight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s important to remember that when you start from scratch there is absolutely no reason to believe that you are going to do a better job than you did the first time. First of all, you probably don’t even have the same programming team that worked on version one, so you don’t actually have “more experience”. You’re just going to make most of the old mistakes again, and introduce some new problems that weren’t in t…
If you're going to just quote someone and pretend that serves as a cogent argument you'll probably want to pick someone a little smarter and more well-rounded than Spolsky.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love how the crypto community encourages circumventing laws, UNTIL someone steals from them using their own “smart” contract then calls on authorities for help.
Can someone explain to me why HN is so anti-crypto?
I think it has to do with a misconception about how much effort you have to put in to have a good understanding on crypto. If we are speaking about topics like high mathematics, most people realise that their knowledge is not enough to have a meaningful opinion on the cutting-edge. For some reason people on HN treat crypto like politics: almost everyone has a strong opinion without much knowledge. Crypto is a much deeper subject than how it is treated on HN. You need to have not just technical knowledge (like understanding why a proof-of-stake algorithm has no vulnerability is VERY hard), but also very deep knowledge of the philosophy of value/money/trust. For example any substantial interview with Vitalik Buterin discusses the topics in a much deeper way than it is treated on HN.
TL;DR: People are reasonably smart here but extremely uneducated on crypto, and for some reason they think that they are informed enough to have a strong opinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Lawyers and courts are notoriously inefficient if this implementation achieves efficiencies every if the mechanisms are analogous seems like progress. Lynching/mob justice is much more efficient than lawyers and courts, and that is what comes to mind seeing how the crypto reacts.
Depends what your aim is, and how long your time horizon is. You might feel better today but when new information comes out showing the mob was wrong, that's the kind of guilt that can lead you to a very dark place.
My point here is that it happens time and time again - people do revolution, be it real bloody one like French or Russian or just a tech one like crypto, and from the very beginning dispense with the old mature system and replace it with what they see as a very efficient new one - like the "emergency committee" system of Russian revolution which was able to quickly execute millions of "counter-revolutionaries" - yet with time the system again matures into what is perceived as a very inefficient one.