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

Ethereum Has Issues

blog.dshr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 377 posts

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#131

Post by RustyConsul »

WJW wrote: post #80
thebean11 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For sure, DeFi loans aren't practical at the moment (for anything but speculation), and may never be practical for something like a mortgage or even a credit card. I still find it pretty mind blowing that an algorithm can loan me money. For insurance I don't agree. Something basic like weather insurance (widely used in agriculture) is already possible. The hardest part is getting the weather information onchain in a…

> I still find it pretty mind blowing that an algorithm can loan me money. Algorithmic lending has been a thing for decades though. What do you think a credit score is for if not a tool to let computers decide whether to give you credit or not?

Credit is loaning you money and providing an interest rate. Usually something insane like 15%.

DeFi is unlocking the value of an asset, making it liquid and allowing me to participate in other investment opportunities without an APR.

One example is on Kaurura. I have KSM, Stake that KSM for a 19% APR Rate. Throw that LKSM into a vault and mint AUSD as long as i have 160% collatoral ratio. I can then use that aUSD i printed, buy other assets and participate in liquidity pools, which are giving anywhere from 50% to 300% APR.

It's a new era of finance. Play around in the space before you say it's worthless.

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#132

Post by [deleted] »

Raidion wrote: post #111
jerry1979 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a Crypto Andy?

Andy is a fairly new and derogatory/tongue in cheek term (from twitch, long story) that basically means people that get attention from jumping on someone else's creative bandwagon. Basically someone else does the creation, and you become an Andy by trying to get involved without really adding much value.

[deleted]

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#133

Post by dudus »

rufusroflpunch wrote: post #92

This is not directly related to the content of the post but is about Ethereum. I have been putting this hypothesis out there on twitter for a while now, looking for someone to refute me, but no one has yet. This seems like a place where I might be able to find someone who understand Ethereum enough tell my grasp of the protocol is wrong (or right): Ethereum is going deflationary. Not disinflationary like Bitcoin, but…

What you seem to be afraid of is something that might or not happen in a distant future. At that point they just change the rules again. Ethereum has done it several times. If they don't like the direction things are going they just change it. Some people get mad about it but it just keeps chugging along and these people go out and possibly create a fork that goes nowhere.

I still think crypto is high priced poop people currently view as valuable. But I don't see how your point goes anywhere to prove it.

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#134

Post by dmitriid »

pshc wrote: post #87
pavel_lishin wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> once proof of stake finality arrives Which it hasn't, despite being six months away for years now. You cannot handwave away problems by promising you'll fix them with X in Y months, when you consistently fail to deliver X.

I keep seeing this "eternal six months away" FUD, but no one wants to admit the devs delivered on the Beacon Chain which has been running smoothly for 1.5 years, and the Merge testnets are working quite well. Bitcoin maximalists are out there all day grousing about made-up deadlines promised by strawmen and laundered through hearsay. It has nothing to do with reality.

> I keep seeing this "eternal six months away" FUD, but no one wants to admit

that it has literally just been postponed again https://twitter.com/TimBeiko/status/1514010098145759232

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#135

Post by svachalek »

naoqj wrote: post #52
px43 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a low value Bitcoin fork from Craig Wright, a delusional dude who claims to be Satoshi, so he made a fork where he could control all the Satoshi coins. "SV" means "Satoshi's Vision".

That's crazy. If he is satoshi what's his excuse for not having the private keys to those coins in the main bitcoin network?

It would be incredibly stressful for him to prove it, nay as much as he would like to be vindicated, the risk of the fame and the pressure blah blah blah.

Sorry I can't be bothered to look up the actual quotes but they're similarly incoherent. He pretends to have them but not to want to use them, even to prove his claims.

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#136

Post by throwaway82652 »

pshc wrote: post #62

While many contracts within Ethereum have clear flaws, that doesn't mean Eth as a whole is broken. Time bandit attacks go away once proof of stake finality arrives. Also, trading ought to be done in Layer 2s. Does MEV work on L2s? Re: certain token drops wasting lots of gas, it's up to the token authors to use an implementation that avoids gas wars. Once you go into claiming equivalences with P = NP, you've lost me.…

>that doesn't mean Eth as a whole is broken

That's true in the sense that it's not why ETH is broken. ETH as a whole is broken because it's cryptocurrency. The whole idea of smart contracts is never going to work as advertised, it's impossible to make a more complex contract without running into any number of these flaws and spending an inordinate amount of your time and energy trying to mitigate and workaround them. But at the same time these are the types of contracts that drive developers to ETH. It's a lose-lose situation, at best it's equivalent to a payment API that's extremely unpredictable and insecure and will never have those issues fixed because they're part of the design. These flaws aren't inherent in making online transactions, they only pop up when you insist on using blockchains for everything, when there's no real reason to do that.

>Also, trading ought to be done in Layer 2s.

It's really baffling to me how L2 chains have become a serious thing. If you ask me those are just workarounds for flaws in the design of the L1 chains, nobody actually wants to use L2 chains but they're forced to because ETH (and other L1 chains) are so poorly designed that it can't accommodate most things people actually want to do.

>They're programs with a low ceiling on the number of steps and possible codepaths. They barely even have loops half the time. Estimating isn't that hard in practice.

Ok but why should anybody have to estimate in the first place? There's no reason for it with a trivial transaction, requiring this is just bad design.

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#137

Post by danans »

thebean11 wrote: post #112
danans wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The hardest part is getting the weather information onchain in a way that's trusted by the buyers and sellers of the insurance. So the hardest part is trust, the very thing that blockchains supposedly make unnecessary?

People get touchy about the word "trust" in blockchain threads. Would it help if I said that the hardest part is creating a way to get the weather data on chain that the buyer and seller can agree on ahead of time? Anyway, I'm obviously not claiming this can work without input from humans off chain. My point is that the infrastructure needed to get clean and honest weather data on to the chain (which requires human i…

> Would it help if I said that the hardest part is creating a way to get the weather data on chain that the buyer and seller can agree on ahead of time?

> My point is that the infrastructure needed to get clean and honest weather data on to the chain (which requires human inputs) is much smaller than the entire infrastructure needed to administer weather insurance

Is "much smaller" infrastructure on a different dimension than the "hardest part" of the problem? If so, what dimensions are those?

If not, how can the trust/agreement part be both "much smaller" and also the "hardest", especially given that it requires human inputs, especially human driven systems for routinely validating the process (AKA audits), and adjudicating inevitable claims of breaches of the agreement (AKA the courts).

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#138

Post by nootropicat »

>To some extent, the Ethereum project has just given up on scaling the main blockchain. “For Ethereum to scale and keep up with demand, it has required rollups” — do the work somewhere else and send back the result. The blockchain is only usable if you work around actually using it.

Zk-rollups are fundamentally superior to direct scaling because they move execution and proof generation cost to only one node (entity, could be a server farm) that only has to do it once, while ensuring correctness is verifiable by anyone cheaply forever. No more scalable solution exists from a purely theoretical level. This in theory allows even running complicated multiplayer games on a blockchain (turn based directly, realtime by dropping state snapshots).

In principle, this should be implemented directly - but it's so early that a solution that can last for decades simply doesn't exist. In addition, decentralizing zkrollup implementations to third party teams allows for much faster innovation.

Optimistic rollups are more questionable.

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#139

Post by Geee »

px43 wrote: post #70

Ha, Flash Boys 2.0 was from 2019. This blog post is literally "I read a thing from three years ago and have lost faith in something that I never believed in in the first place". As someone who knows and has worked with all the people involved with the write-ups referenced in this blog post, I can pretty confidently say that the author is way way behind here. There have been some insane advancements in recent years th…

The referenced paper is dated 29 March 2022. https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.15930

Re: Ethereum Has Issues

#140

Post by trompetenaccoun »

dmitriid wrote: post #134
pshc wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep seeing this "eternal six months away" FUD, but no one wants to admit the devs delivered on the Beacon Chain which has been running smoothly for 1.5 years, and the Merge testnets are working quite well. Bitcoin maximalists are out there all day grousing about made-up deadlines promised by strawmen and laundered through hearsay. It has nothing to do with reality.

> I keep seeing this "eternal six months away" FUD, but no one wants to admit that it has literally just been postponed again https://twitter.com/TimBeiko/status/1514010098145759232

Postponed would mean the date was officially announced by one of the devs?

I've not had time to pay attention much over the past months, but to me that June date was always a silly rumor. Correct me if I'm wrong. End of year is what I heard, but even that isn't set in stone of course and I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't happen till then.

Post reply on HN