Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection • Hacker News Board

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#141

Post by boppo1 » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 3:04 PM UTC

sureglymop wrote: post #10

churchill wrote: post #2

For reference, Uniswap is a cryptocurrency exchange which uses a decentralized network protocol. The protocol facilitates automated transactions between cryptocurrency tokens on the Ethereum blockchain through the use of smart contracts.

Would you mind explaining that in even simpler terms?

Imagine you want to trade your gold for silver. You literally possess the physical gold.

FTX/centralized exchange: deposit your gold, counterparty deposits silver. FTX possesses the physical quantities and gives you both receipts. You agree to you exchange rate and FTX issues new receipts for what you hold, old receipts are void. You can use the new receipt to withdraw your gold and silver[0].

Uniswap: You take the amount of gold you want to trade to a building. You get to the building and exchange your physical gold for physical silver directly. You leave with your physical silver. You spent a little gold on the way to afford gasoline for the trip.

These are technically inaccurate but give an overall correct idea of the difference.

[0]most crypto users don't understand how to possess their own crypto (control private keys) so they skip the last step and leave the 'gold/silver' (crypto) in the physical custody of the exchange.

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#142

Post by rib3ye » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 3:05 PM UTC

parkingrift wrote: post #121

hailwren wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what gemini has to do with this, but most people who actually think crypto is interesting will tell you that _any_ centralized exchange (to include coinbase, gemini, the NYSE, even the ones in the future that haven’t been made yet) is against the ethos of crypto. Uniswap is an entirely different class of thing. The only scams possible in the _logic_ of Uniswap are those which would be considered bugs in the…

Ah the “No True Scotsman” fallacy. No true crypto enthusiasts would use a centralized exchange. If they’re using an exchange, they must not be a true crypto enthusiast. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

They would use one, but they wouldn’t complain when it went down and swallowed customer funds.

Is there a “Every Man a Scotsman” saying?

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#143

Post by themihai » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 3:18 PM UTC

mhluongo wrote: post #38

themihai wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I've checked it was unusuable due the high trading fees. In theory it's great but in reality it's not really working.

"No one goes there anymore, it's too popular!" Yesterday over $2.1B in volume cleared on Uniswap [0]. It's certainly useable by someone. If you want cheaper fees, try it on Arbitrum or Optimism. [0] - https://info.uniswap.org/#/

The "popularity" issue does not help a payments/transaction system. I believe in the long term it will die. A merchant that tried accepting crypto payments and found that in the busiest day its clients couldn't pay due the high transaction fees will abandon the crypto payments entirely and wont come back when they get cheaper.

Of course the system may still be used for the types of transactions that cannot be easily replaced by mainstreem methods (crypto scams, fraud payments, pump/dump tokens etc) but I believe in the end it will die because the number of white sheeps will get thinner.

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#144

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 3:21 PM UTC

hailwren wrote: post #125

parkingrift wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah the “No True Scotsman” fallacy. No true crypto enthusiasts would use a centralized exchange. If they’re using an exchange, they must not be a true crypto enthusiast. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Sure, differentiating between two categories of things is a logical fallacy I guess.

[deleted]

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#145

Post by m00dy » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 3:40 PM UTC

themihai wrote: post #143

mhluongo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No one goes there anymore, it's too popular!" Yesterday over $2.1B in volume cleared on Uniswap [0]. It's certainly useable by someone. If you want cheaper fees, try it on Arbitrum or Optimism. [0] - https://info.uniswap.org/#/

The "popularity" issue does not help a payments/transaction system. I believe in the long term it will die. A merchant that tried accepting crypto payments and found that in the busiest day its clients couldn't pay due the high transaction fees will abandon the crypto payments entirely and wont come back when they get cheaper. Of course the system may still be used for the types of transactions that cannot be easily…

but it is not a payment protocol. It is a trade protocol.

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#146

Post by synu » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 3:42 PM UTC

alexvoda wrote: post #98

synu wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the paper abstract, it says the identified scams by looking at transactions. So it seems at least some people are manually adding them and getting scammed. Or are you saying anyone who does that is by definition using Uniswap wrong and shouldn’t be counted as being scammed on Uniswap?

They are not using it wrong the same way someone being scammed by Nigerian prince spam are not using email wrong. Uniswap filters the tokens available the same modern email providers filters email. If you go looking in the spam folder and fall pray to a scam there, it is your fault, not the fault of the email provider.

That makes sense, but would you say email then is safe? Or is it something you should watch out for scams on?

I am mainly wondering about Uniswap being described as safe.

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#147

Post by themihai » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 3:45 PM UTC

Sargos wrote: post #43

themihai wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I've checked it was unusuable due the high trading fees. In theory it's great but in reality it's not really working.

As of this writing it is $2.39 to perform a swap on Ethereum Uniswap which isn't great but not too bad when compared to something like Coinbase. On L2s it's around 10 cents which I think most people would agree is acceptable. Fees from https://l2fees.info/

I think it's less important how high are the fees right now. The fact tomorrow the fees could increase to $1000 makes the system unreliable for long term investments. The crypto payments for example had few real chances to become mainstrean but their limitations(high transaction fees, high congestion, low throughput) proved they are not practical.

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#148

Post by saurik » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 4:14 PM UTC

oarsinsync wrote: post #79

Sargos wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misconceptions like yours are why the title is misleading. If you go to Uniswap right now you will not see any of these tokens and have a near 0% chance of being scammed.

> If you go to Uniswap right now you will not see any of these tokens and have a near 0% chance of being scammed If there's 100 tokens listed on the front page, and one of them is a scam, that may be near 0%, but it's equally near to 2%. I'd be pretty confident that there's a >1% chance of being scammed on a platform like this. FTT wasn't thought to be a scam until it was proven to be. Unless a token issuer does so w…

> ...but it's equally near to 2%.

Ignoring anything else you might have gotten wrong, the comment you are responding to didn't say a 2.3% chance of being scammed, it said a 2.3% chance of NOT being scammed, which is nowhere near 0% or 2%, as it comes from abusing the 97.7% figure from the paper.

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#149

Post by mumblemumble » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 4:25 PM UTC

eli wrote: post #5

mudrockbestgirl wrote: post #3

Sure, because anyone can create and list a token on Uniswap. The only cost are the gas fees. That doesn't mean those tokens have any real liquidity or are being used. Just like anyone can create a website and put it online. The only cost are the hosting fees. That doesn't mean it'll get any visitors.

Yet 97% of websites will not steal your money.

This seems like an unfair retort to me. The point of the website analogy was not to suggest that the percentage of malicious websites is comparable to the number of malicious coins. It was to draw an analogy to another distributed system with low barriers to entry and where people dabble semi-seriously.

I think that the parent makes a fair point. I'm willing to go so far as to agree that suddenly yanking support for a coin you created and put up for sale on a public marketplace can be described as pulling the rug on that coin. I don't think I would assume, though, that doing so necessarily constitutes a deliberate attempt to scam people.

Is it irresponsible? Perhaps. Though that's a somewhat subjective judgment, and I recognize that the crypto community's culture around these things runs in sharp contrast to how I think about public marketplaces, so perhaps it wouldn't be fair of me to make a value judgment.

Is it worrying? I suppose I can appreciate arguments that the kinds of regulation necessary to prevent such behavior are themselves harmful, and that this sort of thing is acceptable or even desirable insofar as it indicates the market's level of freedom. I can't bring myself to agree, though. I personally would not want to participate in a securities exchange where such behavior is rampant.

But not all worrying or irresponsible behavior is a scam.

Re: Do not rug on me: Zero-dimensional Scam Detection

#150

Post by horse666 » Sat, Nov 12, 2022, 4:27 PM UTC

parkingrift wrote: post #121

hailwren wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what gemini has to do with this, but most people who actually think crypto is interesting will tell you that _any_ centralized exchange (to include coinbase, gemini, the NYSE, even the ones in the future that haven’t been made yet) is against the ethos of crypto. Uniswap is an entirely different class of thing. The only scams possible in the _logic_ of Uniswap are those which would be considered bugs in the…

Ah the “No True Scotsman” fallacy. No true crypto enthusiasts would use a centralized exchange. If they’re using an exchange, they must not be a true crypto enthusiast. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Is saying “most of something” a universal generalisation?

The comment didn’t say “you’re not a crypto enthusiast _unless_ you believe X”. It just made an assertion (which, for what it’s worth, I think is incorrect) that the majority have a certain belief.