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

The Problem with Ethereum

tomerstrolight.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 321 posts

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#261

Post by noxer »

shawnz wrote: post #242
noxer wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not correct. The software update that goes to the uses but if miners dont mine for the hard fork, then the user cant use it. Its a technical reality that they could update anyway and at least some miners would mine for them but that would just be causing a chain fork and 2 different chains. The miners have the power to decide where they mine. And user have the power to decide on which chain they operate on. They both…

> The software update that goes to the uses but if miners dont mine for the hard fork, then the user cant use it. ... The miners have the power to decide where they mine. This is based on the assumption that miners would rather choose to abandon their business as a matter of principle than mine on the most profitable chain, and also somehow convince any future, unaffiliated prospective miners to also do the same. How…

You should probably read the the whole post not just one part and then assume something I never said.

The power is split between miners and user. A majority from both parties are required to determine where the network goes the rest are somewhat forced to follow. If no such majority can be found the network can fork and both chains can be profitable for miners. I never said miners are in control, I disagreed with the parent who said users are in control - big difference.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#262

Post by lottin »

elevenoh wrote: post #188
mandmandam wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The market has not efficiently determined that though. _Objectively_ better alternatives to Bitcoin are around for at least the last five years. No one can realistically argue that it's better to have a system use 6 million times more energy, cost infinitely more, and require waiting 16 minutes for a confirmation compared to less than a second. "The market" is chock-full of inertia, vested interests, propaganda, sunk…

>_Objectively_ better alternatives to Bitcoin are around for at least the last five years. If you truly think this way, you're deluding yourself & this is where I stop reading. Everything has tradeoffs. There's no 'objective' better.

> There's no 'objective' better.

Maybe look up 'efficiency'. If we can achieve the same outcome at different costs, then the method that achieves said outcome incurring the least cost is objectively better than the others.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#263

Post by noxer »

Taek wrote: post #229
noxer wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not correct. The software update that goes to the uses but if miners dont mine for the hard fork, then the user cant use it. Its a technical reality that they could update anyway and at least some miners would mine for them but that would just be causing a chain fork and 2 different chains. The miners have the power to decide where they mine. And user have the power to decide on which chain they operate on. They both…

Any chain can exist with a single miner on it, and anyone can be that miner. Users do not need the consent of miners to execute a hardfork and migrate to a new chain. Miners do not control or determine hard forks. This has been demonstrated empirically numerous times in crypto history, most notably the moment that >80% of the hashrate openly supported a hardfork that subsequently failed because it did not have user s…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28142675

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#264

Post by MichaelZuo »

hiddencache wrote: post #135
agumonkey wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on which side you're on. The big smart may again take advantage of the rest.

The eternal challenge - improving efficiency in systems while ensuring that those efficiency gains are fairly distributed among participants...

Ah the story of organic matter.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#265

Post by shawnz »

noxer wrote: post #261
shawnz wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The software update that goes to the uses but if miners dont mine for the hard fork, then the user cant use it. ... The miners have the power to decide where they mine. This is based on the assumption that miners would rather choose to abandon their business as a matter of principle than mine on the most profitable chain, and also somehow convince any future, unaffiliated prospective miners to also do the same. How…

You should probably read the the whole post not just one part and then assume something I never said. The power is split between miners and user. A majority from both parties are required to determine where the network goes the rest are somewhat forced to follow. If no such majority can be found the network can fork and both chains can be profitable for miners. I never said miners are in control, I disagreed with the…

What I am saying is that only users can determine which chain is profitable for miners. Miners only have a choice in the sense that they can choose to sacrifice profits on principle, which is not really a choice in the same sense as the kind of choice that users have.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#266

Post by lottin »

elevenoh wrote: post #155
birdyrooster wrote: post #143

Everything wrong with crypto is the notion you can make a global reserve currency impervious to special interests. It’s going to be gamed by the people at the top, they will use all and any leverage to change the code to favor them more. They will extract the value from the system like they have every other system and the easiest part is that stakeholders like you and me don’t get any vote. You can’t decouple monetar…

>Everything wrong with crypto is the notion you can make a global reserve currency impervious to special interests This ain't binary. Ain't yes or no. Also.. why do you assume crypto is gunning for 'global reserve currency'? Crypto enables all types of experiments toward reducing the insider-asymmetry nature of central control control (e.g. political whim money printing, political whim monetary policy) >Fiat will alw…

> fiat policy shifted 2008 wall street bankruptcy risk away from markets onto ordinary people who're being inflated-away

Do you have any evidence at all about this or are you just parroting Austrian mantras?

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#267

Post by agumonkey »

hiddencache wrote: post #135
agumonkey wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on which side you're on. The big smart may again take advantage of the rest.

The eternal challenge - improving efficiency in systems while ensuring that those efficiency gains are fairly distributed among participants...

Now in that view, it's possible that crypto currencies and/or Blockchainish project may raise the floor for everybody (in the case absolutes matter).

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#269

Post by trts »

iSnow wrote: post #203
CuriousCosmic wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd recommend looking at Project Catalyst out of the Cardano ecosystem. Of course the proposals are still heavily focused on internal/ecosystem development but there's an increasing focus on building platforms for people in developing regions as well. There has generally been a heavy focus on improving connectivity and access to affordable financial services within the African continent however recently there's been…

Come on. I wish ADA well, but Charles is one self-centered person and the community has erected a cult around him and is super toxic against other projects. After BTC maxis, ADA has the most religious maximalists I would say.

As someone who started learning about Cardano recently and has listened to some of Charles' broadcasts on YouTube, I'm not really sure what you're referring to. To me he seems happy to celebrate success in other crypto platforms, has some strong opinions and a libertarian bent, but of course is building Cardano according to his own vision.

BTC maximalists are quasi-religious in my experience but Cardano just seems to recognize the inevitable ascension of the blockchain and is building for that future, very similar to Ethereum.

Maybe he's full of it; I've encountered other comments criticizing him but none that were deifying.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#270

Post by meowface »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #27
DenseComet wrote: post #6

Seems like one of the core arguments of this is that the the core devs have pushed the difficulty bomb multiple times because they've missed their original timelines for switching to PoS without any repercussions. It seems to me that this is actually the correct thing to do. I'd rather the core devs take their time and iron out the issues instead of being incentivized to play fast and loose with a system that manages…

Agreed. The article feels a bit like it's salty about a very complex software project behaving like a very complex software project. My understanding of the changing of the rules "as you go" is that it's based on the reality being faced by the system. Bitcoin's proof-of-work is simultaneously one of it's strengths and one of its weaknesses, and Ethereum has chosen to move from PoW to PoS because of the belief that it…

>Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin Satoshi Vision. Take off the rose-coloured glasses, "your community" isn't sunshine and roses either.

I think this is unfair. These are splinter communities. It's like critiquing Ethereum's community by pointing at Ethereum Classic and Binance Smart Chain.

>Personally, I think PoW may be what brings Bitcoin down in the long-term.

I pretty much agree with this part. I think it'll probably cause very serious issues for it over the next decade. I predict they'll actually eventually move off of PoW or drastically alter the PoW algorithm, but only after many years of infighting and stubborn refusal to consider the possibility.

Post reply on HN