Live data from Hacker News

What does $100 Ether mean?

medium.com

41–50 of 117 posts

Re: What does $100 Ether mean?

#41
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both BTC and ETH don't actually reward randomly. Instead, everyone is just trying a large amount of 'solutions' until one works. The first to find and distribute such a solution is said to have 'mined' such a block and gets to add his reward into the record by modifying that block. Because there is no way to know the true solution, everyone is just guessing so in the end it is random chance that determines who gets t…

Bigger computers equals faster search, which we could explain to non techies as buying more lottery tickets. I try never to explain mining to a general audience. It's too low level for a clean semantic mapping between what they want to know about, and how it all really works.

Maybe this analogy would work:

Imaging a million haystacks with a million different keys scattered within them. There is a lock which only one of those keys can open; it is difficult to find the key, but when you do, anyone can easily verify it is correct by turning it in the lock. Once a key has been found, a new lock is created and the process starts again.

The more robots (mining power) you have to search for the key, the more likely it is that you will find it before competing machines do.

Re: What does $100 Ether mean?

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The halting problem states you can't predict what a turing complete program will do, until you run it. This means to some degree, that you can't predict what your "smart" contract will do, until it does it. Thus turing completeness causes security to be far, far harder than non turing completeness. This is how you lose the millions of dollars as the DAO did after it passed audits. The Halting Problem states that yo…

"The naïve Ethereum people think they've cleverly sidestepped this with the notion of "gas" but actually all they're doing is cheating with this messy kludge: because simply saying "we'll arbitrarily make the program stop running at some point" does not make "smart contracts" written in Ethereum "decidable" - as we've seen, these contracts can still blow up / go wrong in other ways before they run out of gas." https:…

This comment is simply incorrect. The gas limits do make smart contracts decidable. It is a mathematical fact. Bringing the idea that things have gone wrong with Ethereum as proof to the contrary is completely absurd. Things have also gone wrong with Bitcoin [1]. Is it undecidable now too?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mt._Gox

Re: What does $100 Ether mean?

#43

The problem with smart contracts is that they are only 100% trustless as long as all the input data is already present on the blockchain. Even something banally simple as "if such and such win the world cup deposit earnings there" cannot be 100% trustless. How does one overcome this problem? I don't think smart contracts can overcome this problem while remaining 100% trustless.

This may not fully address your questions, but oracles input external data into smart contracts:

https://docs.oraclize.it/

Re: What does $100 Ether mean?

#44
post #19
post #12

They forgot the feature where if a smart contract doesn't go the way they want it, they create a default-opt-in hard fork of the currency. Sorry if I don't trust the "small group of legends" more than the government.

And in the same breath criticize Bitcoin for consolidation of mining power (which is a valid criticism).

There are cans of worms I could not open. I'm sorry.

Re: What does $100 Ether mean?

#45

The problem with smart contracts is that they are only 100% trustless as long as all the input data is already present on the blockchain. Even something banally simple as "if such and such win the world cup deposit earnings there" cannot be 100% trustless. How does one overcome this problem? I don't think smart contracts can overcome this problem while remaining 100% trustless.

"Trustless" is a terrible meme, as the term is misleading and the implementation of the concept is impossible. The truth is: There is no cloud, just other people's computers. Smart contracts can make trust relationships explicit. By using a blockchain system, you entrust a network - which you may have no control over - with application state. If you rely on such a network, you indirectly also rely on the network infr…

I agree that our terminology is often terrible. "Smart contract" could well have been "conditional payment" which for most purposes is clearer.

Do you know about http://erights.org ? They are good - great - on terminology.

Re: What does $100 Ether mean?

#46

The problem with smart contracts is that they are only 100% trustless as long as all the input data is already present on the blockchain. Even something banally simple as "if such and such win the world cup deposit earnings there" cannot be 100% trustless. How does one overcome this problem? I don't think smart contracts can overcome this problem while remaining 100% trustless.

"Trustless" is a terrible meme, as the term is misleading and the implementation of the concept is impossible. The truth is: There is no cloud, just other people's computers. Smart contracts can make trust relationships explicit. By using a blockchain system, you entrust a network - which you may have no control over - with application state. If you rely on such a network, you indirectly also rely on the network infr…

[deleted]

Re: What does $100 Ether mean?

#47

The problem with smart contracts is that they are only 100% trustless as long as all the input data is already present on the blockchain. Even something banally simple as "if such and such win the world cup deposit earnings there" cannot be 100% trustless. How does one overcome this problem? I don't think smart contracts can overcome this problem while remaining 100% trustless.

"Trustless" is a terrible meme, as the term is misleading and the implementation of the concept is impossible. The truth is: There is no cloud, just other people's computers. Smart contracts can make trust relationships explicit. By using a blockchain system, you entrust a network - which you may have no control over - with application state. If you rely on such a network, you indirectly also rely on the network infr…

[deleted]

Re: What does $100 Ether mean?

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Vinay has great insights into gun control, the hexayurt, and some other topics, however, on ETH, I think he's totally in error. I'd be happy to livestream chat him about it.

What do you think I'm missing about ETH? Insufficient political radicalism?

Crypto is a hard space. Most people's startups have lost them money compared to what they would have made had they just bought btc and held. Other's have left the btc ship with predictions of failure (Falkvinge, Hearn) and their doom predictions haven't yet and perhaps may not come true. I feel that many the great mind is lost to boredom with boring old BTC, the crypto you can actually buy things with. This makes me sad, for surely BTC is not yet where anyone would like it to be. The braindrain has a cost.

Massive amounts of braindrain have funneled into ETH, and not just dev's but dollars. It's like 21 inc. They failed so hard that they pivoted into a payments layer. I literally paid them a 6 percent fee to send some BTC to their founder. I could have just sent him btc directly, but then they wouldn't have a profit model right?

Thus. Time and money can be wasted. I believe that much of ETH is such a waste. And even worse, it's actually a risk magnet that convinces others to do unsafe things, like tie millions of dollars up in smart contracts, that are quite unsmart.

Bitcoin's not exciting enough, so let's iterate all the xyz thing but with bitcoin ideas. They nearly all fail, so then we're on to, lets have shorter block times, or lets tie proof of work to something that's not electricity, like storage or selfies. Then there's the "smart" layers like colored coins, branded tokens, and mastercoin, and ETH which layers on itself.

So the situation is, everyone wants to get rich, but you can only get rich in crypto if you A. start with lots or B. Get in really early. Since most people don't start with lots, and most people aren't "early" to BTC, they venture into altcoin land, also known by a diminutive term I won't use here. You could C. ico, pump and dump as well.

Thus everyone wants to get in early, and get in on the pump, few want to work with boring, slow, nearly impossible to change BTC, corners get cut, and sheep get shaved.

The growing pains BTC had cost a couple orders of magnitude less financial harm?

Value comes from scarcity + demand. Open source software is by definition not scarce. Thus if a cryptocurrency has value, it's not it's code that its the value, it's the network effect of users using it that prevents other copies from outcompeting them at lower fees. Thus for any cryptocurrency token to have lasting value, it must derive that value from something external to it's bad ass code.

Take a look at how many things you can buy with BTC that you can't with ETH, that is the value, that is hard to replicate, hard to penetrate. Even lower volatility due to giant order books is a plus. Thus, when I see open source projects try to make money on the quality of their code, they're missing out on where the value comes from.

Now, could ETH be amazing, sure. Would it be amazing if the tokens were worth $1 or 10 cents, or 1 cent? Probably, the same way tcp packets are amazing, and worth pretty damn little.

SO when people hop on the pump, on a currency that is only hitting 1 metric, the pump one, it's dangerous and risky.

Then there's the risk that your'e enticing dev's to write smart contracts, when smart contracts are hard to write. And you're giving them all the tools they need to hang themselves.

Then there's the risk that you say lots of things that are inaccurate, which I guess I'll just tackle in a giant post next, lol.

Re: What does $100 Ether mean?

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Trustless" is a terrible meme, as the term is misleading and the implementation of the concept is impossible. The truth is: There is no cloud, just other people's computers. Smart contracts can make trust relationships explicit. By using a blockchain system, you entrust a network - which you may have no control over - with application state. If you rely on such a network, you indirectly also rely on the network infr…

I agree that our terminology is often terrible. "Smart contract" could well have been "conditional payment" which for most purposes is clearer. Do you know about http://erights.org ? They are good - great - on terminology.

Yes, in fact this is one of the most interesting websites for me now, especially when looking at general purpose distributed computing beyond blockchains. See here for a few notes of mine: https://github.com/void4/notes/issues/5
Post reply on HN