You left out that the decentralized fullnode owners decided to agree to these plans because funds were at risk following a UX problem. The foundation was not able to do it themselves. Did you just leave that out intentionally? Groundhog day in cryptoland. Misinformation and rage.
-
-
Replying to @tangleblog
So there was a critical issue (sloppy tech right there!) and you needed a cartel to fix it. I see. But keep going with the insults here, nicely illustrates my point about toxic people.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @andreasdotorg
I didn't insult you other than pointing out that you left out an important piece of information. And not me, but the IOTA foundation asked for a snapshot because victims asked for help. The majority of fullnode users approved that and they reached "consensus" to secure funds.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tangleblog @andreasdotorg
do you have another argument to bring up that proves your strange point? because it looks to me that you have flawed sources and mindless hate. (also, thanks for proving my point again, you're not the first)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tangleblog
So you admit that there was a critical bug and funds were frozen? Sloppy. You accuse me of „mindless hate“? Toxic. It‘s that easy. I might have something more to say about „ternary logic“ and „hash function generated by an AI, but frankly, I feel this would be a waste.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @andreasdotorg
there was no critical bug, stop with the ridiculous law-talk. Users reused addresses despite being warned. It's a UX thing. The foundation (after complaints and messages) fixed that wallet and the money has been reclaimed. Yeah. Mindless hate. You have no clue but hate IOTA.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tangleblog
Oh, so it was *just* a UX thing that made people lose their money. No biggie, really. Nothing to see here. Especially not sloppy coding, as UX isn‘t actually coding.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @andreasdotorg
Has nothing to do with the protocol though, and it wasn't a bug but bad user experience: only little protection against address-reuse, no hack. it's old coffee. something else? because that can't be enough to spread your BS on Twitter. this though:https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/a-brief-history-of-bitcoin-hacks-and-frauds/ …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tangleblog
Bad UX that makes you lose your money is a serious issue. Sugar-coat it all you want.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @andreasdotorg
yeah, but there was no money lost because the entire community decided to help, unlike in almost every other blockchain. and at this point, I'm afraid you bore me with your tactics that you use to besmirch a secure innovative system. Stick to the truth, I'm out.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
So, yes, and a bunch of insults. Thanks for confirming my initial analysis.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.