An apt summary of most if not all of non-PoW protocols: "we solve distributed consensus on X by assuming we have solved distributed consensus on Y." In the process you'd get fancy terms like "randomness beacon" that sounds sophisticated, but in reality just obfuscates the issue.https://twitter.com/random_walker/status/1043613473974964224 …
-
Show this thread
-
You'd then get these diabolical white papers that go on for pages, filled with formulas no less, to prove the robustness of these protocols. All starting off of a circular reasoning fallacy. But math, right?
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
It's surely intimidating if you're new to crypto. All these smart-sounding people writing all these smart-sounding words. Their papers so thick, their formulas so fancy. They can't be all wrong, right? Some of this is due to pure incompetence, but some are outright scammy.
2 replies 1 retweet 10 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @hugohanoi
So you suggest to ignore-dismiss all these efforts and embrace the current status quo? Isn't this handwaving?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @gakonst @hugohanoi
Of course efforts for implementing new ideas add great value. Current problem in the crypo scene is that we see tons of fancy white, yellow, blue papers that aim to raise hundreds of millions of dollars with no interesting development progress.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Exactly. Nothing wrong with experimentation, and it might truly take time to weed out the bad ideas, but the amount of bad/scammy ideas in crypto is insane & the fact that they raise billions is a problem. Something about crypto gets the worst out of people. It's sickening, tbh.
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.
