* https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.06528.pdf … (HT @fnietom https://twitter.com/fnietom/status/1045779954938654720 …); Fantastic work! Lovely, general negative results. Way to go, @random_walker. Will be very useful for the next round of positive results.
-
Show this thread
-
Okay, stopping for now. The winners are definitely the first one (Ethereum PoS FAQ) and the last one (new negative result by Arvind Narayanan, Jonah Brown-Cohen, and Christos-Alexandros Psomas).
4 replies 2 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
zooko Retweeted AnthonyKarrick
There were quite a contestants in categories like "references to researchers or groups without links to specific documents" and "drive-by Twitter snark". The winner for Honorable Mention in that last category is https://twitter.com/AnthonyKarrick/status/1045779281194827777 ….
zooko added,
2 replies 2 retweets 10 likesShow this thread -
Okay, more updates. My mentions are getting away from me, and I think once too many pile up that I haven't loaded then twitter won't let me scroll back to them.
So apologies if I don't see yours. Maybe try resending tomorrow? Anyway, here are a couple more observations: …1 reply 1 retweet 2 likesShow this thread -
… The biggest single divider between pro-PoS people and anti-PoS people is whether they think weak subjectivity is okay or not. …
3 replies 2 retweets 14 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @zooko
What about the economic entrenching that PoS enables? What about the fragility of PoS - once someone has corrupted a PoS system, it remains broken forever. You can't easily tell if someone owns 51% of vites. Much harder to hide 5 GW of power use.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DavidVorick @zooko
What about the historically low participation rates in proof of stake systems? What about the fact that exchanges usually follow a power curve where the 3 largest control >33% of the total supply?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @DavidVorick @zooko
Proof of stake has big concerns from many angles. It's got more theoretical challenges than on-chain scaling. Accepting weak subjectivity doesn't get you a worthwhile PoS system, it solves a single one of many crucial challenges.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DavidVorick @zooko
Hugo Nguyen Retweeted Hugo Nguyen
Weak subjectivity is a terrible terminology to begin with. The term “weak” is incredibly misleading. Let’s not help popularize it any further.https://twitter.com/hugohanoi/status/1045837760521588737?s=21 …
Hugo Nguyen added,
Hugo Nguyen @hugohanoi1/ “Weak subjectivity" strikes again. One thing Vitalik is good at is creating amazingly bad terminology. Some examples besides "weak subjectivity": "Bitcoin maximalism", "inactivity leaks” (which he erroneously likens to depreciation). https://twitter.com/zooko/status/1045808363974488064 …Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
“Weak” relative to WHAT, specifically?? “Weak” can turn into “strong” on a dime.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The terminology dictates the conversations and in this case, contains hidden bias.
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.
