Tweetovi
- Tweetovi, trenutna stranica.
- Tweetovi i odgovori
- Medijski sadržaj
Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @phildaian
Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @phildaian
-
Prikvačeni tweet
Introducing Complete Knowledge (CK) proofs, that allow a user to demonstrate that they *really* have control of secret data, and the data isn't shackled by SGX or MPC. Implications on communication protocols, smart contract bribery prevention, ZKPs, etc.!https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Rrr7G7wQ0WI1hmB4slZDZPjKcVexVNNj/view?usp=sharing …
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
Philip Daian proslijedio/la je Tweet
Information about our most recent security audit has been posted in our forums. Come have a look if runtime verification is your thing:https://forum.makerdao.com/t/976
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
Philip Daian proslijedio/la je Tweet
BDoS: Blockchain Denial of Service. Attacker incentivizes miners to stop with far less than 51%, bringing a Nakamoto-like chain to a halt if miners are profit-driven. https://medium.com/@IttayEyal/bdos-blockchain-denial-of-service-385c8c56b401 … https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.07497 w/
@mitik2, Ji, Pang, Klages-Mundt,@AriJuelsHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
Philip Daian proslijedio/la je Tweet
“Why use K as opposed to Coq?” Three
@rv_inc blog posts using a working example to highlight important ways in which K and Coq differ as formal verification frameworks for languages: Part 1 http://bit.ly/36v70vy , Part 2 http://bit.ly/2LMtDUa , Part 3 http://bit.ly/2LPSoyZ .pic.twitter.com/VLTMPC77LG
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
Philip Daian proslijedio/la je Tweet
There's a reason why your research shows up in the Maker Governance TOS
pic.twitter.com/dQgWMyA9vF
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
New paper! "SquirRL: Automating Attack Discovery on Blockchain Incentive Mechanisms with Deep Reinforcement Learning" by Charlie Hou, Mingxun Zhou,
@iseriohn42, myself,@florian_tramer,@giuliacfanti, and@AriJuels. Turns out, selfish mining is hard! https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.01798Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
And people still call my belief that Libra is primarily a play by Peter Thiel and associates to gain nation-state level economic power a conspiracy theory.https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1197373042600620032 …
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
Minimizing governance just ensures the system stays "captured" by original stakeholders who hold all existing informal power, which is not necessarily optimal. A system's axioms should IMO respond to the needs of its ever-changing stakeholders, and they can't with minimization.
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
All this is to say I don't think governance can be reduced to "minimize it to avoid capture", nor do I believe that systems that work this way will achieve much beyond serving their initial status quo. Otherwise stated, all human systems are "captured", ideally by stakeholders.
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
Bitcoin is a case-study. Look at the early split along use-case lines. Should we optimize our axioms for payments or SoV use cases? Because Satoshi's axioms favored the SoV crowd, they won by political default. And were able to change the axioms later at their convenience.
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
So if you just say "changes to our axioms are not up for debate", the only thing you accomplish is deferring to the power of the status quo every time. This not only disenfranchises people, it *ensures* capture by the status quo, which can always express informal political power.
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
IMO, both approaches do not avoid capture, they enshrine it. The real contention in political systems *is* on the rules and on the axioms of who owns what or how the system should work. The real contention in blockchains is partially on protocol rules.
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
This shares the conservative nature of libertarianism, where change to the status quo is rejected and touted as a feature that brings stability to the system. It's why so many new ideas in Bitcoin that fundamentally change things are too radical for consideration.
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
In blockchain minimization, blockchain rules are taken as an axiom. Humans are expected to magically agree on these rules, which are in some way handed down from the sky. Satoshi Nakamoto's disappearance facilitates this, because to some extent BTC rules *did* fall from the sky.
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
To some libertarians, the only valid expression of government power is to some extent enforcing the status quo w.r.t. this ledger. Radical changes are considered anathema, the axioms are not up for debate, and this is part of what labels libertarianism a "conservative" movement.
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
In libertarianism, a property ledger is taken as an axiom. Humans are expected to magically agree on this property ledger, and everything follows from their axiomatic respect for this ledger. The source of truth is on such a ledger is in some way handed down from the sky.
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
I have a whole essay queued up on this topic actually. I think the idea that you can solve governance problems by minimizing governance has clear ideological roots in libertarianism, and shares IMO similar axiomatic assumptions.https://twitter.com/phildaian/status/1197007267935195136 …
Prikaži ovu nitHvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
So looks like
@renprotocol basically built the infrastructure required for a Dark DAO. Fun!Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
If I write an ERC20 that only allows the admin to trade on Uniswap, giving them 100% control over Uniswap price, how does that interact with higher-level protocols that use Uniswap price oracles?https://twitter.com/zhusu/status/1194845768240074752 …
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
Philip Daian proslijedio/la je Tweet
There is no such thing as "neutral infrastructure" backed by a coin distribution. Does not exist. Coin distributions *are* political statements. "Neutral technology" is exactly the sort of delusion that guides much of tech culture astray: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/technology/#NeutVersMoraAgen …
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi -
Philip Daian proslijedio/la je Tweet
Check out my new post on
#DeFi and#stablecoin attacks. "Vulnerabilities in#Maker: Oracle-Governance Attacks, Attack#DAOs, and (De)Centralization"https://medium.com/@aklamun/vulnerabilities-in-maker-oracle-governance-attacks-attack-daos-and-de-centralization-d943685adc2f …Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.