Philip Daian

@phildaian

Hi, I'm Phil! A software engineer w a passion for security, p2p, applied crypto. Grasping for tractability . Tweets mine, results preliminary, COIs↓↓

New York, USA
Vrijeme pridruživanja: ožujak 2012.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @phildaian

Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @phildaian

  1. Prikvačeni tweet
    8. lis 2019.

    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.!

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  2. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    18. pro 2019.

    Information about our most recent security audit has been posted in our forums. Come have a look if runtime verification is your thing:

    Poništi
  3. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    17. pro 2019.

    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. w/ , Ji, Pang, Klages-Mundt,

    Poništi
  4. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    12. pro 2019.

    “Why use K as opposed to Coq?” Three blog posts using a working example to highlight important ways in which K and Coq differ as formal verification frameworks for languages: Part 1 , Part 2 , Part 3 .

    Poništi
  5. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    9. pro 2019.
    Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:

    There's a reason why your research shows up in the Maker Governance TOS 😉

    Poništi
  6. 5. pro 2019.

    New paper! "SquirRL: Automating Attack Discovery on Blockchain Incentive Mechanisms with Deep Reinforcement Learning" by Charlie Hou, Mingxun Zhou, , myself, , , and . Turns out, selfish mining is hard!

    Poništi
  7. 21. stu 2019.

    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.

    Poništi
  8. 19. stu 2019.

    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 nit
    Poništi
  9. 19. stu 2019.

    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 nit
    Poništi
  10. 19. stu 2019.

    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 nit
    Poništi
  11. 19. stu 2019.

    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 nit
    Poništi
  12. 19. stu 2019.

    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 nit
    Poništi
  13. 19. stu 2019.

    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 nit
    Poništi
  14. 19. stu 2019.

    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 nit
    Poništi
  15. 19. stu 2019.

    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 nit
    Poništi
  16. 19. stu 2019.

    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 nit
    Poništi
  17. 19. stu 2019.

    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.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  18. 18. stu 2019.

    So looks like basically built the infrastructure required for a Dark DAO. Fun!

    Poništi
  19. 15. stu 2019.

    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?

    Poništi
  20. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    15. stu 2019.
    Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:

    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:

    Poništi
  21. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    14. stu 2019.

    Check out my new post on and attacks. "Vulnerabilities in : Oracle-Governance Attacks, Attack , and (De)Centralization"

    Poništi

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.

    Možda bi vam se svidjelo i ovo:

    ·