Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
John Adler
Blockchain skeptic. Co-founder: , . Focused on scaling by separating data ordering/availability from execution. Prev: .
2.156
Tweetovi
137
Pratim
2.049
Osobe koje vas prate
Tweetovi
John Adler proslijedio/la je tweet
Eric Wall IS RIGHT 2 h
1/14 This was a great DeFi debate between & . Both showed that they're articulate and qualified to carry their side's argument. In my view won the debate at 51:00 when he brings up permissionless entrepreneurship in DeFi vs. centralized exchanges.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 2 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson i 2 ostali
That's an interesting position. I think by this point we all know how blockchains work in the context of state machine replication, but clearly your idea of PCN differs from mine. Do you have a description of the model you're using for PCNs I can read?
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 3 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @aliatiia_ @AFDudley0 i 4 ostali
Summoning to clarify "potential claims."
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 3 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson i 2 ostali
A rollup is a sidechain, which means it's a blockchain. You can use a blockchain in any place you'd use a PCN, but not the reverse.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 3 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson i 2 ostali
No. This still required an on-chain transaction + timeout (which is exactly what "locked up" means here).
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler proslijedio/la je tweet
Angela Walch 21 h
All open source devs are equal, but some open source devs are more equal than others.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 3 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson i 2 ostali
Huh? It's capital efficient because it doesn't require users to pre-commit to locking funds. Rollups are completely decentralized (or they should be, if designed properly).
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 3 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson i 2 ostali
*** For PCNs, instant finality doesn't apply in the same way as a single channel, because 1) you may need to attempt multiple paths, 2) you actually need to find a path, and 3) your payment may be stalled. The only advantage of channels kind of disappears when using PCNs.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 3 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson i 2 ostali
Interestingly, rollups are only worse than channels in one way (they're better in literally everything else): time to finality***. Channels have instant finality, rollups need to wait for a main chain block.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler proslijedio/la je tweet
Su Zhu 22 h
It'd be pretty tax efficient to have a negative staking rate coin actually. It's almost like an attack on how taxes work naively. Let's say everyone's coinholdings go down 5% a yr and they all get to use the "loss" for tax shield on their gains elsewhere.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 4 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson i 2 ostali
Payment channel networks can also be griefed, etc. by abusing liquidity requirements for routing, while rollups Just Work™. The list goes on. The problems with payment channel networks are pretty well-known and extensive at this point.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 4 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson i 2 ostali
Rollups are substantially more capital efficient than payment channel networks. They also allow private transactions (I think is working on something along those lines), while LN is rather trivially susceptible to monitoring, and thus provides zero privacy.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 4 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson @iamtexture
Code for an optimistic rollup that can process payments is publicly available here 👇, in beta phase but rapidly improving. In general you should expect ORUs to start shipping very soon, much faster than the perpetual 18 months of the LN.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 4 h
Odgovor korisniku/ci @AFDudley0 @IAmNickDodson @iamtexture
Well, that depends how you define "p2p" and "fast," and if you include "cheap" in there as well 😂 With optimistic rollups you can get cheap and fast payments, yes. Zk is a bit different since you have to tradeoff between fast and cheap, with constant factors being improved on.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler proslijedio/la je tweet
Alexey Akhunov 🍒💻 15 h
I have re-read the report again, and would like to point out an important omission. This sentense "However, after hearing feedback that OpenEthereum collaborators would be more comfortable contributing under a GPL license as it stands instead of a DAO-owned license" implies ...
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler proslijedio/la je tweet
Ryan Berckmans 7 h
Here's a new essay where I try to explain why Eth1.5 will have a huge, positive impact on the price of ETH. And why burning gas in EIP-1559 won't.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler proslijedio/la je tweet
Paul Sztorc 7. lis
Odgovor korisniku/ci @Truthcoin
He also said that users "would gladly pay very high [layer-1 BTC] fees", because "Bitcoin is the most secure cryptocurrency network due to the total accumulated hashes". But since long-run hashrate is determined 100% by fees, that argument was 100% circular reasoning.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler proslijedio/la je tweet
Fuel Labs 23 h
Rollups are a promising avenue for scaling Ethereum today, and synergize with the increased data availability throughput of Eth 2.0's sharding in the future.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler proslijedio/la je tweet
Paul Sztorc 5. velj
YOUR OPINION: In a world post-HyperBitcoinization (BTC vanquishes USD, but else similar), the US fed govt would STILL be able to: [A] Raise ~20%+ nGDP in tax revenue (as today) [B] Deficit Spend (eg: spend 130%+ of tax rev) [C] Print Money (unilaterally expand balance sheet)
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
John Adler 5. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @VitalikButerin @ChrisLundkvist
More to the point, can you expand on why decentralized delegated key recovery requires a blockchain, and under what failure model (other than trustless timestamping)? I don't see a scenario where e.g. Shamir's Secret Sharing fails but some blockchain-based systems works.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"