..and those reason are what exactly in relation to the solve of the Byzantium Generals problem?
USD is still the goto choice for ponzi and scams in general, does that invalidate it's utility?
USD is still the goto choice for ponzi and scams in general, does that invalidate it's utility?
It mitigates the issue by making a 51% attack or its equivalent harder.
Outside cryptocurrencies, there is literally no practical application for even an approximate solution for the Byzantine Generals problem.
Outside cryptocurrencies, you can always use a 1970s vintage Merkle tree without the 10000x weight of the blockchain.
You are splitting hairs on the solve and it comes off as petty. Bitcoin 100% has solved it, prove me wrong by showing me how it's failed.
> Outside cryptocurrencies, there is literally no practical application for even an approximate solution for the Byzantine Generals problem
Hmmm sure
This shifts the work for your position to another person, and in the negative. Certainly it makes your life easier, but in traps you in a bubble of your own creation.
It’s essentially the same as admitting “I can’t prove it, so you have to prove the inverse” and hoping the other person will Marty McFly for you, and waste their time instead. It’s a solid method for reinforcing confirmation bias because whether they try or forget about it and move on you get to continue in your assumed position.
Leslie Lamport commenting on the 1982 paper. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/byzanti...
> There is a problem in distributed computing that is sometimes called the Chinese Generals Problem ... the original title of this paper was The Albanian Generals Problem ... The obviously more appropriate Byzantine generals then occurred to me.
In the general construction of byzantine generals, there's essentially an adversarial agent preventing arbitrary communications. As far as I know, a distributed ledger can't generally survive in such an environment. Nor can TCP.
If I've got your private key, I can do what I want with the bitcoins it has access to.
Protip: don't FOMO into anything as you will always be a bag holder.
That's about the jist of your response and has nothing to do with the utility of blockchain
The posts you are responding to never said blockchain consensus protocols don’t work. All they are saying is that hype coins tend to have the shape of a scam.
Now, if you want to get back to us just as soon as you find an application for blockchain consensus protocols that isn’t basically a hype coin, we’d be happy to hear about that.
IPFS, storj, any number of infrastructure projects/value props.
Hellium, which is a wireless access point blockchain, there are a bunch but you aren't actually interested in any of this.
> Get back to us
Dude speak for yourself only, I have no idea who you think you represent but you're wrong if you think it's anyone but yourself.
It's clear your not a genuine actor in this dialogue. Let's see you move that goal post.
Personally I haven’t even seen the goalposts in this interaction since you decided that, in a discussion of a shitcoin pump-and-dump scam, the fact that said coin is built on a solution to the Byzantine Generals problem is somehow important, and… means that people shouldn’t criticize scammers taking advantage of credulous investors to fleece them?
It does not matter if a shitcoin is built using quantum manipulation of the space time continuum, if all that is being done with it is selling it to rubes to obtain their dollars.
You can be excited about blockchain, that’s fine, and you can believe it has actual value. But when people point out that your favorite technology is actually continually being used to perpetrate scams, you should get angry with the scammers, not the people who are pointing that out.
Personally, I like JavaScript. When people shout about tracker-infested slow loading websites, I don’t respond by saying ‘you’re wrong because actually the object dictionary duality in JS is a really elegant system’. That doesn’t matter. I reserve my anger for the people who are using JavaScript for evil.
You fell for the trap and ignored the one project that meets your requirements...like I called.
You're not a genuine actor in this conversation.
And when people point out that any asset can be used, and is used to a much greater degree, you ignore it.
You are literally projecting yourself on to others.
Feel free to be Paul Krugman on this tech stack, it's not going away because of it's utility. Just because there are assholes that scam people doesn't invalidate it's use cases.. Same applies for the USD.
Anyway, GLHF!
What percentage of circulating USD is involved in that sort of activity?
Give us absolutely values...yeah nice way to deflect but doesn't hold up bud.
Deal with absolute numbers and it pales in comparison, and again it's used for scams is a null argument unless you hide it in percentages.
The argument applies to any fungible asset and isn't unique to blockchain.
Also check the history of the dollar and financial networks.. clever shitty people will always be ahead of the curve.
It's why I support regulation, people are very good at identifying bad behaviours and mitigating it..that is until they end up running it.
My argument is that the net impact of USD is positive, while the net impact of cryptocurrency is negative.
FUD & FOMO are exactly derived from this problem.
Solving the Byzantine Generals problem doesn't help you know who to trust.
With a large enough network, it makes it extremely difficult for malicious actors to subvert the process of exchanging money.
It does nothing to solve other crucial aspects of "who do I trust with my money", such as having recourse when someone scams you into giving them money.
In fact, the technology's spread has enabled terrible abuses of trust like cryptolocker attacks, and has probably made scamming much more profitable and practical.
If the solution to those problem has even a whiff of "user error" in it, then I submit that the problem is not actually with the users (it so rarely is).
How do you prove that only the attacker doesn't also have access to a private key?
I mean, the US has got some really sharp and explodey fiat, arguably the most fiat fiat in the world. But we stopped pretending it was backed by anything else in the 70s.
USD is fiat money, built on trust sure, but in practice backed by the wealth and power of the United States.