So, what, israel is to absorb the Palestinians wholely?
Projection, you live in germany, a country premised on a superposition between self hatred and ethnic superiority, ruled by leaders who hate you, on a continent that will devolve into eating each other soon. Whether I am right or wrong about israel, you throwing "ngmi" around is ironic.
I believe bin laden when he says 9-11 was blowback for sanctions and supporting israel. I believe hamas when they say this attack is blowback for shooting up a mosque.
Its also possible to believe both, that hamas is dangerous, and that this will never be fixed until israel takes their boot off Palestinines neck. How can you expect the taliban to stop fighting when we actively occupy them? The stronger side has to inititate concessions, or you are expecting the palestinians to lay down their arms and accept the domination by israel and hope that, what, netanyahu decides hes going to start playing nice? Im skeptical that will ever happen, so without israel initiating concessions you are seemingly conceeding that there will never be a solution until the last palestinian is dead and that it has to be this way.
Everyone with strong opinions about the israeli people, their history, and their relationships with others, seems to believe everyone else is so ideologically convicted and in defense of everything historically associated with that side.
Like damn, you say hamas is a terrorist group, I say israel is oppressing them, and we move the fuck on. Im not going to jump down your throat because I dont know fuck all about it, you shouldnt jump down my throat...because I still dont know fuck all about it, its an opinion and I have a right to it.
As someone who works with evaporative coolers, this is an interesting rabbit hole.
More advanced L2 stuff, its above my paygrade, but as I understand it they would allow multiparty channels.
Could you explain what hes saying here in more detail? It seems like the arguement is
1. Drivechains make miners more money so they are harder to bribe
2. Liquid could create MEV too, so its hypocritical to not accept MEV from drivechains.
Assuming thats accurate,
To 1, I assume we all accept the economic principle that prices fall to the marginal cost of production. If drivechains cause hash prices to fall, all that does is drive out miners that cant compete on MEV. That would make you feel very secure and "powerful" if you were the top pool operator, and that appears to be what Paul is referring too, but why that is a "good thing" eludes me. Again, miners arent getting bribed, they arent getting paid, they are directly collecting the fees because they will be building sidechain blocks. The idea that miners wouldnt jump at the idea to make more money just because they are making enough is thus an irrational conclusion, if they do not then they will be overtaken by a miner that will because of the affect on the hash price.
To 2, again, an arguement about something you dont like about bitcoin today doesnt justify aggrevating the situation. Pauls tendency to resort to these arguements is troubling, either drivechains are a good idea or they are not, when a hole gets poked in his game theory and he immediately starts pointing the finger at someone else it discredits him. At the very least he needs to do a better job defending his arguements, rather than this and the patronizing language from the first link. That aside, he says in-text that liquid hasnt implemented MEV as described, so evaluating that as an arguement is difficult.
Id be fine with opctv now that I know what its doing, I would just like to see more debate between that, op_return, and a new proposal that I heard about recently, I forget the name. I wish jeremy the best, I just wish I could coach devs a bit on how to talk to people LOL.
I knew much less about the incentives and workings of bitcoin at the time, and what effect ctv would have. I was concerned about recursive vaults, which jeremy said were impossible, but I felt that should be subject to scrutiny/debate before just accepting it. I really dont like the way some of these devs conduct themselves though, trying to ram something like ctv through when many of us had never even heard of it can only be met with resistance.
We need a conference or podcast circuit for new proposals, everyone should be hearing the best arguements from all sides.
I was initially very skeptical of opctv, I didnt like the way jeremy rubin went about pushing it. Since, clearly we need a covenant implementation, im neutral on whats best.
Sorry for the late response, I read it at your suggestion, I think all these points are argued against by shinobi in his recent episode with stephen livera.
The article presupposes that sidechain blocks will be built by proposers, rather than miners. The miners have an economic advantage in creating sidechain blocks because they are already bringing the hashpower, so they dont need to pay what the proposer would to get that block approved, winning a higher profit, so I would expect that the sidechain block production will be dominated by mining pools. Pools that have better tools to exract value from mining sidechains will dominate the mining industry, and make it unprofitable to mine without sidechain mining, let alone mining for anybody but the top pools.
The miners have an enhanced ability to reorg the sidechain too, and proposers lose their spent bitcoin in that case, but miners never needed to pay to create sidechain blocks because they mine it themselves.
You could say, as this article does, that every miner is engaged in finding these side hustles that effect the profitability of mining for everyone. Its not a *good* thing that mining companies are finding economies of scale or side gigs that screw with the economics of bitcoin, it causes miner centralization. We shouldnt look at that and step on the gas pedal, like "ah fuck it, lets just go full send because load shedding is a thing".
Further, these side hustles or tricks like having newer miners all revolve around having more hashing for less electricity. MEV presents a novel price incentive to mining that cant be compared to load shredding or mining on curtailed energy, because those grid issues are everywhere. Mining on ercot has been lucrative for iris, but eventually the texas grid will evolve to not need the miners and the incentives will evaporate, replaced by incentives posed by other grids like microgrids in africa.
When these discussions picked up the line was that it doesnt pose a risk, it seems clear that it does pose a risk. Maybe you consider the risk worth it, but I don't; it adds too many unknowns to the incentives around mining, the lack of clear explanation of why miners wouldnt create the sidechain blocks is the most obvious issue I see.
The quote, though im just grabbing this off reddit
The current system where every user is a network node is not the intended configuration for large scale. That would be like every Usenet user runs their own NNTP server. The design supports letting users just be users. The more burden it is to run a node, the fewer nodes there will be. Those few nodes will be big server farms.
Well, it was what satoshi envisioned actually, they said a few large data centers would comprise all the "nodes" (synonymous with miners at the time). Its important to remember satoshi wasnt infallible, because I gemerally agree with your vision and if thats not the trajectory we are on then we should change course.
A curve the nsa came up with they could have an advantage in cracking, bitcoins curve is particularly special in being (relatively) easy to validate as secure, though I dont understamd the math.
Im concerned about the issues laid out by shinobi. These drivechains could expose the miners to MEV, meaning the best capitalized miners win. The existence of outside incentives necessitates miners to participate or they wont remain in profit as the hash price gets cut by miners that can operate in the red. So, mining gets centralized as only a small cohort of mining pools can compete on MEV and everyone else gets washed out of the market. Any criticisms of that take?
Am i fucked up for wonderimg what peoples last thoughts were, was this guy like "oh shit I never thought this could happen to me!" Or was it "this doesnt prove anything, i am more likely to die from covid!"
Maybe, or mayve ill just be happy that 150 people who dedicated their lives to villainy are packing their bags.
Unironically accurate, just not intended by the author.
Presupposing the love of money is the root of all evil*