News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by gruez on Tuesday April 06, 2021 @08:06PM (#26718923)
The point is that in your initial comment, you were saying that with decentralized cryptocurrencies you'll be free from third party interference, but with ETH the DAO hacker was subject to the very interference you claimed crypto wasn't subject to. Therefore it weakens your claim from something like "with crypto, nobody can stop you!", to "with crypto, nobody can stop you! ...except if you do something we don't like in which case we'll hardfork", which is pretty similar to how centralized systems work today.
Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by leppr on Tuesday April 06, 2021 @08:30PM (#26719093)
A hard fork in a decentralized cryptocurrency is democratic, users chose which of the 2 new chains assets' they want to keep. No binary winner is decided, the market currently values ETH as 122 times more valuable than ETC, but ETC is not censored.

The sentencing of criminals in republics is very removed from democratic action (see drug criminalization).

Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by jude- on Tuesday April 06, 2021 @11:01PM (#26720129)
> A hard fork in a decentralized cryptocurrency is democratic, users chose which of the 2 new chains assets' they want to keep.

Show us the votes, then. Did a majority of miners and/or coinholders vote to hard-fork?

Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by perryizgr8 on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @04:21AM (#26721812)
> A hard fork in a decentralized cryptocurrency is democratic

Yup, and I don't want public votes to decide the amount of money I have.

Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by whimsicalism on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @10:20AM (#26725347)
> public votes to decide the amount of money I have.

Unfortunately, there is no alternative. The value of what you have is decided by what people are willing to pay for it in markets. If people decide that they value the forked ETH that doesn't provide the money to the people who stole from the DAO more than the version where those people have all of the money, then it is going to be more valuable. You don't escape this problem with fiat either.

Basic market mechanisms like this are pretty much inescapable.

Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by leppr on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @01:46PM (#26728256)
Gold or other physical scarce assets come pretty close to allowing you to escape this.
Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by whimsicalism on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @02:10PM (#26728637)
Ah yes, the constant value of gold https://www.macrotrends.net/1333/historical-gold-prices-100-...

As I said, there is no escaping market mechanisms, as value is market contextual. Certainly, there are assets with more or less stable value, but that is still due to the whims of what people (ie. the "public") are willing to pay.

Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by leppr on Wednesday April 07, 2021 @05:28PM (#26731600)
Yes, the point here is not about the total valuation of each asset, which affects every holder equally, but about how individuals can influence, or not, the relative distribution of said asset.

If I'm, say, from a persecuted cultural group, I'll want to keep my wealth in an asset that has the same value whether I or someone else own it. Precious metals fit this bill better than both fiat and public-ledger cryptocurrencies.

Re:Signal adds a payments feature with a privacy-focused cry... by whimsicalism on Tuesday April 06, 2021 @08:16PM (#26719009)
That wasn't my comment. Also, people freely chose to start using the new version of ETH, they weren't required to.