News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:$34M permanently locked into AkuDreams contract forever d... by ineedasername on Saturday April 23, 2022 @11:52AM (#31135348)
They didn't say it was faultless. A year & 150 phones calls is a significant improvement on "nope, nope, not ever ever ever ever".

Also the current system at least has the potential to be improved, maybe. While irreversibility is baked into the ideology of many (not all) proponents if crypto.

Re:$34M permanently locked into AkuDreams contract forever d... by danamit on Saturday April 23, 2022 @12:14PM (#31135586)
You can implement irreversibility in a blockchain or a smart contract easily, many coins can freeze funds and issue funds, that's defacto irreversibility.
Re:$34M permanently locked into AkuDreams contract forever d... by ineedasername on Saturday April 23, 2022 @01:56PM (#31136569)
>Irreversibility is both easy & often

Did you mean reversibility? Because otherwise you're agreeing with me: I'm saying irreversibility is easy, often the default with crypto Yes, that is what I am saying. In traditional banking reversibility is easier, and (mostly) the norm for situations of standard human error.

In the case of this particular contract a limited form of reversibility is even what was intended, but that doesn't matter. It's a system that doesn't allow for honest error.

For some, that's a feature. For the vast majority required to take smart contracts mainstream, that is not a feature. Better error resistant reversibility can be built, and that's when things may become attractive to more people. But, again, many proponents view irreversibility as a feature so it's not primary consideration when building things.

Re:$34M permanently locked into AkuDreams contract forever d... by azinman2 on Saturday April 23, 2022 @01:24PM (#31136232)
Seems this is a counter example.
Re:$34M permanently locked into AkuDreams contract forever d... by lukeschlather on Saturday April 23, 2022 @01:42PM (#31136417)
Only to the extent that the code doesn't have bugs and your algorithm has no design flaws. (All code has bugs and you should assume all algorithms have design flaws.)