Peeps by @Alec
Showing page 3 of 3 (116 peeps total)
Replying to @Bevan (0x30755d3e65c0cf46c35b72d11e52d941c5fc3a3e)
Hey @xelion and @alec, good question! It will be verified on Etherscan soon. See peepeth.com/front_end for more.
Awesome to hear!
I would also like to know why.
Replying to @Xelion (0x7f4d762fa48d170a643337b49a50bc744c75bee0)
Look at the first comment ;)
Yes, I know. It was shut off, then turned back on, in order to test the decentralized capability of the network.
Replying to @Xelion (0x7f4d762fa48d170a643337b49a50bc744c75bee0)
According to a friend that have worked with IOTA, that's not true. Simply because without the coordinator, it would be very easy to attack the network with 1/3 of the nodes.
Replying to @Xelion (0x7f4d762fa48d170a643337b49a50bc744c75bee0)
I forgot about IOTA that currently use a coordinator to validate which part of the Tangle is valid. But at least, they plan to move to a decentralized solution.
From my understanding, the IOTA devs temporarily disabled the coordinator and took a screenshot of the networker one point, and things had been looking pretty good. Hopefully the Coordinator will be removed relatively soon.
Replying to @balresch (0xd6d48727d8835b73f8dc511a5baaf3445a6f65c9)
From what I can tell, it is not a 'ponzi scheme' - it is a kind of game which is completely upfront about its pyramidic character, proving a point about speculative (crypto-)trading in general. I think the community might need this 'project' to learn. @hankcooper @ alec
Hey, at least they're honest.
Replying to @Xelion (0x7f4d762fa48d170a643337b49a50bc744c75bee0)
It seems that some peoples are so interested in profit, they're ready to invest in stupid ponzi schemes :(
Although looking at this, I can't say I'm surprised:
Replying to @Xelion (0x7f4d762fa48d170a643337b49a50bc744c75bee0)
You think it's a good idea to invest in a ponzi scheme?
You'd think people would be smarter after BitConnect.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Replying to @matthewcarano (0x8bcfaca5f63c79af77fe4667c7bdb7cbdc7776af)
Is there another way to achieve censorship resistance besides decentralization? I can't name it. Censorship is only possible where centralized institutions exist.
I agree, decentralization is the only tool proven to achieve censorship resistance. I guess you could say Democracy was a tool to achieve the same thing (free speech and all that), but we all know how that worked out.
Replying to @jacob_web30 (0xba1804139240394006ea14caaf9bebb89abb79ea)
I feel that the price to peep is falling Is it due to mind?
Could be the value of ETH fluctuating?
Replying to @matthewcarano (0x8bcfaca5f63c79af77fe4667c7bdb7cbdc7776af)
Let it be known that blockchain technology is the promise of decentralization. Decentralization is more than a buzz word - it is a commitment to resist censorship. Every action we take is an expression of our being. Decentralization thwarts those who would censor that expression.
Yeah, it's important that decentralization isn't a goal; It's a tool to achieve the goal of censorship resistance.
Replying to @simon (0xf17cc1ed79f2c07eb976323603c18a6a9b7370b8)
You can't update a smart contract (on Ethereum). It can be invalidated only if it has the selfdestruct function. Otherwise it lives forever on the blockchain.
I mean, you could "update" it by setting some things you expect may change in the future as storage variables, then use an onlyOwner() modifier that allows whoever deployed the contract to change said variables.
Other option would be to make the selfdestruct() and re-deploy.
This is why we need decentralized alternatives to legacy social media platforms.
Replying to @Alec (0x23677376bc1b7f48970b83a7ce0d0367395eac9e)
Anybody else find it weird that Metamask doesn't have a "sign out" button?
Was referring to the issue as described here: https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension/issues/1887
Was present the last time I used Metamask. Currently on Toshi.
Anybody else find it weird that Metamask doesn't have a "sign out" button?