← Back to context

Comment by nivertech

1 day ago

1. 1/3 malicious nodes under some conditions and BGP

This is backed by academic papers. Ask google or GhatGPT. You may argue that these papers are wrong or outdated, but then you need to tell this to the researchers who wrote them, not to me.

2. finality is binary, probabilistic finality is an oxymoron

3. > This conflates implementation bugs with protocol design flaws.

there is no formal spec for Bitcoin, there is a short informal whitepaper and a reference C++ implementation. Anyway the paper named "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System", and for this specific purpose design is flawed, without regards to bugs.

4. > Bitcoin is a lottery.

Now you're hallucinating quotes I never wrote.

> Honestly, your critique reads more like cope than a technical argument.*

can you show a specific example of the "cope"?

> can you show a specific example of the "cope"?

Pretty much all your comments here amount to twisting definitions, misapplying technical concepts, and nitpicking in search of "gotchas." Not to mention all the "LARPing" comments. It screams how to cope with having missed out, which, to your credit, you more or less admitted.

  • Saying everything is X is like saying nothing is X

    So, you think that if I had BTC, it would’ve magically changed my views on how Bitcoin consensus works?

    BTW: I think Scrum/Agile is also LARPing, do you think if I’ll get a Scrum Master certification it will change my views on Scrum?