/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>16552811
ETH2.0 is coming in phases dumbass. We’ll experience the initial benefits soon

>>16552811

ETH wasn't designed to scale and won't be able to scale, no matter how much tech nonsense gets thrown around. ETH is basically dead.

Ironically Matic fixes that scaling problem but it’s a dump lol

Why the fuck are people invested in ETH? Vitalik has said he wants to legalize child porn and he is helping North Korea evade US sanctions. ETH is a mess

>>16552811
The real ETH 2.0 goes mainnet next month.

>>16552881
Based

>>16552817
>initial benefits soon
jesus fuck the COPE
>phase zero - useless staking no smart contracts
>phase one - still no pos + smart contracts (so much benefits my pajeets)
>phase 2 (the year is now 2022-2025) you now have pos+smart contracts (maybe... yippie)
>phase 3 (the year is 2025+) sharting

>>16552881
>Vitalik has said he wants to legalize child porn
Verbatum

not getting staking set up earlier is going to fuck ethereums momentum. tezos is the new ponzi.

>>16553340
Staking removes power from miners and gives it to people with vested interest. It is a much better abstraction and I will give you an example as to why:
During the BCH BSV BTC hashwars (still ongoing), miners from every side would mine their opposing coin's chain. They would then dump the freshly minted coins straight into the buy wall over extended periods of time.
This is one of the major factors that caused BCH and BSV to both decline in value during the fork.
Staking is better. No inflation staking is best (nano)

>>16553374
a useless staking chain that does nothing useful for multiple years into the future... pretending that's ETH 2.0... hoping the marketing trick works to prevent ETH's price from cratering
>nice try Vitalik you pathetic shameless overshilling cunt

why is eth having such difficulties getting shit done? They've the biggest dev team, experience and the headstart. What's holding them back?

Only based anons understand that ETH is a mess.

>>16553366
What is LINK

>>16553374
Not to mention that in PoS you need 51% of the currency to do a 51% attack and in PoW you only need to do 51% of the mining for a number of blocks which costs you less than 100 BTC in electricity and then whatever the mining equipment goes for.

Then there is off course the fact that PoW uses tremendous amounts of electricity, which is going to get a lot of negative press and will put a damper on adoption.

But this is shitty news that PoS is two years out.
I dont get why it needs to be this complex.

>>16553436
That is the launch technically of that chain and they have had a roadmap saying the full features are years out for over a year and he talked about it at the devcon 2 years ago.

Sorry you don't pay attention

>>16553374
>During the BCH BSV BTC hashwars (still ongoing), miners from every side would mine their opposing coin's chain.
Hahahaha. Friend, BTC miners could reorg the entire SV chain at any time if they felt like it. SV's only defense is being too irrelevant to even bother with.

>>16553453
>biggest dev team
false. cardano has the bihgest dev team working on the core protocol. shelly incentivized PoS testnet goes live on Monday.
>experience
experience in what... clusterfuck dev processes? certainly not in language design. not in protocol design either.
>headstart
correct. they have the biggest head start.
>so why
their approach has been absurd. declare what will work because of (((reasons))), start building it, figure out it is unworkable, declare something else is the answer because (((trust me))), start building it, figure out this too is unworkable, insert some philosophical rambling on twitter, declare this is the answer because (see rambling twitter storm), start building again... oh shit... copy other projects... develop some more

>>16553498
>What is LINK
something completely unrelated to eth staking?

>>16553543
keep pertending that ETH 2 is here next year, it is an obvious and desperate shill tactic worthy of the finest pajeet army designed to mislead the unthinking masses

>cardano

>>16553544
>cardano
stopped reading right there

>>16553560
>>16553567
i can smell your fear from here.

>i can smell your fear from here

>>16552811
imagine thinking 5 years

>>16553340
remember when sharting was scheduled for fall 2017? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

>>16553374
It's not staking on ETH 1.0 but on a totally useless chain. It's all a big meme and so stupid only ETHtards can fall for it. They must be trying to do worse than LN.

>>16553340
>phase one - still no pos + smart contracts (so much benefits my pajeets)
if phase 1 is coupled to eth1, it can be used to scale layer2 on-chain solutions like zksync into 100k+ tps.
That appears to be the current plan for end of 2020 (optimistically) or end of 2021 (realistically?).
>phase 3 (the year is 2025+) sharting
wrong, phase 1 is data sharding already.
>>16553544
>copy other projects... develop some more
what is ethereum copying? everyone is copying ethereum.
They have the most problems because ethereum is working in the real world.
The core problem is the rising size of the state.
*Nobody* else is talking about this. All those ethereum killers just copy the 2015's ethereum approach.
Any chain with eth's level of transaction demand (or larger) would have the same problems. Let's say cardano or whatever is 100x more scalable than current ethereum and it's actually used. The result: the size of a node STATE (the thing that has to be on a ssd!) baloons to several terabytes in less than a year.
The network would fucking collapse. They don't even think about this.

There are only two roads:
- nodes to be only in datacenters with ssds in raid 1. I'm talking about 100TB+ of SSD storage. Algorand goes that way.
- make the chain stateless, shifting state storage out of the core protocol and into users of any particular use case. Want to use particular tokens trustlessly? You have to store the state data. You don't have the data? You have to pay for storage for someone who does.
Nobody, nobody except ethereum is going that road.
At best, everyone else is planning to just copy ethereum once it finishes (guaranteeing being a loser), at worst, they never expect any actual adoption and just want to dump on speculators.

That's literally it. There's no third option.

>>16553453
see up

>>16554010
>what is ethereum copying? everyone is copying ethereum.
>They have the most problems because ethereum is working in the real world.
>The core problem is the rising size of the state.
>*Nobody* else is talking about this. All those ethereum killers just copy the 2015's ethereum approach.
>Any chain with eth's level of transaction demand (or larger) would have the same problems. Let's say cardano or whatever is 100x more scalable than current ethereum and it's actually used. The result: the size of a node STATE (the thing that has to be on a ssd!) baloons to several terabytes in less than a year.
>The network would fucking collapse. They don't even think about this.
so much hopeless ignorance in a single post... a commendable acheivement.

>>16553516
>attack and in PoW you only need to do 51% of the mining for a number of blocks which costs you less than 100 BTC in electricity and then whatever the mining equipment goes for.
LMAO:
1) The 51% Electricity costs of the network assuming $0.05/kWh and average miner efficiency of 0.15 W/GH/s approx is about $25M USD an hour, ~3500 BTC
2) Good luck finding an energy contract with a power generation plant big enough to supply your 51% electricity demand, which is around 7,500 MW
3) Doesn’t even take into account buying all that hardware, setting it up in many many facilities with proper Hvac equipment for ventilation and cooling

This mental gymnastics is expected of an eth maximalist, your 51% attack would help the network, and I’m sure whoever would bother to set all that up would realize they are profiting massively, and would not hurr durr destroy the chain and it’s value.

>>16554093
Why dont you grace us with your enlightenment then?

>>16554138
most of mining power is in china, meaning china gov could control bitcoin completely if they wanted to.

>>16552913
This

>>16554207
TM