Why is Vitalik so scared of talking about Ren?

[Anonymous No.19425418]

[Anonymous No.19425435]

market sold my ren

[Anonymous No.19425445]

>>19425418
He's implying REN is going to Mars.

[Anonymous No.19425457]

sell all REN now

[Anonymous No.19425476]

>>19425418
i hate this pedo

[Anonymous No.19425491]

>>19425476
Stop

[Anonymous No.19425513]

>>19425418
Because Ren is going to have Ethereum by the balls for many years to come. They are going to control a sizable amount of Bitcoin liquidity, and there always will be a threat of moving to another network, and having the dark nodes bond there.

[Anonymous No.19425519]

he's just distracting from the fact he is thinking about BSV all day.
vitalik you aren't fooling anyone.

[Anonymous No.19425533]

How much % of your portfolio should be in REN?

I am 60% ETH, 10% BTC, 30% LINK/UBT/BAT

[Anonymous No.19425567]

I read his tweets in his gay little voice, he does one of those awkward breath-in laughs after every statement he makes

[Anonymous No.19425582]

>>19425533
Enough to get a dark node.

[Anonymous No.19425600]

>>19425567
Vitalik is the man. It’s just odd he isn’t mentioning Ren.

[Anonymous No.19425789]

Bump

[Anonymous No.19425818]

>>19425519
>unironically believing in BSV

[Anonymous No.19425848]

>>19425418
I don't know about ren, but why do so many people put so much emphasis on what this autist has to say?

[Anonymous No.19425855]

>>19425600
It's more odd he isn't mentioning Dentacoin mutha fucks be havin them COVID teeth

[Anonymous No.19425871]

>>19425855
I haven’t heard about that in years

[Anonymous No.19425982]

>>19425476
no u

[Anonymous No.19425994]

>>19425519

[Anonymous No.19426001]

>>19425848
His white paper revolutionized blockchain for starters. Ren is evolutionary too though

[Anonymous No.19426016]

>>19425994
What a burn lol

[Anonymous No.19426023]

>>19426001
His? I thought ethereum was created by a conglomerate of furries

[Anonymous No.19426029]

>>19425994
Top lel

[Anonymous No.19426163]

there's nothing special about ren, it's a run of the mill project with insecure collateral model.

[Anonymous No.19426201]

>>19426163
>t.keeplett

[Anonymous No.19426203]

>>19426163
>insecure collateral mode
there is an easy way for you to make some money then....why not put it to the test?

[Anonymous No.19426240]

>>19426203
because to attack it profitably you need lots of ren.
Attack is profitable for whales (what's the dev stake?) but not for outsiders that would have to buy it, so the security model ends up in trusting them.

[Anonymous No.19426279]

>>19426240
>there is an easy way to attack it but you would need to own all the ren then you could attack what you own.
you sound like you have nigger blood in you. is that true?

[Anonymous No.19426305]

>>19426163
They modified tendermint, created a bond on Ethereum, and used Shamir secrets so no dark node knows the key to the btc wallet. It’s pretty brilliant and makes Cosmos and Polkadot look silly

[Anonymous No.19426336]

>>19426240
There is enough Ren for 10000 nodes and Shamir secrets that change rapidly. Even if you somehow gathered that many nodes before the system would fork you wouldn’t have enough time to assemble the key.

[Anonymous No.19426388]

>>19426279
no you don't need all ren, you need 1/3 of any shard.
>>19426336
Except nothing stops you from having enough nodes to know the key, and because it's profitable to steal btc once you know it, the security relies on trusting nodes to not do this.

Fortunately it appears nobody cares about the project except for token holders. It's a huge negative for ethereum because it would impact other btc tokenization projects. I just hope the theft doesn't happen until tbtc gets going.

[Anonymous No.19426398]

>>19426336
Is it 100k ten for a dark node?

[Anonymous No.19426482]

>>19426388
>you need 1/3 of any shard? Won't each transaction be broken into shards though? Also, how would they know which shard will be selected? The shards are randomized for every transaction so in reality you would need to have a significantly large steak in ren to maybe have 1/3 ownership of a shard for one transaction. The odds of that are low and not worth the effort and the possibility of losing your bond.

[Anonymous No.19426494]

>>19426482
Ignore the >

[Anonymous No.19426511]

>>19426482
yes.
he's a brainlet who's entire premise is: "Ren's just lucky the incentive structure works out so its more profitable to be honest than not, otherwise people would be dishonest."

[Anonymous No.19426525]

>>19426482
>The odds of that are low
so you claim. What are the actual odds?
>>19426511
Except it's not more profitable to be honest. It's profitable for 1/3 of nodes (enough to get keys) to steal. That's the problem.
You are trusting node owners to not steal because of moral or legal reasons, or just because of laziness.

[Anonymous No.19426549]

>>19426525
you keep saying 1/3 of the nodes. but its not static. its ever shifting on every transactions and once you executed your exploit you would be kicked....so its a big investment for a 1 time payoff.

[Anonymous No.19426560]

>>19425994
God damn vitalik is based
My money is in good hands

[Anonymous No.19426578]

>>19426388
If someone is approaching that many nodes, and they can solve the Shamir secrets quickly( extremely unlikely) you could gradually turn the minting fee up and burning fee down. It would cause a renBTC burn so the system would have less btc making the attack unprofitable. As a last effort you can turn the continuity fee gradually up. In an extreme case you could make it 100. No one is going to keep their renBTC on Ren if in a year their stake goes to 0. All of this makes the event of making a profit extremely unlikely, and doesn’t incentivize an attack. It is less decentralized than Ethereum, but there are more levers on Ren to deter an attack.

[Anonymous No.19426615]

>>19426482
Additional problem is that the collateral ratio (in ren) is not set in stone, but voted by nodes. Nodes, of course, have every incentive to vote the ratio as low as possible.
>>19426549
>but its not static
which is even worse. You're defending ren here, so show me actual numbers. Because even if you have 0.1% probability of getting >1/3 of any shard, and shard allocations are daily, you have a 30.5% probability of getting >1/3 of key shares once in a year. When that happens, you can happily steal.

What's the shard size, what's the probability you get >1/3 if you own 1M ren (there's 1B of it) and how often allocations happen?
>so its a big investment for a 1 time payoff.
How is this an argument if the attack is profitable?
>>19426578
>they can solve the Shamir secrets quickly
it's not a PoW puzzle. It just means you need 1/3 of nodes to get the key.

[Anonymous No.19426669]

>>19426615
>What's the shard size, what's the probability you get >1/3 if you own 1M re
Shards are large, containing at least one hundred Darknodes, and they are randomly shuffled once per day. This makes Sybil attacks difficult, as an attacker needs to own a large portion of the entire network to have a chance at corrupting any one shard. This also makes bribery attacks extremely difficult, requiring an attacker to collude with a large number of anonymous Darknodes in a short period of time, with minimal trust.

These properties help RenVM to resist attacks made by irrational adversaries (adversaries that do not care about profiting from an attack). But, it also helps RenVM to resist attacks from rational adversaries during periods where an attack may be temporarily profitable. Regardless, RenVM is always able to restore its one-to-one peg in the unlikely event that an attack succeeds.

[Anonymous No.19426674]

>>19426615
You can’t manage all of this before a fork. And the system is backed by grey core for the interim, so even if you have a confident method of stealing the underlying tokens, it is impossible until later releases.

[Anonymous No.19426705]

>>19426669
>Shards are large, containing at least one hundred Darknodes, and they are randomly shuffled once per day
How many active nodes are there in total?
>RenVM is always able to restore its one-to-one peg in the unlikely event that an attack succeeds.
how? btc gets stolen. Where's the replacement coming from?
>>19426674
"grey core"? So you're saying it's 100% centralized currently and devs own keys?

[Anonymous No.19426765]

>>19426705
No it is still decentralized, just among the Ren alliance, projects where the success of Ren is mutually beneficial.

“ During Mainnet SubZero, the Greycore (a special community governed shard that backs all gateway shards and the coordination shard) is responsible for consensus and execution of cross-chain transactions. In later releases, it is retired from this primary role and begins to provide a secondary signature on everything done by RenVM.

Members are initially selected by the Ren team via the Ren Alliance, but its presence and those projects who are in it will eventually be controlled by on-chain community governance. Members of the Ren Alliance that have opted to participate in the Greycore will be admitted into the network after the first epoch and with the Ren team, will oversee security for the RenVM network for Mainnet Subzero.”

This is what Bitcoin or Ethereum would have had to do if they launched today since there are too many investors in crypto. What if every VC knew about bitcoin when it launched?

[Anonymous No.19426807]

>>19426765
so it's basically a clone of liquid federation members? Why is a fully centralized launch being shilled like some sort of success? There's already wbtc.
>This is what Bitcoin or Ethereum would have had to do if they launched today since there are too many investors in crypto
tbtc model is sound and very simple. Every tbtc is backed by 150% in eth. If tbtc gets stolen, collateral gets sold for tbtc which is then burned, keeping the system backed.
Being complicated (like ren) is a sign of obfuscating insecurity.

(tbtc's code is complicated and had a bug (nobody lost anything), but that's separate from having a complicated security model)

[Anonymous No.19426842]

>>19426807
Now I got your agenda bro HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. tBTC is an absolute shitcoin. Their launch failed on the first day. Ethereum prices can swing wildly, the keep network has no fee structure to stabilize prices. Also you have 3 custodians who have to stick together for 6months. Does that sound decentralized to you?

[Anonymous No.19426858]

>>19426807
ah, so the shill finally shows its true colors. Sad, i thought we were having a real discussion

[Anonymous No.19426866]

>>19426807
Also your “custodians” are Andreesen Horowitz and friends. Way too much VC money got into keep before the crypto community. It looks like they just burned their money

[Anonymous No.19426897]

>>19426842
>Their launch failed on the first day.
You yourself admitted ren is fully centralized. If tbtc was fully centralized too, they could patch the contract in-place. It was decentralized, so they couldn't.
This is the problem with shit projects like ren. Good projects spend all efforts on developing. Shit projects spend nearly everything on marketing and to attack better competitors, and the actual product is a centralized scam.
>Ethereum prices can swing wildly, the keep network has no fee structure to stabilize prices
There's no need for any 'fee structure'. Collateral is liquidated is eth price falls too low.
>>19426866
Collateral is in eth, there's no trust involved.

[Anonymous No.19426908]

>>19425994
Absolutely based

[Anonymous No.19426912]

>>19426897
Dude just start a keep thread if you want to shill instead of hijacking this one

[Anonymous No.19426915]

>>19426807
Is that what Ethereum did to blockchain? They just obfuscated bitcoins scripting language? You should welcome complexity.

[Anonymous No.19426935]

>>19426912
I don't care about keep. tbtc is currently the only secure decentralized pegged bitcoin project. Ren is not secure.
>>19426915
There's nothing complex in evm. It's a pretty simple stack based vm.

[Anonymous No.19427035]

>>19426935
How are you going to convince people to even risk their eth backing the bitcoin, when they can just stake?

What an oversimplification of solidity lol

[Anonymous No.19427056]

>>19427035
>How are you going to convince people to even risk their eth backing the bitcoin, when they can just stake?
There's an incentive to mint tbtc if the price is high enough.
>What an oversimplification of solidity lol
Ethereum doesn't run solidity. Solidity is compiled to evm.

[Anonymous No.19427086]

>>19427056
People are going to stake as their is a guaranteed compounding effect on rewarded eth. If their not staking they will be leveraging on a defi platform. TBTC would be last on their mind

[Anonymous No.19427098]

>>19427086
eth staking roi goes down with the total staked amount. At some point it's going to stabilize and alternatives are going to be more attractive.

[Anonymous No.19427180]

>>19427098
That’s when they would leverage on defi or provide liquidity. Listen you know your stuff, I just think you’re backing a failed project. If you’re a keep developer I’m sorry, I don’t meant to discourage. If it makes you feel better if you invested in Ren with your VC funding you would still be richer than me.

If you’re not a keep developer I’d find another project to be passionate about.

[Anonymous No.19427225]

>>19427180
>That’s when they would leverage on defi or provide liquidity
But tbtc is part of defi. In the future, you could mint new tbtc and lend it at some return.
Tokenized staked eth is also going to appear, that's going to be a great collateral. Way better than ren, snx, link or whatever.

I'm not a keep developer. The token (keep) is not necessary for the system at all. The only external action that has to be paid by someone is submission of btc block headers, but that can be solved without any special token.

[Anonymous No.19427310]

>>19425582

How much to get a dark node?

[Anonymous No.19427425]

>>19427310
100k Ren

[Anonymous No.19428009]

Bump

[Anonymous No.19428533]

Bump