A Litecoin bug found today allowed double spend and led to miners having to reorg multiple blocks. PoW is a failed consensus model. Your entire security depends on an assumption that others won't spend more money on attacking the network than miners will defending it, and that those mining will not continue to sell the network out, with Epstein and co. having already permanently neutered it as spendable medium-of-exchange money to transform it into the random evolution of "store of value," controlling the majority of the core devs across a majority of code build and corporatists still controlling a majority of mining. Bitcoin has had a full chain reorg and Nakamoto probabilistic fork choice algo does not give full settlement for this reason. The best incentive is no incentive on networks which are as secure at 1 dollar as they are at 1000 and this is the only model institutions will meaningfully build actual RWA etc. on. https://www.theblock.co/post/398892/litecoin-rewrites-three-hours-of-history-to-undo-its-first-major-privacy-layer-exploit
>>62156949I am holding eth too.
>>62156949
>>62156967>.gifdub- dub- dub- hi! my name is>what?hi! my name is>who?chic-chicka-slim shadyhi! my name is>ha?hi! my name is>who?chic-chicka-slim shadyhi! my name is>what?hi! my name is>who?chic-chicka-slim shadyexcuse me!can I have attention of the classfor one second
>>62156991we're gonna have a problem here
>>62156949>Your entire security depends on an assumption that others won't spend more money on attacking the network than miners will defending it, and that those mining will not continue to sell the network outin this case it was an exploit of the node software itself
>problem solved before anybody even heard about it>price unaffected What is this bullshit? Where is the flash dump?
>>62157083>in this case it was an exploit of the node software itselfWhich explains why link will never be anything special.
>>62156949Soooo….buy bitbean?
>>62156949>Your entire security depends on an assumption that others won't spend more money on attacking the network than miners will defending itI don't own any crypto, but this describes a lot of very important things. Like a physical vault is like that. If someone spends more money than what's used to build/guard the vault, they'll get into the vault.
>>62157252Definitely, but this adds a MUCH easier anonymity and custodians are counterparties working on reputation. If JP Morgan vaults get sold out and are uninsured they lose a business worth WAY more than their physical holdings and are personally and institutionally exposed. When proof of work networks are exploited or coopted, there is just a layer of abstraction or investment losers unhappy when the network majority votes to evolve in a way that SCREWS retail and sells out defi values (as has already happened, requiring centralization into super shitty, TURBO-centralized L2s 5o be remotely viable while still being 100x more expensive to use than other networks which scale at L1 with no concentrated risk faster). Bank heists are possible but harder and insured against and much more difficult. Blockchain tech is for sure the future, but PoW is it's proto, beta test origination.
Litecoin was a coin really loved by 4channellers. Did all the litecoin enjoyers leave?
>>62156949>PoW is a failed consensus model>Bitcoin has had a full chain reorg>Nakamoto probabilistic fork choice algo does not give full settlementAll of this is actual made up fake bullshit, you are literally saying nothing at all. What happened today with Litecoin has nothing to do with its consensus algorithm. You are a giant piece of shit and I sincerely hope you die soon. My schizo theory is that this is somehow related to Calude's Mythos AI because this shit is really good at finding zero day exploits and from what I can gather this was one.
>>62157499the irony is that there are countless zero days because modern systems are built like shit. but hackers don't exploit them because it's pointless and retarded to do it. dunning kruger ai retards don't get that
Not the win OP thinks it is. Litecoin didn't get a malicious tx through as the miners hit it with a 13 block reorg. The people that lost funds were the ones using NEAR DEX which is not PoW. Again, the PoW coin is fine it's the DEX that got fucked.
>>62157402There's nothing decentralized about "DeFi." The company behind the "DeFi" protocol (lol) is going to reimburse everyone so nobody loses anything (lol).
>>62157685Literally nothing I said is remotely incorrect nor is anything you said remotely a correction to anything I did. I never even mentioned near dex, I just qualified this in the broader context of the structural reality of proof of work consensus and how it fails at scale, particularly in the BTC/LTC model.>>62157703"Cedefi" absolutely. And most "defi" also, like solana which has shown it multiple times. There are plenty of networks which are actual defi, at least as media of exchange (they aren't BTC using Lightning).
>>62157499>>62157670August 15, 2010 (Value Overflow Incident). BTC has had multiple reorgs but this was the largest. A bug (CVE-2010-5139) allowed a user to create 184 billion bitcoins. Lurk moar before posting. Enjoy whatever consensus change is forced to prevent quantum threat to Satoshi's wallet or the dumpening and permanent irrelevance that waits for when it is exploited.
>>62157759I'm not going to try to convince you. Keep using your premine PoS chains desu. You deserve it.
>>62157819You have zero argument and are coping through sophistry nodding to the concept that you are exasperated and I am missing a clear point you don't have. I hate PoS too, you retarded false dichotomy disingenuous nigger.
>>62157911insisting that pow is equivalent to node dos is sophistry
>>62157925No, strawmanning after being extremely specifically addressed directly and point by point is. I literally never compared the two or gave the same critique to either. You have no argument so you cope by acting like this and playing REALLY gay rhetoric games to try to signal unfavorability to the horde of consensus group thinkers hoping it will make up for it because this is how you interpret information yourself. And when faced with argument you don't know how to address you just do this one size fits all corny non-argument shit and repress it being true to cope. Really gay
>>62157772You're ridiculous and pathetic. Everyone knows about the 184 quadrillion bitcoin overflow but this was done when the satoshi group was still working on ironing out the bugs. You say pseud shit like>I just qualified this in the broader context of the structural reality of proof of work consensusWhy the fuck include the term "structural reality"? It adds nothing to your points and it just seems superficial and seems like the only reason its there is to fluff up your sentences to make you seem like you're smarter than you are. The reality is that you're an idiot and you cannot prove that this Litecoin zero-day was related to the consensus protocol. Go on, I'll wait. Oh what's that? You can't prove it? Yeah because it's not related to the consensus algorithm. I'll wait for you to post some more literal babbling.
>>62156949It didn't even dip. Litecoin to $2000
>litecoin>privacy layerWhat? I'm so behind on litecoin news.Anyway we already have good privacy coin it's Monero just use that.Also attacks that require "spending money" aren't really code issues afaik.
>>62158897>The thing you said happened which I didn't know about but am now pretending I did happened EXACTLY as you said it did, but it doesn't matter because now I am feigning exasperation at how YOU must be an undesirable type of person who I will now go on to do everything I can to characterize to cope/project and hope that people interpret what I am consciously knowingly doing as being vaguely like you and side with me instead of caring that you were right! Why are you spending half your reply policing my usage of a single term? I use "structural" reality to connote the specific hard-coded, objective scaffolding rather to distinguish it from people who avoid argument like you by using the term "reality" like a rhetorical device to semantically launder subjectivity you can't sell without disingenuous word games. I literally never claimed that the bug was connected to the proof of work consensus model. I literally said this multiple times. I am giving full context of a bug being discovered (despite the litecoin group having spent YEARS working on "ironing out all the bugs" lol), its implications, and the broader aspect of proof of work and why it fails as a model. You spent your entire argument first conceding what you first ignored, pivoting to instead try to run cover for it in a way that makes it seem unmentionable or something because you can't deny something that objectively happened even if you didn't know it did. Lol You finish this with calling me a pseud for mentioning it which bridges into you next policing my language in a way that has zero to do with my argument (intentionally) and is completely avoidant with the sole purpose to make people not consider what I say and to view me as cringe in some way such that even though I am objectively correct and honestly representing things, I am somehow cringe in someway that should overrule the validity of my claims which you are now goalpost shifting/running cover for? Then you triple down on an argument
>>62158897>>62160390I never even made and challenge me to defend that strawman, reiterating it like 5x punctuating each one to try to make it seem like you are confidently exposing me when again I literally never even made the claim and you are just doing REALLY gay argument-avoidant sophistry because you literally know I am right or that you can't defend your argument and literally nothing could be said which would get you to break consensus signaling with your chosen CULTure because your position has nothing to do with what's true and everything to do with having been late to a big opportunity and being too unoriginal and unintelligent to and patience barren to find a new opportunity so you glom onto the squeezed lemon imagining how delicious the next round of lemonade will be. You don't care what argument makes sense or doesn't, you just care about signaling consensus with your side in narrative warfare, aiming to mask the parts that don't fit from mattering. You are indistinguishable from covid cultists/leftists and are a literal NPC. You can literally tell how mad and emotionally ejaculatory/petulant you are by the hollow and emphatically broken up loudness of your writing. It is incredibly obvious you dislike being forced to consciously live in the cognitive dissonance you accept but feel less stuffy when repressing. You literally know you are being like this and are choosing to. You know bitcoin was sold out and coopted and mutated from what Satoshi designed as a medium of exchange servicable money to a "store of value" which still aspires to be a medium of exchange but technically neutered itself to be unable to be without being the most centralized surveillance money slop imaginable using lightning etc. You guys are late normies who would sell all defi value out and live in the technate panopticon gladly for btc to be $50 M. The difference between us is you avoid argument through accusatory projection, I just describe what you did after I already argued.
>>62159171You can use the LTC privacy layer for off ramps and on ramps. Ever swap XMR for BTC and get tainted BTC? With Litecoin you have an offramp where you don't have to worry about whether the previous owner of the coins had tainted funds or not as MWEB enhances fungibility.
>>62160393>You guys are late normies who would sell all defi value outYou realize those of us that have been in crypto for over a decade aren't chasing the newest 'defi protocol' right? We're largely sound money enthusiasts and our core folio is fair launch PoW like XMR, BTC and LTC. It's you noobs that are chasing the shiniest object that don't understand what crypto is about
>>62157467It all stopped when the dude who drew Lite Knights art left. 97% of you weren't here for that
>>62160390>>62160393You literally believe that Epstein and co. coded bitcoin and is the sole reason that bitcoin exists. It seems to me that the retarded NPC is you dumbass.
>>62160413I have been in crypto longer than you. If you have been in crypto for over 10 years and think PoW is the end all be all state of consensus as typified in BTC, you are literally a retard or a normie outsourcing opinions to a sphere of influencers.>>62160605More strawmanning. I LITERALLY said they COOPTED it and steered it from Satoshi's vision of a p2p payment network medium of exchange cash alternative, which they objectively did. As of the time of revelations of Epstein's involvement leaking via email releases, At the time this letter was written, there were around 12,000 commits to Bitcoin's code. Today there are 47,583 commits to Bitcoin's code. That means that 74.79% of the Bitcoin core development and code was committed after Jeffery Epstein took over the defacto senior management role as benefactor. He may not have been 'Satoshi', but he was absolutely running the executive direction of bitcoin on behalf of Mossad for the majority of bitcoin's development, and crucially, at the time the decisions were made to neuter it as money to convert it into a store of value nonsense that requires centralization to scale to be even remotely usable. Bitcoin (and ethgate ethereum) was ALWAYS about making it unusable outside turbo-centralized L2s basically promising defi L1 principles that forcibly funnel into the trojan horse payload of centralized business solutions L2 programmable surveillance money Hell. They tried (and failed) to regulate everything else and give a regulatory free pass to Eth and BTC, but the tech is SO much slower and more expensive and inelegant and vulnerable even the 6 year moat of complete regulatory capture was inadequate to seal the deal and they are hemorrhaging share. Clarity will seal the deal. You can like it or not like it, it's gonna happen. More efficient, better, quantum safe tech will run because bitcoin crawled.
>>62160605>>62161117Forgot pic related. And by "today" I meant to as of the release of the letter. I copied from an old post of mine in the archives and forgot to clarify that.
>>62161117>PoW is le badMonero is the most legitimate coin and it's PoW. But please tell me more about your 'defi investments', moonboy.
>>62157759how do i know which smart contract platforms are "true defi"? i want to use chain that are censorproof. can solana blacklist wallets and roll back transactions?
>>62156949How about we build more node implementations for Litecoin AND BITCOIN so single codebase (Core) issues like this won't happen? Anyone? No? Okay.
