• Pup Biru@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    no; they all have trade-offs and that’s different… you can have trust less proof amongst semi-trusted parties like a consortium of banks: they don’t entirely trust each other, but trust each other enough to keep an eye on the other members of the consortium

    there are plenty of situations like this that are non-public

    • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      they are objectively, mathematically weaker.

      Joining ethereum now implies trusting a complete stranger to get you up to speed. It is objectively subjective.

      • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        i wasn’t talking about ethereum, and i don’t think anyone was saying they don’t have TRADE OFFS. in the world of consensus protocols, there are many different trade offs that build a network that suits your needs

        however the consensus protocol has little to do with how mathematically secure a network is: the security of the consensus protocol comes down to a lot of complex things

        it also has nothing to do with how you bootstrap a node

        these things are all different, albeit interconnected things

        • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          the consensus algorithm is the only thing that contributes to the network’s security. That, and because it’s trying to solve an impossible problem, it also needs the psychological element exploiting humans’ greed (and therefore want to hoard currency).