IOTA

hellsingfan [10:10 AM]
@jace-roc huh, price is still higher than the slack, the initial pump is obviously going to crash lol. I'm not unreasonable will take time for it to go to the moon :slightly_smiling_face:

[10:11]
But even now the market cap of $1.7 billion is amazing. I can see it going down.

[10:12]
Its a long term hold for me anyways. My coins aren't on the exchange :wink:

[10:13]
And IOTA's weakness is a small network. Everyone knows that lol. I only speak of the long term potential. This will be much higher in the future. thats all. i invest long term, not a trader.

[10:14]
My entry point was in the $200 million market cap. I ain't complaining bro.

[10:14]
200-350 million to be exact.

taek
[10:23 AM]
Why is it worth so much though? Not a single person who understands this stuff endorsed iota

[10:24]
@hellsingfan can you provide references to anyone knowledgeable who said iota is a good idea or likely to even work at all?

hellsingfan [10:26 AM]
@taek can you give references to anyone about bitcoin in 2011? Any reputable economist?

taek
[10:26 AM]
@hellsingfan iota is broken as a consensus system

[10:27]
People who know what they are doing have looked at it and scoffed

hellsingfan [10:27 AM]
If it is, it will go down to 0.

taek
[10:27 AM]
I don't think it will lol

fornax
[10:27 AM]
Well, they have a fancy website with loads of JavaScript and buzzwords, so people just pour lots of money into it

taek
[10:27 AM]
It's just frustrating how sparse the diligence is in this space

hellsingfan [10:28 AM]
You should join them if they ever hold an AMA. Maybe that would be good discussion to see.

[10:29]
you say its broken because it is probabilistic? is that all?

taek
[10:30 AM]
No there are a few issues, but again I refuse to engage them directly, they are openly hostile

chanc3r
[10:30 AM]
If IOTA consensus doesn't work then as the network grows you will get multiple forks??
Is fork the right word for iota?

hellsingfan [10:30 AM]
subtangles

chanc3r
[10:30 AM]
Lol are you talking about Nordic David?

taek
[10:30 AM]
@chanc3r that's correct it'll be easy to force forks onto the network

[10:31]
@chanc3r I talked to three of them last year and all three consistently responded to criticism with personal attacks instead of technical responses

[10:31]
Things like "you will never be taken seriously as an academic if you can't see why we are right" -> note that this contributes nothing to my understanding

[10:32]
After 30 minutes of that with each I gave up

hellsingfan [10:32 AM]
lol.

[10:32]
well then i'll be hoping that they're right. hahahaha

[10:32]
just means you didn't get your answer cuz of their personality not because there is no answer.

chanc3r
[10:32 AM]
Yeah doesn't surprise me...
I had the opportunity to buy in during their seed fund in NXT Blockchain and I decided not to.l because of who's involved...
Maybe I could have made some money but I guess I couldn't bring myself to give them my money

hellsingfan [10:32 AM]
or there is no answer. thats also possible.

[10:33]
its a toss up :slightly_smiling_face:

chanc3r
[10:33 AM]
@taek that is Davids stock phrase 'if I'm not making sense that's because you don't have the brains to understand me'

hellsingfan [10:33 AM]
it does fork, but then a tx is replayed.

taek
[10:33 AM]
(my name is David and this conversation is confusing :stuck_out_tongue: )

hellsingfan [10:34 AM]
lol

chanc3r
[10:34 AM]
I know and you probably could legitimately use it but wouldn't - he does all the time

taek
[10:34 AM]
but yeah, they are like the Donald Trump of cryptocurrency. They win arguments by repetition and social engineering, not by being correct

[10:35]
@chanc3r if you can't properly explain your idea to someone who is genuinely interested in learning how it works you don't understand it yourself very well

chanc3r
[10:35 AM]
Interesting the network could potentially suffer a ddos type reaction if people were to force enough forks

[10:35]
@taek lol

[10:35]
Are they also orange?

hellsingfan [10:36 AM]
spamming actually helps the network.

chanc3r
[10:36 AM]
Lol at 3B it's a target so let's see someone will test it

taek
[10:36 AM]
@hellsingfan can you explain why, or are you just parroting? Not to insult you, but if you have a reasonable explanation I would like to help you disassemble it

[10:37]
if you are just parroting, I can say broadly that in any consensus system, spam only serves to increase the computational load on your machine

hellsingfan [10:37 AM]
they need a tx to confirm another one. yes there should be wasted resources for sure to confirm a spammed tx. but it will help confirm a real one.

[10:38]
the POW is light weight to begin with.

[10:38]
a lot would depend on the size of the network again.

taek
[10:38 AM]
@hellsingfan the fundamental scaling problem of any consensus system is that your computer can't process more than a handful of transactions per second

[10:39]
and you have to store the entire state of the network

[10:39]
Look at Bitcoin. 120 GB blockchain or whatever

[10:39]
and a multi-GB utxo set. If you quadruple the blocksize, you'd literally need a 1 TB drive to hold all that data

hellsingfan [10:39 AM]
well as for storing the entire chain, that won't be required due to snapshotting.

taek
[10:40 AM]
ok, but you still need to download it

hellsingfan [10:40 AM]
you'll store 'entire chain' per current snapshot.

[10:40]
kind of a reference point if you will.

taek
[10:40 AM]
How frequent are the snapshots, and how can you tell if the snapshot is correct?

hellsingfan [10:41 AM]
snapshotting is not fully dev yet, its still under process.

[10:41]
but they have done successful snapshots already

[10:41]
like just a week ago.

[10:41]
they have done few before too

taek
[10:41 AM]
it's difficult to know which snapshots to trust, someone could easily make multiple snapshots

hellsingfan [10:41 AM]
that would be a consensus as well

[10:42]
cuz snapshots would be done at a local level

[10:42]
at different and various times

[10:42]
there will not be a 'global snapshot'

taek
[10:42 AM]
if there are no global snapshots, when you first join the network you will have to download the whole chain

hellsingfan [10:42 AM]
and then there are permanodes who do store the full chain

[10:42]
to verify again.

taek
[10:42 AM]
what you are describing is pruning, which only works if there are enough people holding the full chain

hellsingfan [10:42 AM]
Permanodes will not be snapshotting.

[10:43]
exactly.

taek
[10:43 AM]
ok, so the permanodes will be propping up the entire network

[10:43]
if 1/10 nodes are permanodes, each permanode is going to have 10x the burden of a normal node

hellsingfan [10:44 AM]
yes you could say that.

[10:44]
although i'm not sure entirely i would say 'burden'

taek
[10:44 AM]
but if your blockchain is 1 TB, I can guarantee you that it'll be less than 1/10 of nodes are permanodes

hellsingfan [10:45 AM]
as i said, this aspect is still under dev.

[10:45]
the full details on how they handle it would need to be revealed first.

taek
[10:45 AM]
well, it seems like a really important part of their scalability plan

hellsingfan [10:45 AM]
yes obviously.

[10:45]
I think Whitepaper 2.0 is being release in a month or two.

[10:46]
maybe more clarity will be given then.

taek
[10:46 AM]
but the core problem is that nodes probabilistically determine whether or not a transaction is valid. That's trivial to fork

[10:46]
just create a transaction that some nodes will accept and others will not

hellsingfan [10:47 AM]
in the testing, no one was able to do that.

[10:47]
not a single double spend for example got confirmed

[10:47]
anyhow i gotta get ready for work.

[10:48]
I think Whitepaper 2.0 should provide more clarity so perhaps lets wait for that :wink:

taek
[10:48 AM]
alright

[10:49]
but also, just because nobody was able to cause a fork during testing doesn't mean it's secure. It might just mean that nobody competent bothered

[10:49]
was there a reward for executing a double spend?

hellsingfan [10:49 AM]
forks are there, they're even visible in the visualizer

taek
[10:49 AM]
if you put a $500k bounty on successfully executing a double spend, I'd do it


[10:49]
note though that we need to be careful about the definition of a double spend

hellsingfan [10:49 AM]
They did have a $1 Million bounty on bugs and on critical ones it was in thousands

taek
[10:50 AM]
b/c, it's not that two conflicting transactions are on the chain

hellsingfan [10:50 AM]
like $10k or something.

taek
[10:50 AM]
10k is peanuts

[10:50]
which is why bounty programs don't work to demonstrate security

hellsingfan [10:50 AM]
Ok if you want I'll talk to them.

[10:50]
$500k to execute a double spend :slightly_smiling_face:

[10:50]
And if you're not able to?

taek
[10:50 AM]
* $500k to put a transaction on the network that some nodes accept as valid and other nodes do not accept as valid

[10:51]
which is not strictly speaking a double spend

[10:51]
but it is nonetheless a consensus fork

hellsingfan [10:51 AM]
hmm.

[10:51]
anyways gotta get ready for work.

[10:51]
pce.

taek
[10:51 AM]
I gtg as well

fornax
[10:52 AM]
Interesting stuff


hellsingfan [10:59 AM]
@taek I did just message Dominik. He said to call you there ASAP lol. I know you gotta go, i gotta go too. He said I can set up a debate between you two. He did say that he'd offered you 30 bitcoin to find the flaw. Anyhow if you're interested we could have an official 'debate' type thing at an agreeable time.

[11:00]
the 30 bitcoin offer is from before i guess.

taek
[11:00 AM]
That's not 500k lol. But also who decides if I found a flaw?

hellsingfan [11:00 AM]
ya i get your point.

taek
[11:00 AM]
If it's someone from their team I don't care

hellsingfan [11:00 AM]
but i think a public discussion would be nice

taek
[11:00 AM]
=}

hellsingfan [11:01 AM]
let the public decide.

taek
[11:01 AM]
*=\

hellsingfan [11:01 AM]
huh?

[11:01]
lol

taek
[11:01 AM]
Maybe

[11:01]
My battle is with eth

[11:01]
You can't win by going on stage with Trump lol


hellsingfan [11:01 AM]
lol

[11:01]
can let the public see your views.

[11:01]
i'm open to listening.

taek
[11:01 AM]
Even if he makes a total fool of himself he still gets more votes than you do

hellsingfan [11:02 AM]
i think iota is confusing for most people

taek
[11:02 AM]
Anyway, it's not worth my time right now, I've got a full plate already

hellsingfan [11:02 AM]
if you did have a discussion i think a lot of people would get some sort of clarity if not fully.

taek
[11:02 AM]
I'll give them a go if they pass eth

hellsingfan [11:02 AM]
oh ok :disappointed:

taek
[11:03 AM]
I know :(. But altcoin bashing never gets you much popularity unless others also feel the way that you do

wesley [11:04 AM]
joined #altcoins

taek
[11:04 AM]
You have to pick your battles carefully or you just rack up enemies

[11:05]
With that, I'm out. My stance is that iota is very unstable and people should avoid it, but ultimately that's the most amount of effort I'm willing to put into my statement. Maybe I am overlooking their genius, but their hostility has lost them my willingness to dive deeper