ZergShotgunAndYou

That is not entirely correct. AFAIK a few pools have set up nodes to signal no in the ExtraData field that you as a pool user can connect to if you want to express your opposition.

Yes you can.
http://progpowcarbonvote.com/
Just send a zero eth tx to one of the addresses representing yes or no.

You do realize there's a difference between the multisig debacle and their work on the parity client???

I too got butthurt with their cavalier attitude subsequent to the multisig incident and their insistence in pushing EIP-999.That doesn't mean i can't also recognize their many many valuable contributions.

Also since you're so quick to point out their failures maybe you should brush up on the history of eth and remember how they basically saved the day during the Devcon2 DDoS attacks in 2016??

ITT: clueless people who have never written a line of code in their lives thinking that a vuln resulting in DoS attack vector(that would rank pretty low in a CVE score) can lead to loss of funds and conflating this minor issue(that was also handled well as per responsible disclosure guidelines) with the multisig SNAFU.

If you think the Parity guys are incompetent because they have responsibly reviewed the issue,determined it to be larger in scope than previously thought and updated their advisory accordingly... i don't know what to say to you.

Just stop with this drivel.
While i disagree with him on some topics(eg EIP999,ProgPoW etc) he has proven to be an invaluable asset to the eth community,time and time again.
By this reasoning we should also hate Vlad Zamfir because of a few tweets exposing his concerns about the pace at which eth was being adopted during the ico craze in summer 2017.
Absolute BS.Being critical of what you are working on is a great way to avoid becoming complacent and sitting on your laurels.
He recently spearheaded efforts to build the Gorli testnet,he was one of the few people(the only one?)to assist during the failed constantinople hf on Ropsten last year and the list goes on.
If you want to call for him to step down based on a few harmless tweets expressing his thoughts about a competing product(being developed by people he knows but working for a different entity,the web3 foundation)then i don't know what to say.
If you think his tweets harmed you as an """investor""" then wait until you see what not having a release coordinator and dev lead for the parity client would do to your bags.Remember working in this sector requires skills and more than anything dedication and an innate passion.You can't exactly replace people by opnening a job position and waiting for the CVs to start rolling in,especially since qualified candidates can certainly earn more elsewhere.

You're cancer;not because of your opinion as to why ProgPow is harmful to eth but for the tactics you use.

You are knowingly disseminating misleading or incomplete information.

First,the vote is not over,second you omitted the fact that Martin Koppelmann of Gnosis just voted with two multisig wallets belonging to Gnosis and his vote accounts for the vast majority of the No camp(it his his right and prerogative to vote ofc but i still think his explanation as tho why he did it, eg:to prove that this method for signalling sentiment and gauge the community opinion is spurious and unreliable - is naive at best as we already knew that).

​

Yes, ofc it is.

Source:

https://twitter.com/ConsenSysAndrew/status/1096013592737054720

Yeah it's kinda fishy especially since i didn't present it in a partisan way.i literally said just vote.

And as of now the actual website is also down,probably being DDoSed.

EDIT:

nvm it was maintenance

Remember the original post and thought it was incredible,glad to see the project is still alive.

I wonder if Infura manged to add support for debug_traceTransaction

This is spam,nice ref link you have there!

How are the games provably fair if they are not using smart contracts?This seem to be a run of the mill online casino that uses crypto as a funding method.Beware.

A very tentative time frame for the audit to be completed was given as end of march/april with a decision based on the results to be reached shortly after(like the next dev meeting after that)

Always a pleasure reading these.
Also congrats to Preston Van Loon on his decision to quit Google to dedicate himself full time to the ETH ecosystem.

For the record i'm not a blind ProgPoW supporter.

From my (limited) understanding of it,having read the spec,listened to the original core devs meeting where it was proposed almost a year ago and subsequent calls discussing it in depth and the Devcon4 panel i find the rationale to be solid.

I can understand the concerns and accusations of being a bad actor leveled against Kristy aka u/ohgodagirl aka Ms. If.

Now i hope this audit can finally focus on the technical merits and shortcomings of the proposed spec and reach a conclusion because frankly if the code is solid i couldn't care less if it was developed by Hitler,Kim Jong Un,Polpot and Stalin or if the proponents had ulterior motives because of their purported affiliation with Nvidia.

If valid concerns regarding the technical aspects of the spec were to emerge from the audit ofc i would agree it should not be pursued but if not and the only reason for this prolonged inaction is due to the perceived contentiousness and a misguided desire from the devs to appear as not to be favoring a specific side(while their mandate is clear since the ETH whitepaper describe it as ASIC resistant and that was the driving force behind the design of ethash and its chief technical goal.) ProgPow should be activated in an ad-hoc HF.

One person whose opinion i'd be VERY interested to hear is u/timohanke (Timo Hanke of Dfinity and one of the two researchers who authored ASICboost).

aaaand decisiveness is exactly what we didn't get

Agenda:

https://github.com/ethereum/pm/issues/73

Then you didn't read my post as i explicitly addressed this non interventionist school of thought

What do you guys think of the Avalanche consensus mechanism and could it play a role in the ETH roadmap further into the future?

Yeah absolutely.

Kudos for taking one for the team and doing the mind-numbing work, monastic scribes have got nothing on you!

What do you guys think of the Avalanche consesus mechanism and could it play a role in the ETH roadmap further into the future?

Very interested to hear about the efforts currently underway at the EF and strategic partners/OEMs to design and manufacture the VDF hardware.

It's also the thing that scares me the most about the proposed design;i can see how they would really increase the security of the random sample selection process in addition to RANDAO but manufacturing hw is a costly, difficult endeavor often subject to unforeseen issues and delays.

On that note is an economic incentive structure for running a VDF node being considered?

Thanks and keep up the great work.

EDIT:

One of the concerns i have specifically is security.

Since this is gonna be single-purpose, highly specialized hw always connected providing a crucial function to the network it would be a prime target for potential adversaries to disrupt or compromise.