And then, every time a hack happens they blame it on the users - “the blockchain wasn’t compromised”. Sure, but users don’t care about that technicality.
Crypto needs better UI/UX and real-world mainstream usecases, not better consensus algorithms.
I don’t think Vitalik et all understand this, outside of the small criticisms they’re willing to bring up to deflect crypto-skeptics.
Eg, POW’s environmental damage is mentioned once in this blog, as a positive that enabled ETH’s “accessibility”. This is a joke right? You can barely mine any ETH even on an rtx3090. Obviously, mining pools/farms and the resulting global GPU shortages are accessible.
These are two distinct problems completely.
If you claim that ETH’s role is purely to be a replacement for the BoE (which is debatable) - surely they’ve solved counterfeiting, and can move on other things? Do we need to bike shed this forever?
[1] https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/counterfeit-bankno...
> once a block gets finalized, it cannot be reverted without the attacker having to lose millions of ETH to being slashed
when most recent hacks are begging for reversibility.
https://eyeofmidas.com/scifi/Turtledove_RoadNotTaken.pdf
Highly recommend.
I'm not sure if Solidity's traps are the EVM's traps exposed at the higher level, but given how hard it is to write a robust VM, I can't see the EVM being based on existing implementations being a bad thing.
