pull down to refresh
100 sats \ 4 replies \ @optimism 25 Jul \ on: OP-CATS, Mining Pools & Naka Consensus (Bitcoin Magazine, Big Read, Walt Smith) bitcoin
Ethereum was ICO'd, it's half a company, it has a roadmap. It had a million hard forks. It's Vitalik's playground.
Why is Ethereum's history a qualifier for Bitcoin? Why would anyone want Bitcoin to become a shitstonk?
Bruh what's this? You didn't get this immediate allergic reaction when some bro from a VC fund called "Standard Crypto" (<--- IT LITERALLY SAYS CRYPTO) comes in and mansplains Bitcoin needing AMMs? What market would that work for? BTC/USDT? tf?
Bitcoin, not shitcryptoretardation.
Perfectly reasonable as a scenario... that mining community went to complete shit.
Also, off top of my head I have no idea what AMM is either, but i believe it was explained (or at least defined) in the article.
reply
I know what an AMM is, it's an Automated Market Maker. It's where you trade shitcoins for other shitcoins, or you provide shitcoin liquidity to it to get rich in shitcoins, unless the shitcoin gets rugged, then you lose all your shitcoins.
So which asset is going to be the other side in the pair
BTC/??? on this magic AMM. It's per definition shitcoinery, so choose one. This worked for Ethereum because it was literally made to launch unlimited shitcoins, and ETH "miners" make their money through these AMM interactions: they play the margins of everyone's trades by front-running orders against AMM contracts (=price manipulation, and =rent seeking.)My question is: how is this not shitcoinery? What makes this article so great? Its length? Definitely not its content, because it proposes for Bitcoin to survive it must become like Ethereum. Do we want Bitcoin to be a rent seeking paradise for bankers, like Ethereum?
reply
...or trade anything for money, like a market. Oh, yes, aaaasset markets
Also, why are you arguing with me — go speak to the author if you think this is so critical
reply
Trade anything for money using an AMM running on the Bitcoin L1 so that miners can frontrun everyone? Why on earth would anyone want to have more transaction cost than necessary just because it's on a system that is so poorly designed for trading that one can be front-ran? What's wrong with just trading without the AMM?
Even if NFTs of assets like real estate or tokenized real world securities/commodities would actually work (they don't, best we can do is synths and perps, everything else is enforced by either regulation or otherwise a scam) don't you see how this would make Bitcoin a copy of Ethereum? The packaging of the article is intriguing at the surface, but underneath it is literally: to solve the problem with miner income, we should do what ethereum did by making their bug (front-running) into a feature, and narrating how this is good.
why are you arguing with me
Because you're biting and making points (market on a blockchain) we've had for over a decade now coming from Vitalik and co. Tell me why I am wrong?
go speak to the author if you think this is so critical
Naw bruh, you boost the message here, we discuss it here. No deflection.
reply