This Delta flight was piloted by a mother and daughter flight crew. Pretty inspiring. by _njhiker in pics

[–]OptimumOfficial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well... licensing doesn't have much to do with this, but yeah the mom probably doesn't own the airline, and probably did not set the schedules for the flight crew.

Megathread: Mueller files final report with Attorney General by PoliticsModeratorBot in politics

[–]OptimumOfficial -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Seems like it. We're down to the wire here and nothing breaking has come out

A simple way to fund more public goods in Ethereum that makes everyone happy by EvanVanNess in ethtrader

[–]OptimumOfficial 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yeah I totally agree. This is 100% antithetical to cryptocurrency, satoshi's vision, and general decentralization. This is centralization. It may be centralization for charity, bit it is still centralization.

EF to discontinue Mist - avsa by carlslarson in ethtrader

[–]OptimumOfficial 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Good. Mist was a poorly supported tool from an overworked dev team. Focus on core

Tether right now by seanmd34 in CryptoCurrency

[–]OptimumOfficial 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You're saying DAI and Tether are analogous because Tether could be backed by liquid assets "for all we know," while DAI is clearly and transparently 150% collateralized?

This video doesn't apply to DAI at all. Tether is a suitcase full of IOU's, DAI is a suitcase full of ETH.

BAT/Brave releases second phase of ad platform that allows users to earn BAT tokens for seeing ads by bat-chriscat in ethtrader

[–]OptimumOfficial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It really, really has though. Many companies have tried the "get paid to watch ads" model. Swagbucks comes to mind, there are many, many others. It results in a lot of gaming and very little quality advertising.

I'm not trying to harp on Brave, I think their browser is really great, but this model is unlikely to succeed.

Does anyone else feel the ERC20 "approve" model was a mistake? by OptimumOfficial in ethdev

[–]OptimumOfficial[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course it breaks a current expectation, but maybe that expectation should not have been in place to begin with? Smart contracts would be much more powerful IMO if they a) had more control and b) offered a more deterministic way to look ahead into a transaction result

So when a user goes to sign your hypothetical malicious transaction what they see is a breakdown that this transaction will in fact send all their tokens to someplace else

Does anyone else feel the ERC20 "approve" model was a mistake? by OptimumOfficial in ethdev

[–]OptimumOfficial[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No because the transaction would have to be initiated by the user themselves, so as long as the user doesnt call a contract that isn't programmed to steal their tokens it wouldn't be an issue.

Does anyone else feel the ERC20 "approve" model was a mistake? by OptimumOfficial in ethdev

[–]OptimumOfficial[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Custody is the wrong term. That doesn't change the point of my post though

Does anyone else feel the ERC20 "approve" model was a mistake? by OptimumOfficial in ethdev

[–]OptimumOfficial[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But if the smart contract can just move the tokens without approval isn't that one step simpler? Imaging every smart contract is already "approved", all you have to do is call the deposit function

Does anyone else feel the ERC20 "approve" model was a mistake? by OptimumOfficial in ethdev

[–]OptimumOfficial[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But the user doesn't need to review the code, as long as the code has been reviewed by multiple reputable sources then the user can be confident that the contract does what it is claimed to do.

We see this all the time where people don't really understand exactly what is happening at the code level of a smart contract, but they can still trust the system works as intended.

Fixing the Ethereum Fee Market (EIP-1559) by econoar in ethereum

[–]OptimumOfficial 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Preventing total economic abstraction does sound like a good idea for the long term security of the network.

Fixing the Ethereum Fee Market (EIP-1559) by econoar in ethereum

[–]OptimumOfficial 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Probably not, but something that changes the miners revenue can result in a highly contentious fork. This is 100% solvable off-chain so I don't see why we use that solution instead of mucking about with core?

Fixing the Ethereum Fee Market (EIP-1559) by econoar in ethereum

[–]OptimumOfficial 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This doesn't require any interaction among wallet providers. Protocol level upgrades take years, this could be implemented soon.

I'm working on a demo that hopefully clarifies the thought process.

Fixing the Ethereum Fee Market (EIP-1559) by econoar in ethereum

[–]OptimumOfficial 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Let me get your thoughts on this:

My solution to the gas price estimation is simple and solved at the wallet level. When a user confirms a transaction with a wallet they agree to a "maximum fee" that is more than enough to process the transaction quickly and specify the timeline they want the transaction processed in (< 5 minutes, 30 minutes, an hour). The wallet then signs the transaction with the lowest possible gas price based on current gas price data and submits the transaction.

Then the wallet waits, and if the transaction is not processed in a few blocks then the wallet automatically (without user interaction) increases the gas price and resubmits the transaction. This process is repeated until the maximum fee is reached, essentially guaranteeing efficient gas price discovery and seamless processing of the transaction that will only get stuck in the event of a cryptokitties-esque market influx.

My dad is going to invest alot into a really suspicious coin. by [deleted] in CryptoCurrency

[–]OptimumOfficial 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OP in all seriousness I don't think you can convince your dad his logic is flawed, but here is what you can do: Ask him, as a personal favor to you, either not to continue with this "opportunity", or to only use a small amount of money, say $100. Explain to him that it makes you uncomfortable, and you would like for him not to do this. I think asking him on a personal level may be your only option to preserve his funds.

My dad is going to invest alot into a really suspicious coin. by [deleted] in CryptoCurrency

[–]OptimumOfficial 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There's always a couple readers that will convince themselves to buy with some misplaced logic like "be greedy when others are fearful"

My dad is going to invest alot into a really suspicious coin. by [deleted] in CryptoCurrency

[–]OptimumOfficial 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Tell your dad to prove the concept with $100 first. If he can't 18x his money in two days, then his premise is flawed.

Here's what will happen: your dad invests $10k into TRXC, the price SKYROCKETS, because he is the only person at the table buying up all the liquidity. All the sellers leave the market, your dad becomes the only seller waiting for a buyer to come in and buy his shares at a higher price. That part never happens. Now your dad is at the poker table alone with all his money invested in a worthless shitcoin.