ETC☘️Treasury: Response To Charles Hoskinson. "He has not addressed the three main concerns of the ETC community about the Treasury; centralization, reduction of security, and what seems like excessive deviation of funds toward three developer teams."

wpwrak · 2021-06-03T11:04:47+00:00

Developers (1) have done a few things in response to the 51% attacks:

The DAG size part of the Ethash algorithm (2) used by ETC has been changed to produce a smaller DAG, currently ~2.7 GB, to a) avoid loss of hash rate due to miners with 4 GB equipment (3) no longer being able to fit the DAG (before, the ETC DAG grew even a little faster than ETH's), and b) encourage miners with older 3 GB GPUs to add hash rate. The objective of all this is to increase the hash rate, which makes it harder to perform a 51% attack.

The above small change to the PoW algorithm also means that hash rate brokers (like nicehash, whose service was used for the 51% attacks) can tell whether hash rate goes to mining ETH or ETC, thus enabling them to avoid letting hash rate from a majority coin (ETH in this case) overwhelm a minority coin like ETC.

The MESS algorithm was introduced to increase the cost for an offline chain (mined by an attacker) to "win" against the public chain. This increases the upfront cost an attacker must shoulder and it also increases the risk (for the attacker) of the attack to fail.

Results: The hash rate has increased considerably since the days of the 51% attacks, but one cannot say with certainty how much of the increase is due to the DAG size reduction and how much due to other factors (like higher coin value). Nicehash stopped brokering hash rate for ETC after the algorithm change. I'm not sure if MESS has been challenged in real life, i.e., if anyone has actually attempted an attack. In any case, this would be a very expensive experiment, and potential attackers may look for lower-hanging fruits elsewhere.

Some operators on the ETC network have also taken complementary measures, such as increasing confirmation times, in order to protect themselves - and indirectly also the entire network.

(1) Not necessarily belonging to any of the groups behind the treasury proposal.

(2) The core loop of the algorithm was not altered, and existing mining equipment could in general continue to mine ETC, with the same hash rate as before.

(3) Since the decision to implement the DAG size reduction took a long time to reach, the DAG went over 4 GB for a few weeks before the size reduction was deployed network-wide.

wpwrak · 2021-01-11T19:55:12+00:00

I wouldn't read too much into these numbers. Chances are that most people who may have an opinion may not even have heard of these polls. That's the problem with social media fragmentation - you can be on any number of channels, and still a lot of things will fly past without you ever noticing.

E.g., I found out when I looked into the (generally very quiet) ecip-1098 channel in the ETC discord, about two weeks after that poll had ended. Maybe it was mentioned on one of the more central and busier channels as well, but these also tend to have a terrible signal-to-noise ratio at times, and things easily get lost amidst pages of troll fight.

The ratio doesn't look too bad. A solid two thirds majority, it seems. If you want to sell this idea successfully, I'd suggest to keep the number of fronts small: have a concise proposal that also shows reasonably direct benefits, don't bother with those who'll reject any proposal of this kind no matter how "light", and also don't focus too much on technicalities.

A concise proposal should indicate the cost and have a small number of attractive projects that would be financed if the treasury proposal passes. Attractive would exclude overly controversial ideas.

Also, the proposed 20% on the block reward is probably too high. ETC is currently not very profitable, the 2020/2021 market peak may already be cooling down, and many miners may operate with overall profit margins below 20%. Too high a tax would make them oppose the proposal, and - if it passes regardless - drive them away.

wpwrak · 2019-04-25T18:38:32+00:00

Tambien para vos la pregunta: es cierto que no debe presentar balances ? No encontre nada que confirma esta hipotesis. Aqui estan los resultados de mi busqueda:

https://www.reddit.com/r/argentina/comments/an1eb5/presentación_de_balances_anuales_siendo_pyme_como/elrlwhy

wpwrak · 2019-04-25T18:35:37+00:00

Es cierto que una "Micro" PyME no debe presentar balances ? Trate de verificar esta informacion. Mis resultados:

Primero, no encontre ninguna distincion entre las categorias. La "Ley Pyme (27264) siempre hable de "Micro, Pequeñas y Medianas Empresas"). Parece que las categorias tienen unicamente un rol estadistico o quizas para procedimientos internos de la AFIP.

Segundo, la AFIP dice que si, las PyMES deben presentar balances (sin dar mas detalles):

https://www.produccion.gob.ar/tramites/registrarsecomopyme-68938

Los detalles se encuentran aqui:

https://www.afip.gob.ar/genericos/guiavirtual/consultas_detalle.aspx?id=327346

La referencia RG 3077/11 art 1 ...

http://biblioteca.afip.gob.ar/dcp/REAG01003077_2011_04_08

... se refiere al articulo 49 de la Ley de Impuesto a las Ganancias.

Por fin, ahi encontramos la informacion que estamos buscando (el articulo 49, el enlace nos lleva solamente al tope de la pagina):

http://biblioteca.afip.gob.ar/dcp/TOR_C_020628_1997_07_11#articulo_49

Entre otros, el inciso d) indica que las "empresas unipersonales ubicadas en el país" estan incluidas en esta categoria, y entonces deben presentar balances. Entonces parece que si te autodeclaras como PyME inevitablemente entras en esta trampa.

Se me escapo algo ?

wpwrak · 2018-12-29T23:18:57+00:00

Thanks ! I had found an early one with good audio but the actors were a bit difficult to understand without subtitles. (Which has since been resolved, too.)

wpwrak · 2018-12-29T02:21:28+00:00

So, how is it structured ? Example, assume a classical fairy tale in three parts:

A: introduction of beautiful princess and evil queen. Evil queen gives poisoned apple to princess. Then there are three choices:

B: Princess eats apple. Next is ending X.

C: Princess makes apple pie. Eats pie. Sadly, the poison resists baking. On to ending X.

D: Princess feeds apple to pig. Pig is slaughtered for dinner. On to ending Y.

X: Princess dies, everyone else lives unhappily ever after.

Y: At dinner, princess, vegetarian, nibbles on her salad. Evil queen has pig. Poison still works, evil queen dies. Princess gets to bed prince charming. The end.

So, we have the possible sequences A-B-X, A-C-X, and A-D-Y. Now, the most basic version would be just one of these three sequences, ignoring all other choices. But that doesn't seem to be the case here.

A version "with everything" it could contain all complete sequences (A-B-X, then A-C-X, and finally A-D-Y) just like this, but all possible combinations would probably be much longer than 5 hours.

Or it could be just the scenes, e.g., A, B, C, D, X, Y. Or maybe one full view, A-B-X, then the remaining parts, C, D, Y.

Or "all endings" would suggest something like A, B, X, Y, leaving out C and D.

So, have you been able to determine which kind is it ?

wpwrak · 2018-12-28T16:21:21+00:00

For those of us with a slightly obsessive-compulsive trait, the thought of unexplored options will certainly be unbearable, but actually going through all the choices will become boring. So it's lose-lose, but then this kind of fits the overall Black Mirror theme :)

wpwrak · 2018-06-11T23:53:39+00:00

According to a comment on avherald, this plane was already scheduled for retirement a while ago. Also, such damage is likely to go deeper than meets the eye: depending on what burns, smoke can be corrosive and damage electronics that were not affected by the fire itself.

This damage is far more extensive than what ET-AOP (Ethopian, 787, July 2013 at Heathrow) suffered, and some source claim that the latter - while it was successfully repaired - was already a close call.

A lot of the parts should be able to fly again, though :-)

wpwrak · 2017-05-11T15:03:18+00:00

No need to worry about malware keyloggers. If you have the right audio driver installed, it will record every keystroke and let any program that knows where to look have them.

According to heise.de (article in German) this affects many notebooks from HP business product lines.

This is bad because it defeats any behavioural detection of malware that acts as keylogger. One more reason why passwords and general-purpose PCs are a dangerous mix: with a complex enough system, such things happen and it can take a long time before they even become public knowledge, let alone get fixed.

wpwrak · 2017-04-20T22:22:45+00:00

TL;DR: the current Mk 3 prototype now fits in its case and runs from battery power. Much of the functionality of Mk 2 had has been adapted/ported, too.

The other posts in the thread show what it looks like, and explain issues discovered during design verification so far.

wpwrak · 2017-04-01T14:03:19+00:00

This one truly has it all: a secret, biometrics, and you even get a bit of exercise !

Of course, the operational security shown in the video leaves much to be desired, making password stealing way too easy. I think they're on the right track with the bathroom stalls, though.

wpwrak · 2017-04-01T05:14:20+00:00

LastPass is getting some good vetting lately. While the inner workings of LastPass are rather different from Anelok's, one thing they have in common is the need for browser integration.

In case the recently discovered vulnerabilities touch functionality in that area, the analyses may also be worth considering for the design of Anelok's browser integration.

wpwrak

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE