Hence I think the focus should be spent on simplifying the underlying Bitcoin protocol, ossification, and striving towards as much decentralization as possible.
A friend, who's a seasoned CFA analyst, cited Buffett's criticism of Bitcoin that it's a nonproductive asset and most successful Bitcoin investors were "lucky", i.e. investing based on sentiment not skill (like valuing stocks based on DCF).
Of course I need to play defense 🙂 1/
First of all, I’ve always been a fan of Buffett. Love his autobiography “Snowball” and I take his compounding interest lesson to heart. In investing and everything else in life: everything compounds. Knowledge, friendship, etc. 2/
I also love his humility, most successful people have a lot of luck on their side, whether they know it or not. There’s no such thing as a self-made man (Ovarian Lottery theory). 3/
Alice: This year sucks. You know what’s almost as bad as 2020?
Bob: Yeah?
Alice: Multisig is still scary.
Nunchuk: Hold my beer.
1/
It’s somewhat ironic that for a technology that reveres decentralization as its central operating principle, Bitcoin still heavily relies on single point of failure as the dominant method of ownership. 2/
Applying S2F to things that are not integrals in nature is a mistake. Math is useful only when it’s applied correctly to phenomenon. It’s mental masturbation otherwise.
Examples of things with true S2F characteristics: population, CO2 concentration, the Bitcoin’s ledger (security strength as an integral of fee flows over time)
Last few words on @VladZamfir's poor piece of “work” (or is it propaganda?).
A 18-min rant to express what are some very simple ideas should be enough of a major red flag. But let me point out some tactics/fallacies. They are used elsewhere in this “space” too.
2/ First of all, Greg Maxwell explained verification-not-computation concept so well already so I highly recommend reading his full post, linked in @TuurDemeester ’s thread here.
I seriously hope Emin is not the only one teaching blockchain at @Cornell. Because he is dead wrong.
3/ Reducing PoW’s role to Sybil control is like an alien looking at cars and conclude that their main purpose is for protecting people from external objects. When they try to create the same thing, they might end up with something like the Flintstones’ car. 🙄