Tuur Demeester's Ethereum claims


#44

This claim is mostly subjective about the author’s perceived optimism level to be too strong or exaggerated over the development of scalability at a protocol level.

Agree that Ethereum scalability has been postponed multiple times.

Disagree that these promises have been overly optimistic or are unreachable


#45

All permissionless public blockchains can be forked hence all blockchain communities will have broken promises. This is not exclusive to Ethereum protocol making it a redundant claim/


#46

It’s a public permissionless turing-complete blockchain, you can build anything. Also this claim is not objectively negative or positive, it just shows the author’s biased towards Bitcoin which feels challenged by Ethereum’s sharing narrative.


#47

Agreed, if you only allow the protocol to transfer value from A to B and vice-versa you reduce attack surface significantly when compared to a turing complete platform. I have my doubts here if this is a feature or a bug


#48

Plasma is not a single project but a framework for designing applications with higher transaction throughput off-chain that is resolved on the mainchain. There are so many different implementations of Plasma including Plasma Cash, Plasma Debit, etc.
This concept was introduced a year ago to add scalability to applications on Ethereum without requiring layer 1 scalability and it already has thousands of teams working full-time on it.

Here is a breakdown Plasma related developments so far:


#49

If there was a single claim that personally triggered me was this one which showed the author’s lack of knowledge of any developments on Ethereum layer 2 scalability


#50

AGREE: Just like preethi, I agree that Ethereum has had a lot of hype in 2017. I also agree that Ethereum’s market cap is inflated. But I also agree the same is true for Bitcoin, and so does Tuur Demeester. He has mentioned this in an article posted four months ago that he suspects the price to fall further. So I do not believe Tuur is solely talking about Ethereum here, as he has mentioned being bearish on Bitcoin as recent as four months ago.


#51

Ethereum warp nodes are commonly misunderstood to reduced the security of the network because of the difference between utxo blockchains and smart-contract blockchains.
Besides storing blocks that cryptographically verify transaction history, Ethereum/EVM has a state snapshot attached to each block. This however is not required to verify transactions for future blocks and Ethereum nodes use warp sync to discard this state from older blocks and simply maintain state from new blocks.
Regardless the blockchain is always maintained and verified in full by each node with warp-sync turned on or off.


#52

can you share the articles you refer to? I’m happy to update my viewpoint if you can point me to those :slight_smile:


#53

Agree: I am still surprised it only took 6% of ETH holders to decide for the remaining 94%. The vote should have required a far higher percentage of ETH holders to participate.


#54

I actually only found one article, so I will update my post to reflect that.
Here is what I found- https://medium.com/@tuurdemeester/bitcoin-we-dont-expect-new-highs-in-2018-97e6a7a385f7

“We think the market likely needs more time to absorb the recent 30 month rally, which could produce lower prices. We don’t foresee new all time highs in Bitcoin for 2018, and unless data starts suggesting differently, we are expecting mostly sideways or lower price action.”


#55

thank you! I sincerely appreciate you backing it up with evidence.


#56

The interpreted meaning is that Bitcoin’s decentralization, immutability, SoV, monetary policy and smart contracts? Are better than Ethereum, without any explanations why.

  1. Decentralization, the number 1 argument used during the original Bitcoin civil war(the one that mattered) is that higher number of nodes equals the most decentralization. Ethereum has more nodes than Bitcoin, thus more decentralized? Another major argument from the Maximalists about Ethereum being centralized is that Vitalik is alive and well and helping build a roadmap for Ethereum, while Satoshi is gone or dead and thus Bitcoin dev is leaderless. What does Adam Beck and Blockstream in charge of Bitcoin development mean then? When Satoshi was alive did that mean Bitcoin was centralized? This silliness of this argument becomes apparent when one just thinks about it for 2 minutes.

  2. Immutability, on this matter, it’s clear that the target is the hard fork decisions surrounding the DoA hack. Where due to a relatively easy to fix bug, Vitalik chose to implement a hard fork to protect investors funds in the super early days of Ethereum. In software developments there are bugs and issues that arise just like this, and the fix is with re-writing/refactoring code and possibly hard forking to upgrade the protocol. Bitcoin has also done the same in its early days, there was a bug where billions of coins could be mined, and that was hard fork fixed, yet this was so early one most aren’t even aware of it. Ethereum is facing more scrutiny since Crypto has become more popular. Back to immutability, after the hard fork and Ethereum’s civil war, the mantra Code is Law arose with Ethereum Classic (ETC). As is apparent to anyone now, ETC lost that war, as BCH lost it’s civil war. Users voted with their SoV assets.

  3. Store of Value. Every single cryptocurrency by nature is a store of value, some much better than others, currently Ethereum is rank 3rd in overall market cap, and 2016 - early 2017 investors have seen their value grow. Later investors have lost money just as with every single crypto asset on the market, this makes it no different than Bitcoin in that regard.

  4. Asset Issuance (Monetary policy). I am a fan of Austrian economics and realized that this is what makes Bitcoin valuable and a better version of gold. Bitcoin has a fixed limited supply, this is one of the core benefits of the asset. Inflation is no inherently bad, over inflation and expanding inflation is. Gold was the world’s best money ledger for thousands of years, yet it still has an inflation rate, the key point with gold is that the inflation rate is small and hard to increase. With Ethereum, it’s inflation rate is practically nil, and getting smaller over time. Will Ethereum be a better SoV than Bitcoin? Probably not in the long run, but Ethereum is a better store of value than all Fiat currencies in the world. Same as Bitcoin.

  5. Smart Contracts. Ethereum has the lindy effect with smart contracts and it’s global state machine. Bitcoin smart contracts are too simple for any complex interactions or Dapps to be build with it. Also due to Bitcoin’s conservative development nature, which is one of their good key aspects, tokenized securities, real-world tokenization of value and a multitude of other programmable assets have a much greater chance to be built on Ethereum or another smart contract platform.

  6. Tuur’s last statement isn’t clear, and just appears to be a vague attack on Ethereum.


#58

Confirmed w/ caveat - Casper PoS and Sharding have been promoted as the layer 1 scaling solution(s) for the better part of 3.5 years. There are clients in test running MVPs of the spec (https://twitter.com/raulitojordan/status/1079085816209649664?s=21), and previously Parity had released a testnet implementation of Casper FFG which was deprecated over the summer as duplicative efforts in FFG and Sharding led the researchers to believe joining the efforts would yield a better result in a moderately extended timeframe. Roadmap accelerations were proposed following DevCon 4 which resulted in ETH 1.x, an intermediate milestone to get some near-term benefits from limiting the growth of state size and p2p network improvements in place sooner rather than waiting on full 2.0 deployment at a later date. Ethereum is 3.5 years old and these are complex problems. Comparatively, Bitcoin’s only scaling solution to date, LN took ~3.5 years of R&D, and they still call it a “beta.” Computer science is hard. Tweetstorm by Vitalik referencing this roadmap and changes: https://twitter.com/vitalikbuterin/status/1029900695925706753?s=21


#59

A larger point here is that security laws:

  1. Should not apply to Cryptocurrencies, and these laws are decades old, before computers existed.

  2. These laws should be re-written anyways for legacy securities. Someone should not have to make 200 thousand a year, or own a million in assets to be able to invest in some of the better financial vehicles of wealth generation. At the moment millions of Americans only have access to lottery tickets and 401ks which are losing value and with job security declining.

  3. It’s almost hilarious, but definitely sad that a lot of “Bitcoineers” are hoping for government regulation to hurt all perceived competition. I guess Anarcho-Capitalism is only good if it benefits you.


#60

Also Bitcoin Core and Blockstream have no open meetings what so ever. What does that mean? Nothing, both Bitcoin and Ethereum are open-sourced and decentralized.


#61

Confirmed w/ caveat - He is somewhat misrepresenting CBC here by simply calling it Casper/Sharding which may confuse the casual onlooker. He did this previously, claiming he cant keep track of all the specs, and it was rebutted: https://twitter.com/tuurdemeester/status/1070760364680335360?s=21 He again seems to be confusing CBC (a very ambitious far future state phase mostly in research by Vlad and not a prerequisite for Serenity) with Casper under ETH1.x/2.0 despite the mounds of responses to his previous tweet on it. CBC was peer reviewed by Muneeb Ali and co. understanding that the spec is incomplete and Work in Progress. The criticisms/assumptions are centered around the missing pieces as relevant to liveness and non-standard defintions Vlad uses. More discussion in this tweet thread provides clarity: https://twitter.com/muneeb/status/1070755328160079875?s=21 Also: https://twitter.com/muneeb/status/1070802670796062722?s=21


#62

Rejected - It is very clear if one does research beyond the bitcoin echochamber:

Raiden ERC-20 included: https://raiden-network.readthedocs.io/en/stable/index.html

Plasma Cash ERC-721 by Loom Network: https://ethresear.ch/t/loom-network-plasma-cash-for-erc721-tokens/2385

Connext Network/Hub ETH and ERC-20: https://medium.com/connext/our-first-hub-is-live-on-mainnet-b5660486635e

All three are “live” on mainnet (Raiden Red Eyes most recently).


#63

Weird flex for Lightning but Elizabeth Stark still considers the network in beta state as well. https://twitter.com/starkness/status/1063914570140606464?s=21 .User experience is still highly lacking and very much work in progress: https://twitter.com/abrkn/status/1078193601190989829?s=21


#64

Raiden only works with main-chain issued ERC20 tokens.

The exact opposite of Tuur’s claim. How can we trust anything else he says if he can get this completely wrong? It’s a complete lack of research.