|
jpmeyer posted:i did not know until the dan olson video that the reason that ethereum and ethereum classic split was to reverse the dao "hack" (read: exploit of a known, documented security flaw that they never bothered to fix before going live) The ethereum and ethereum classic form was because one of the first use case called “the dao” wrote bad smart contracts that allowed people to exploit it. The flaw was not in ethereum itself but in the contracts people wrote to try and make it do a thing. Edit. What I’m trying to say is there was no flaw in ethereum. It was a smart contract that another entity wrote was buggy
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 05:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 00:17 |
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:The ethereum and ethereum classic form was because one of the first use case called “the dao” wrote bad smart contracts that allowed people to exploit it. The flaw was not in ethereum itself but in the contracts people wrote to try and make it do a thing. you must be explaining it wrong. code is law.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 05:49
|
|
|
TVsVeryOwn posted:you must be explaining it wrong. code is law. I must be code then, because I AM THE LAW. All I'm saying is Judge Dredd made more sense than crypto and NFTs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 05:51
|
|
|
I still kinda wanna make a collection. Or at least look into how ratfucked I could hypothetically get if I did make a collection.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 05:56
|
|
|
HolHorsejob posted:Did NFTs/smart contracts launch immediately with lovely monkey pics, or did they start by attempting to tie them to real/real-ish assets? (contracts to provide goods & services, physical property ownership, investments in companies that provide physical goods, etc.) According to the wikipedia, the below is the first NFT, though it was called something else: https://i.imgur.com/NpV3wD4.mp4 (right click to play) One of the co-creators later apologized, acknowledging that the current NFT landscape had an "extraordinary range of grifters and spammers". The newer "standard" NFT on Etherium is a ERC-721 token. There are lots of other chains and methods used though, since everyones got their own brand of bags, sub-bags, and/or bag derivatives to sell these days.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 06:09
|
|
|
buttcoin
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 06:34
|
|
|
TVsVeryOwn posted:I still kinda wanna make a collection. Or at least look into how ratfucked I could hypothetically get if I did make a collection. Just.... print your own? Like none of those people who bought apes or whatever actually own that art, it would have to be the coin makers themselves suing you even assuming they have the art rights in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 06:40
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Just.... print your own? Like none of those people who bought apes or whatever actually own that art, it would have to be the coin makers themselves suing you even assuming they have the art rights in the first place. I meant like try to mint a series of NFTs
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 06:43
|
|
|
You will absolutely lose your shirt. You will spend more minting the stupid things than you will ever get back from selling them, and that's overlooking any "oh gently caress working with this NFT-making shitbird" issues that may come up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 06:53
|
|
|
TVsVeryOwn posted:I meant like try to mint a series of NFTs are you aware it costs a couple hundred dollars to make the things and a several more hundred dollars to sell them to anyone? the whole thing is a grift to get people to buy fake money with real money, please don't
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 06:59
|
|
|
Mimesweeper posted:are you aware it costs a couple hundred dollars to make the things and a several more hundred dollars to sell them to anyone? Don't stop him yet, I want to see his MMO proposal
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:01
|
|
|
Mimesweeper posted:are you aware it costs a couple hundred dollars to make the things and a several more hundred dollars to sell them to anyone? I know this on an abstract intellectual level. I want to at least get back of the envelope numbers. Also I heard something about mint-on-demand so the token doesn't exist until it has a buyer. e: My NFTs would just be the 300ish avatar remixes I did back in like 2017 or whatever and would not confer any rights past, present or future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:02
|
|
|
TVsVeryOwn posted:I know this on an abstract intellectual level. I want to at least get back of the envelope numbers. Also I heard something about mint-on-demand so the token doesn't exist until it has a buyer. Thats the "free nft" limited to 50 blocks now. If you go that route you still need to find suckers willing to buy your thing for [profit]+[fees]
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:03
|
|
|
TVsVeryOwn posted:I know this on an abstract intellectual level. I want to at least get back of the envelope numbers. Also I heard something about mint-on-demand so the token doesn't exist until it has a buyer. Isn't the pro tier move to hype it up, and get people to buy in and then defraud them all? Edit - I'm still not sure how the rug pull scam works. Don't the creators have to spend money creating the NFTs in the first place? Also how do they drive the value up for the initial sale?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:14
|
|
|
Z the IVth posted:Isn't the pro tier move to hype it up, and get people to buy in and then defraud them all? That's where wash trades come in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:19
|
|
|
Ad by Khad posted:buttcoin god i miss the days
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:26
|
|
|
Shinjobi posted:god i miss the days remember when a goon sold the buttcoin blog to actual coiners who wanted to turn it into another shilling site? back when all this poo poo was actually funny? yeah
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:29
|
|
|
TVsVeryOwn posted:I know this on an abstract intellectual level. I want to at least get back of the envelope numbers. Also I heard something about mint-on-demand so the token doesn't exist until it has a buyer. Minting costs gas. Gas fees depend on current network utilization, among other things. And of course gas is paid in ETH, so the price of ETH impacts your cost of entry. OpenSea has mint-on-demand, but that works by doing as much as possible in OpenSea's own ecosystem. To enable that, OpenSea's smart contract has to connect to your wallet and do a bunch of stuff...which costs gas. So you're still paying out. I guess the question is why do you want to mint NFTs? The nature of the crypto ecosystem is such that you can't touch the poop even a little bit without getting your hands covered in poo poo. You have to create a wallet and buy ETH, and burn a bunch of carbon for the minting. And even if you sell any, which also costs gas and a ton of energy, you're getting paid in ETH, not dollars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:32
|
|
|
Somewhere out there in the multiverse is a timeline where the Cosbycoin joke ended up becoming an actually popular coin ala Dogecoin, and to this day people are still trading it while engaging in arguments about how the crimes of Bill Cosby shouldn't turn people off trading in the currency of the future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:35
|
|
|
Just use the ethereum testnet if you absolutely want to try creating a NFT. No need to spend money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:37
|
|
|
Z the IVth posted:Isn't the pro tier move to hype it up, and get people to buy in and then defraud them all? Typically, they promise that they'll spend their NFT sale profits on doing things that make the NFTs more attractive and raise the price. For example, they'll promise to spend a percentage of the profits on a dedicated marketing campaign, or promise a bunch of gifts and benefits and lotteries for NFT buyers, or they'll promise that the NFTs will play a key role in a later videogame, or whatnot. A rugpull is essentially a crowdfunding scam, but with crypto. People buy in thinking they'll get exclusive access to special bonuses the campaign is promising to use the profits to create, except instead of making those bonuses, the issuer just takes the money and runs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:39
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Don't stop him yet, I want to see his MMO proposal only so long as step 11 or 12 is a crypto-utopia involving buying an island.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:41
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:only so long as step 11 or 12 is a crypto-utopia involving buying an island. cruise ship nation, but go off
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:45
|
|
|
How long are we gonna let GhostTTY keep posting weird graphs before we tell them that market prices are representations/manifestations of aggregate sentiment rather than the result of a mechanistic ruleset within some clockwork monetary universe? Markets are stochastic, and therefore, as is written in the prospectus of every fund in existance, past performance is no indicator of future results. This is why insider trading is illegal: having privileged information lets you move before the market's sentiment catches up to a disruptive new reality. If you could know what was going to happen based on haruspicy of bar charts, insider information wouldn't be worth a drat and we wouldn't live in a universe where Martha Stewart smokes up with Snoop and Willie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:45
|
|
|
TVsVeryOwn posted:cruise ship nation, but go off So, the NFT is going to represent a valid H1B visa? I suppose it's creative in some way. Maybe it's about as enforceable as the ownership of the dune book.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:49
|
|
|
mdxi posted:How long are we gonna let GhostTTY keep posting weird graphs before we tell them that market prices are representations/manifestations of aggregate sentiment rather than the result of a mechanistic ruleset within some clockwork monetary universe? Markets are stochastic, and therefore, as is written in the prospectus of every fund in existance, past performance is no indicator of future results. If you missed it, I suggest checking out this post and some that follow. GhosTTTY is kind of like the thread mascot at this point. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?noseen=0&threadid=3838405&pagenumber=1289&perpage=40#post520833941
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 07:54
|
|
|
CaptainSarcastic posted:If you missed it, I suggest checking out this post and some that follow. GhosTTTY is kind of like the thread mascot at this point. My bad. But I reserve the right to name my Alan Parsons Project tribute/concept album about cryptocurrency The Haruspex of Bar Charts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 08:14
|
|
|
I also appreciate that clarification because I was seeing these absolutely wild charts and had no idea what any of them meant. I'm surprised no one made ghosty's avatar the loss edit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 10:15
|
|
|
i'm looking over the qubit hack apparently the major glitch in their code was this: there is an address on the ethereum blockchain 0x000000 or just 0x0. where everybody on the blockchain sends to just burn some of their tokens to balance out how many exist vs another coin or... just for funsies. it apparently is also the default address of lots of wallets so you just have people accidentally sending it to this wallet address here is a link from 5 years ago where someone asks if he can get some random token back from the address: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/5rd4co/ethereum_wallet_sends_to/ i still don't know the intricate technical details of the hack because to be frank, i have no clue how to browse those blockchain explorer websites.. but the gist is this: the qubit bridge was designed to allow users to move coins between ethereum and binance coin. to handle this they have an intermediary coin: xETH. xETH is not created until ETH is created, xETH then gets converted to Binance Coin. they wrote a "deposit" function to handle their code. they actually audited their code! the auditors advised them on how to fix their code.. they made a new function, "depositETH" it's fully audited! they did not bother to audit the "deposit" function. both the deposit and depositETH function eventually call the same deposit event. this event means that the user successfully deposited ETH into the qubit bridge. only problem is one function was audited and the other one wasn't. because they left the code in their contract, they could tell you to use one function call.. but there's nothing preventing you from using the other function call if you read the contract carefully. anyways, the way the hacker exploited the code was apparently because you could "pretend" you're trying to exchange coins from address 0x0. the contract checks that this address is whitelisted.. (the developers manually did this, which is why some people suspect that it was a rugpull hack.. but most likely they were just lazy and this let them sidestep some issue with burning their intermediary coin.. honestly not sure.) it also checks to see the amount you're trying to exchange (say 9999) then it executes a call "tokenAddress.safeTransferFrom(depositer, address(this), amount);" see it says, "safeTransferFrom" so surely it is very safe right? well normally if you make a transfer and the depositer does not have the actually goods you eventually get an error back from the call and it would revert the transaction.. but apparently if the tokenAddress is 0x0 in this case.. it just silently fails and does not throw an error. so if there's no error it must be fine and the code gladly allows the "deposit" to go through! hacker does this enough times to get the xETH intermediary coin. then he goes onto the binance blockchain and converts the intermediary coin into binance coin. now he has all the money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 10:30
|
|
|
Z the IVth posted:Isn't the pro tier move to hype it up, and get people to buy in and then defraud them all?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 12:17
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:both the deposit and depositETH function eventually call the same deposit event . . . the contract checks that this address is whitelisted.. (the developers manually did this, which is why some people suspect that it was a rugpull hack.. but most likely they were just lazy and this let them sidestep some issue with burning their intermediary coin.. honestly not sure.) [taking notes] mhm mhm yes, this sounds very much like an innocent mistake and not a rugpull. Unrelatedly: would anyone like to develop a
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 12:30
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:i'm looking over the qubit hack apparently the major glitch in their code was this: has it occurred to anyone else that blockchains might actually be bad, and not good?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 12:47
|
|
|
Hammerite posted:has it occurred to anyone else that blockchains might actually be bad, and not good? Not until this exact moment. Thank you, OP, I am now wise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 13:20
|
|
|
mdxi posted:My bad. Bitcoin will reach 100 million when Harry Potter destroys the last Haruspex.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 14:15
|
|
|
mdxi posted:How long are we gonna let GhostTTY keep posting weird graphs Wait is he posting those like, seriously? I just assumed he was pulling stuff from reddit and posting it as a joke. Like, "haha let's laugh, together, at people who think like this."
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 14:54
|
|
|
It's possible that someone who habitually posts graphs, but seems incapable of labelling both axes in spite of many a hint, might be nothing more than a drat fool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 15:14
|
|
|
BigBadSteve posted:It's possible that someone who habitually posts graphs, but seems incapable of labelling both axes in spite of many a hint, might be nothing more than a drat fool. It really would be possible to think gtits is a Bitcoin Mocker if you hadn’t been following this thread as long as some of us, simply because in the last, well, couple of years gtits often does drive-by no-context-or-labels graphs without any discussion or dialog. He does occasionally drop solid  -worthy comments “Butts $100k by New Year’s,” etc), but it’s easy to miss ‘em amongst the log-graphs that just sorta “appear” when #goup and then pauses as # inevitably go down. This is a pattern of lots and lots of bitchcoiners on SA threads stretching back to the first iteration of the megathreads a decade ago. Some of us F5 the gently caress outta these threads, though, and understand exactly what they are attempting to muddle their way through because the same posters keep. Showing. Up. And. Posting. Bullshit. At least before Seraph stopped taking his meds and posting crazy-style (I honestly worry for him still) would converse and allow us to discuss butt-issues even though he never accepted our anti-butt positions. HamSandwiches was sorta the same, but ghost TiTTY just shitposts nonsense graphics once and moves on, which could confuse those who have lives and aren’t reading and refreshing multiple Bitcoin-mock threads like some of us. Goddammit; do I secretly miss Seraph? Holy poo poo hang on, it’s nine am cst I gotta go take my meds 🤪 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 15:56
|
|
|
Knuckles gets scammed https://twitter.com/TurboJehtt/status/1487153506142228482
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 16:08
|
|
|
The "$100k btc by the end of 2021" broken record poster was salt_shaker (or something close to that) who got probed for a month in the middle of December. Oddly, they haven't come back to the thread yet to explain how their failure is actually good for bitcoin.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 16:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 00:17 |
|
|
Zil posted:Knuckles gets scammed Lol this owns....
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2022 16:17
|
|
