Vitalik reviewed Harmony consensus

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Thank you based money skeleton. Now we rise.

Attached: 1518107464416.png (646x700, 169K)

Fuck you

fake alarm, vitalic can't figure it out for years now and now they play with magic number

>bullish

That's it. BTC, ETH, Link, and ONE is the chadfolio of 2020

Should I put my 300 BNB into this?

Maybe

lol. Laugh at those guys.

God this really makes me feel like a brainlet. Usually I'm pretty good about being able to decipher jargon with just context and tangential knowledge, but I really can't figure out what the fuck skelly is talking about here.

STOP DUMPING AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Just use a binary to ASCII converter and you are good to go

01000111 01100101 01110100 00100000 01100010 01101001 01110100 01100011 01101111 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100110 01100001 01110011 01110100 0001010 0001010 01010011 01101001 01101101 01110000 01101100 01111001 00100000 01100111 01101111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01101000 01110100 01110100 01110000 00111010 00101111 00101111 01100010 01101001 01110100 01100011 01101111 01101001 01101110 00101101 01100111 01100101 01101110 01100101 01110010 01100001 01110100 01101111 01110010 00101110 01101111 01101110 01101100 01101001 01101110 01100101 0001010 0001010 01000001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01101110 01101011 00100000 01101101 01100101 00100000 01101100 01100001 01110100 01100101 01110010

he means to say he thought about forcing nodes not to censor txs. So that means if a node pushes a new block, another node can tell it, uh uh nah nigga you didn't put this tx in. Will probably lead to some issues.
He's interested in this new approach of using the "this nigga didn't put a tx in his last block" to oust the block making nigga and assign a new one.

At least that's what I gathered.

From what I understood the Harmony protocol blocks have a leader who authenticates transactions for 40 blocks (instead of every block having to chose a leader to authenticate it). Vitalik's is concerned that if a leader is found to be malicious (censors a transaction) then the protocol will censor all transactions for that 40 blocks round. That as you may guess would cause slowness and instability. Vitalik is saying he has thought about using the condition that a block is only valid for leadership (of a single block mind you) if he has not censored any transactions, but is afraid that approach might cause too much instability if, for example, there's an attack and the validators can not reach a consensus on what was censored and what was not. Harmony's approach is interesting, according to vitalik, because the validators can vote in a new leader if 2/3s of them agree that an X number of blocks don't have the same transactions, meaning the leader has censored them and is compromised. Thus a new leader is chosen and the protocol doesn't have to censor all the transactions for 40 blocks, keeping the integrity and speed of the protocol.

How is this different from how ethereum ousts frontin ass niggas talkin bout "that transaction never happened" and shit? It was my understanding that this was already how blockchain worked

In most POW consensus based blockchains
whoever mines the block is the king honcho and can censor whoever he wants

Wow, even vitalik seems to be impressed. BULLISH AS FUCK

So glad I have a suicide stack of 500k

it's more like a making it stack fren