Raiden Network – High Speed Asset Transfers for Ethereum
raiden.network
raiden.network
Lol, its almost as if Ethereum is the alpha stage test environment for Bitcoin.
It even has its own bug bounty program called "The DAO" that pays up to 150 million dollars!
Anyway bad time to enter Ethereum, they have much bigger problems than scaling (see: hard fork for DAO).
Watching some of the talks from the first Ethereum Dev convention highlights this hypocrisy as they specifically advocate for "the code is law".
I still have a vested interest in Ethereum as an Ether holder, but the last few weeks have not really impressed me about it's communities adherence to their stated values.
I think you can tell by the way I phrased the question I disagree. I own < $10 in DAO so I don't think I'm too biased here, and I believe in a pow system if you can get a majority the miners to agree than nearly any decision is justified.
I am not as worried about it in the longer term, but it's a big setback in the immediate term. Ethereum will have to convince the world that it has truly returned to "the code is law" at some point in the future.
The reversal of opinion in parts of the ethereum community regarding bailouts is incredible. The only thing more shocking is that they appear unable to recognize it.
I don't want that in my cryptocurrency voting pool, so I'll pay less to enter it.
Raiden is a project that will work on any blockchain running EVM code, not only the blockchain that has had this DAO drama. So, for example, many of the internal private blockchains in use at major banks and corporations will be able to benefit from Raiden.
There is an interesting discussion to be had about the merits of Turing-complete (EVM) vs not Turing-complete (Bitcoin script), but you have chosen to focus on some off-topic drama instead.
What is the purpose of a "private blockchain"? Why not just use a traditionally centralized application if your organization is the only user?
They are generally replacing trusted third parties like clearinghouses. Instead of needing to trust (and pay for) a third party clearinghouse running a centralized db, these enterprises just need to trust that 1/3 of the participants in the consortium running the blockchain won't collude to attack the protocol. And even if there is an attack, there will be a big paper trail.
You may ask "why not just use a BFT database system with signed logs?" Well, this is what a blockchain basically is, wrapped in a package with a bunch of other stuff.
Any entity which can mount a 50% attack in a private permissioned blockchain, would be known to all participant. Average Joe isn't mounting such an attack, because his key doesn't really have write access to the blockchain, only read access.
It seems like in cases where extremely large amounts of money are at risk, we still haven't developed computers that should be completely trusted with it.
No. The DAO attack wasn't a 50% attack - it was a bug in the contract.
It seems like in cases where extremely large amounts of money are at risk, we still haven't developed computers that should be completely trusted with it.
That's the point of the blockchain.
As for Raiden itself, I think that the forthcoming return of the Snake network will largely bring cheer to those who dislike it, and largely overshadow it. [JOKE]
It's kind of like giving someone a signed check for $1 and telling them "I'll give you another check for $2 tomorrow if you don't actually cash that one." The party doesn't have to trust you for the $1 you've already given them.
Still many ifs, but if it works, there could be some interesting advantages for speed and scalability.