HNHacker News
TopNewBestAskShowJobs

jjranalli

33 karma · joined June 28, 2019

Twitter @jj_ranalli
submissionscomments
jjranalli··on Show HN: Merge to earn – reward system for open source development
TLDR; Compromising Merge to earn projects is not worth for an attacker as it requires:

- satisfying multiple hard requirements,

- yields low rewards, and

- can be easily and quickly mitigated by project owners.

Full answer:

---

What you describe is actually not possible for a number of reasons.

In order for an attack on a Merge to earn project to have success, an attacker needs to obtain:

- Access as owner / maintainer to the Github repo, and

- The private keys of the wallets of enough safe owners to autonomously execute transactions. The general rule for multisigs is, the higher the quorum, the higher the safety.

In absence of both conditions, project maintainers have plenty of time to get control of the situation, and the attacker couldn't do anything. In fact, even if a Github account is compromised and fake PRs are merged to give themselves fat rewards, nothing happens until multisig owners actually execute the malicious transactions.

But, even though extremely improbable, let's assume an attacker manages to do that and the worst possible scenario happens. What then?

Due to how slicers are designed, the attacker wouldn't be able to get money received until that point out of the slicer, but only what has been received after he gained control. The Slice protocol has been designed to safeguard against these kind of attacks and malicious usage.

On the contrary, to mitigate an attack, project owners just need to reinitialize MTE for their repo with a new slicer and multisig, distribute ownership to contributors as it was before the attack, and redirect any new income and donations to the new slicer. This is technically trivial and can be done in minutes.

jjranalli··on Show HN: Merge to earn – reward system for open source development
Actually that's not necessary, with Merge to earn it's theoretically possible to send whatever amount to only the contributors of a PR (instead of all contributors).

Imagine putting money into a vault that gets released to contributors on PR merge.

jjranalli··on Show HN: Merge to earn – reward system for open source development
Maintainers can and are encouraged to specify the entity of the prospective reward in the issue (see examples here https://github.com/slice-so/merge-to-earn/issues).

However this should be limited to maintainers as rewards in merge to earn are related to actual ownership of the project and its future earnings.

But anyone could open an issue, and then the maintainer can add a tag to it depending on the reward it thinks it could be worth.

At the end though it's important to note that the contributor opening the PR has the final word on the amount being requested for the work done.

jjranalli··on Show HN: Merge to earn – reward system for open source development
Thanks for reporting! Unfortunately can't reproduce on my end so additional details would be welcome (is there any log in the browser console?). Will figure it out anyway!
jjranalli··on Show HN: Merge to earn – reward system for open source development
Merge to earn uses smart contracts to make this possible in a permissionless and automated way. It also doesn't impose projects to use any cryptocurrency (only ETH is always accepted, any other must be explicitly specified).

I'd be more interested to hear opinions that go beyond the crypto = scam argument.

jjranalli··on Show HN: Merge to earn – reward system for open source development
Figuring out the rules for contributions is definitely a challenge, but should not be up to a tool like MTE to solve as it depends on too many variables. Each project should have its own rules and grow to reward equitably its contributors.

We definitely plan to contribute to this, and even propose flexible guidelines for projects to base their estimates on.

jjranalli··on Show HN: Merge to earn – reward system for open source development
MTE rewards are designed to give partial ownership of the project to a contributor. So I'd say it's natural that such issues are opened by project owners.

But the bounty system you mention is interesting. This is already implementable in the current system (ie open an issue and commit to give $ to those who fix it), but you'd need to peek at the PR solving the issue and manually send $ to those who fixed it.

We can easily automate that.

jjranalli··on Show HN: Merge to earn – reward system for open source development
- If a PR solves an known issue, maintainers could specify the prospective reward in advance on the issue. The contributor should though always be able to set their own terms, discuss them with maintainers, and see them go through once the PR is merged.

- Maintainers could theoretically steal the code in a PR, but since everything is public they would lose reputations with contributors and the community. Future contributors will be wary of opening new PR in case maintainers act in bad faith.

- MTE doesn't impose any restriction or rules when it comes to how contributions should be managed, so it's up to project owners to come up with their own rules.

- I'd expect projects to specify objective rules to quantify rewards, for example based on effort required, task difficulty and impact on the project. I would also expect that estimates would naturally become more accurate as the project and number of maintainers grow

jjranalli··on Show HN: Merge to earn – reward system for open source development
Projects can get income or donations and still be open source, what matters is the license. While allowing contributors to be rewarded for their work generally creates healthy incentives.

Handling rewards in public discussions on Github naturally prevent bad behaviours from maintainers (ie making bad-faith choices as to what does or doesn't get merged) as they would lose reputation with their contributors and community.

jjranalli··on Show HN: Slice – Decentralized stores with NFT-based ownership
The Slice website is merely an interface for interacting with its contracts on Ethereum. Just this fact has profound implications on ownership and privacy, and makes it hard to compare it with any centralised service.

True ownership means that no-one can ever stop you from selling content, or earn from it. It also comes with the freedom of selling part of your ownership to others.

It introduces the concept of NFTs with objective value (based on slicer accumulated ETH) which makes it possible to leverage the unique characteristics of web3 and NFTs in real world applications.

Composability makes it possible to seamlessly combine Slice with any other contract or web3 service. This is the case for example for Slice used as tool to handle payments to DAOs, or to establish temporary project based on collaborations between DAOs and individuals.

I agree that at first sight it may seem like it introduces unneeded complications with respect to traditional centralised services (especially from a customer's perspective), but comparing Slice to existing marketplaces doesn't really have sense as it effectively represents a new way of owning, creating and selling content.

jjranalli··on Show HN: Slice – Decentralized stores with NFT-based ownership
Customers and creators both largely benefit from a fully decentralized solution such as product stores on Slice, for example with true ownership over content and unparalleled privacy. I don't think fiat payments will ultimately prove to be a critical issue.

That said, support for fiat as alternative payment method can be indeed achieved, such as payments with any crypto. It takes a lot of work, but it's on the roadmap

jjranalli··on Show HN: Slice – Decentralized stores with NFT-based ownership
Slice is a platform to create and manage slicers: smart contracts designed to split any ETH received among their owners, proportionally to their owned "slices".

Slices are ERC1155 tokens used to subdivide slicer ownership, which allow their owner to redeem any due ETH from the relative slicer.

Each slicer comes with a decentralized store, which acts as its main source of income. It currently allows to sell files of any kind, and in future even physical objects or services via the Slice API. Products data are stored on IPFS and encrypted so that only those who buy them can see their content (not even Slice can).

In other words, slicers represent a specific entity, project or collectible, and can be used to split payments among token holders and sell products of any kind in a decentralized manner.

Slices can be transferred or sold on Opensea like any other token. Since the ETH income generated by slicers is public, slices are effectively tradable tokens with an objective value. This opens up to many exciting use cases with slicers acting as an independent, decentralized payments infrastructure and counterpart to real-world applications.

For more details and examples, check out this Twitter thread (https://twitter.com/slice__so/status/1463052621841846280?s=2...)

jjranalli··on Ask HN: What unprecedented measures could be taken to stop climate change?
I could be wrong, but I doubt the approach you described alone could reduce emissions at the scale required.

What I'm trying to say is that (I think) the root of the problem are the economic incentives for fossil fuel companies. It's easier for them to compromise with governments (who can't strong-arm them) and pay fines (which in turn gets charged to their customers). I don't think this problem has ever been solved.

But what if for some reason consumers, at a large scale, stopped paying for energy produced with fossil fuels? Wouldn't they be forced to adapt?

Consumers may be emotional, but can also be swayed with the right incentives (governments typically play this part). I assume this to be extremely hard of course, but theoretically I feel like it would be the only way to align all parties in the same direction.

jjranalli··on Ask HN: What unprecedented measures could be taken to stop climate change?
China indeed seems to be the hardest problem to solve.

But wouldn't it be better to go after the demand for energy from fossil fuels, instead of supply? I wonder if there has ever been a large scale attempt at this

jjranalli··on Ask HN: What unprecedented measures could be taken to stop climate change?
Carbon removal tech is such a fundamental piece in all this, and I'm glad Stripe is leading the way. Research takes time though, so hopefully they reach that stage soon
jjranalli··on Show HN: Slice – Decentralized payments infrastructure based on fractional NFTs
Thanks for the feedback!

- The recipient for payments is the slicer, which is a smart contract. If you go onto the slicers page you can copy its address, and yes you can send it ETH however you prefer - not just through the website! (In fact, the payment on the platform is actually a standard ETH transfer). Currently it won't be able to accept other tokens, but I plan to add support eventually in a future release.

- The creation of a slicer involves the mint of ERC1155 tokens, the creation of the slicer smart contract, and establishes the link between the contract and the tokens (so that when a token transfer happens it is also reflected in the slicer logic).

I'm sure most of this aspects will get clear as I publish the contract source code, which I plan to deploy on GitHub soon (btw I'm also looking for devs who may be interested in contributing)

Feel free to reach out on twitter @slice__so, or via email hey@slice.so!

jjranalli··on Show HN: Covid Guard – The global Covid-19 screening platform
Covid Guard is a platform aimed at collecting and analysing anonymous health information to get a real-time overview of the pandemic and prevent new outbreaks.

We leverage a source of information still untapped in most countries – the symptoms of the population – which can provide valuable insights without having to rely on limited resources, such as swabs or serological tests.

By using the platform, users directly contribute to the safety of their own community while receiveing constant updates on their areas of interest (through maps and customised reports).

Our aim is not to directly identify those who may have contracted COVID-19, but rather to statistically determine high-risk areas and identify anomalous patterns days or weeks in advance compared to conventional solutions (i.e. contact-tracing apps). That way, we allow authorities to promptly focus their efforts on the most critical areas, making the most of the tools at their disposal.