RE: Reponse to Vitalik's Written Remarks

[teamsteem]

Vitalik just answered Dan's latest piece so we might expect a response from @dan.

I guess I'm not the only one wishing for it. But we'll see if Dan's see it as worthy of his time.

Comments

[songminer]

I loved this comment on Vitalik's post:

"Vitalik,

Hey, I was bummed to hear you didn't have a steem account, you know... they're free! So it's really easy to get one, and you can just start posting right away! I mean, you don't have to pay anything to post... you just sign up and start writing. There's a lot of great content there too! I'm sure you're busy with Ethereum but if you have a little time... I mean with 3 second block times, you won't have to wait to see your post go live, and then, when people vote for you, you'll get some extra Steem, so you'll never have to worry about bandwidth again! :P Well anyway, I secured a couple of accounts for you, since you pretty much announced to the whole world that your name wasn't registered there. :) @vbuterin & @vitalikbuterin. You're welcome!"

[matthewtimothy]

Why is his payment declined? Im new here..!

[sandwich]

Dan already has a shitload of Steem, he may be voluntarily declining payout to avoid draining the reward pool.

[tommyquest]

i believe that when @dan writes about steem, eos and other topics related to the steemit community he declines payment. i read his reasoning on another post some time ago

[charles1]

wow, thanks @teamsteem for sharing Vitalik response..interesting indeed. I am sure that @dan will have a great response of his own. Looking forward to seeing it.

[eosfan]

making economic bets on next block producer encourages collusion and cooperation rather than competition

vitalik ignores collusion & centralization aspect of that critique completely and even shows that they will literally punish validators that disagree with status quo even if they are the majority:

the idea that we can create a protocol where it is expensive for the validators to attack the protocol, even if they are a majority.

as long as there are at least some "honest" nodes that refuse to follow along a malicious majority, such an attack is expensive.

Minority deciding for majority literally is centralization.

Lets also remember they used a 72% premine and regular ICO for distribution which already suggest centralization in casper. And literally nothing has changed about eth centralization demonstrated before such as abusing codebase, holding funding and updates hostage to get anything they want to happen and decide which chain is real:

note how Vitalik brings up carbon vote as example in low voter turn out. he forgot to mention that his vote was "official" for only 12 hours and yet they still used it to justify coding bailout of money (including vitalik's and other core devs money) set to default - effectively creating new tx that confiscated money from people they disliked.