|
|
|
|
|
by fijter
3098 days ago
|
|
1: By using a ternary number system, the amount of devices and cycles can be reduced significantly. In contrast to two-state devices, multistate devices provide better radix economy with the option for further scaling 2: Why is explained here: https://blog.iota.org/the-transparency-compendium-26aa5bb8e2... - CyberCrypt is hired to review and audit it. 3: The wallet is secure and does what it needs to do, no, it's not very pretty or user friendly but it works. A new wallet (Trinity wallet) will be released very soon. |
|
ad 2. From the article: "Let’s begin with the common sense, IOTA’s Tangle is a significant leap forward from blockchain". Why do you believe this subjective superlative when the protocol is still in beta and heavily contested? It's like saying: "Fusion reactors are a significant leap foward", while no production ready fusion reactors exist. You cannot make this claim unless you're willing to attest to the correctness and production-readiness. This seems common sense to me.
ad 2: What is this document? "The Transparency Compendium", "Transparency Report", "Blog post"? All of them are mentioned, but there is no mention whether this is an official statement, or just a sputter of random thoughts by the author. It seems official, but isn't.
ad 2: No mention of CyberCrypt in that article. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Also, Occam's Razor. That's what I like about the original bitcoin protocol, it's as simple as necessary, but not simpler.
ad 3: It doesn't need to be pretty or user friendly. The complaints are about people losing their IOTA's and all kind of other complaints. Please address these complaints head-on, instead of just making blanket remarks about user-friendliness.