[finnh]

I've posted this before [0], but it's still apropos regarding the foolishness that is Ethereum.

[Ethereum] only makes sense if all of the following obtain:

(a) the code is 100% bug-free (b/c accidents cannot be rewound)

(b) all code-writers are 100% honest (their code does what they say)

(c) all contract participants are 100% perfect code readers (so as to not enter into fraudulent contracts)

(Strictly speaking, only one of (b) and (c) needs to be true).

None of these conditions will ever obtain.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14471465

[vvpan]

And yet the marketcap of the funds locked in a subset of contracts on Ethereum is almost 10 billion today (https://defipulse.com/) and I have been using a popular contract wallet for a while to hold my funds and transact with friends. So clearly it cannot be nearly as catastrophic as you mention, no?

[sfkdjf9j3j]

Is it really meaningful to talk about market cap when there are no underlying assets? The value could be entirely (or almost entirely) speculation.

[vvpan]

Sure, but it is still redeemable value for an attacker, yet attacks are relatively scarce. Or scarce enough for people to keep putting money into it. That's the point I was trying to make.

I know what you mean by "no underlying assets" but I'd say it's arguable. Does BTC (WBTC) have value? By this time it seems like it does. There are also billions of dollars of "stablecoins" on the network. Are they a valid underlying asset? So far it seems like they are... Things have no underlying value until they all of a sudden do, I think that's the story of Bitcoin. A story of value too.