@rumblerocking gets straight to the point. This is a three-part answer.
29 Dec 2023, 13:52
@rumblerocking gets straight to the point!
This is a three-part answer.
1. Immutable is an odd, although traditional, word to use for a decentralized system that can be attacked from all sides for all time.
To build a robust system, Geeq assumes attackers will try anything.
Same news in other sources
329 Dec 2023, 14:08
2. Smart contracts.
Smart contracts have the same potential security flaws and more.
- Outputs on a L1 are validated by the consensus of the L1. There's no choice except to accept the security flaws (alternatively phrased as "security assumptions") of the L1.
Geeq is a Layer0.
Smart contracts. Smart contracts have the same potential security flaws and more.
2. Smart contracts.
Smart contracts have the same potential security flaws and more.
- Outputs on a L1 are validated by the consensus of the L1. There's no choice except to accept the security flaws (alternatively phrased as "security assumptions") of the L1.
Geeq is a Layer0.
29 Dec 2023, 14:05
for a moment? That seems unthinkable, but it's trusted as much as Centralized Exchanges are (because they're all centralized) and yet centralized exchanges are hacked.
So, proof of authenticity and validity at every moment is what Geeq provides.
It's better than immutability.
for a moment.
for a moment? That seems unthinkable, but it's trusted as much as Centralized Exchanges are (because they're all centralized) and yet centralized exchanges are hacked.
So, proof of authenticity and validity at every moment is what Geeq provides.
It's better than immutability.
29 Dec 2023, 14:03
- It's not good for data to be accepted once and then suspended or possibly hard forked later, which poses a threat to reliability for the users.
- It's not good to have malicious actors change the data undetected (unprovably). What if a centralized block explorer is compromised
- It's not good for data to be accepted once and then suspended or possibly hard forked later, which poses a threat to reliabili
- It's not good for data to be accepted once and then suspended or possibly hard forked later, which poses a threat to reliability for the users.
- It's not good to have malicious actors change the data undetected (unprovably). What if a centralized block explorer is compromised