@robertwiblin Mainstream folk deontology seems to say that doing the work is legitimate if and only if you're operating in the context of an institution that has mainstream public legitimacy to do the work. The hope being that if the work is net-bad, the institution would lose its legitimacy.
@罗伯特维布林主流民间义务论似乎认为，当且仅当你在一个具有主流公共合法性的机构中运作时，做这项工作才是合法的。人们希望，如果这项工作真的很糟糕，该机构将失去其合法性。
RT: Secured #4 is out with major Bug Bounty Program updates!
One highlight: a *substantial* reward increase of up to $250,000, and doubled to $500,000(!) for mainnet-targeted upgrades that are live on public testnets. Happy bug hunting! 🐛
https://blog.ethereum.org/2022...
转发：Secured#4发布了重大漏洞赏金计划更新！
一个亮点是：奖金大幅增加，最高可达25万美元，翻了一番，达到50万美元（！）用于在公共测试网上实时进行针对mainnet的升级。猎虫快乐！🐛
https://blog.ethereum.org/2022...
@MTabarrok The difference between #2 and #4 is subtle and philosophically fascinating.
Though it gets weird in today's real world where a large fraction of the cost of boxes comes from risk aversion and regulation.
@MTabarrok#2和#4之间的区别是微妙的，在哲学上是迷人的。
尽管在今天的现实世界中，盒子的成本很大一部分来自风险规避和监管，这变得很奇怪。
RT: Secured #4 is out with major Bug Bounty Program updates!
One highlight: a *substantial* reward increase of up to $250,000, and doubled to $500,000(!) for mainnet-targeted upgrades that are live on public testnets. Happy bug hunting! 🐛
https://blog.ethereum.org/2022...
转发：Secured#4发布了重大漏洞赏金计划更新！
一个亮点是：奖金大幅增加，最高可达25万美元，翻了一番，达到50万美元（！）用于在公共测试网上实时进行针对mainnet的升级。猎虫快乐！🐛
https://blog.ethereum.org/2022...
@adietrichs Yeah I agree. My earlier hypothesis that the main problem was low priority fees now seems likely wrong (CC @MicahZoltu for helping me see this). Every time I get an unexpected >2 min inclusion delay, when I look carefully it's always a basefee issue.
@再见我同意。我之前关于主要问题是低优先级费用的假设现在看来可能是错误的（CC@MicahZoltu帮助我看到了这一点）。每次我收到意想不到的>；2分钟的加入延迟，当我仔细观察时，这总是一个基本费用问题。
@ATabarrok @tylercowen This seems like the most persuasive answer so far. Also I would perhaps add, a general fear in modern political culture of making big indivisible changes and preference for salami-slicing. https://t.co/V6vj9KlsX5
@ATabarrok@tylercowen这似乎是迄今为止最有说服力的答案。我还想补充一点，在现代政治文化中，人们普遍害怕做出不可分割的巨大改变，并偏爱意大利香肠切片。https://t.co/V6vj9KlsX5
The usual excuse for why wallets use the current approach is that it looks bad in the UI to show a higher fee. I feel like there must be better ways to deal with this issue, eg. present fee not as "$4.25" but as "$3-6" .
为什么钱包使用当前的方法，通常的借口是，在用户界面上显示更高的费用看起来很糟糕。我觉得必须有更好的方法来处理这个问题，例如目前的费用不是“4.25美元”，而是“3-6美元”。
PR in the Brave wallet doing this:
https://github.com/brave/brave...
勇敢钱包里的公关在做这件事：
https://github.com/brave/brave...
The current practice of many wallets setting max basefee *right above* the current basefee is horrible imo; it leads to frequent long delays when the basefee spikes up right at the time you're making a transaction.
At least set max to >1.3x current, though I would prefer >2x.
许多钱包目前的做法是将最高基本费设置在当前基本费之上，这在我看来是可怕的；当基本费用在您进行交易时飙升时，它会导致频繁的长时间延迟。
至少将“最大值”设置为>；1.3倍电流，但我更喜欢>；2倍。
RT: How I attempted to break @fuellabs_ v1, a short story about the importance of running validators for optimistic rollups.
Let's start from the beginning: 🧵👇 https://t.co/ESpMak7Ydb
RT：我是如何尝试打破@fuelabs_v1的，这是一个关于运行乐观汇总的验证器的重要性的短篇故事。
让我们从头开始：🧵👇 https://t.co/ESpMak7Ydb
RT: Please to share my first guide in the series of migration guides "Migrating from Prysm to Nimbus" is complete!
https://someresat.medium.com/e...
cc:
@dannyryan @ethereum @ethStaker @ethnimbus @Teku_ConsenSys @sigp_io @ChainSafeth @prylabs @superphiz
RT：请分享我在迁移指南系列中的第一个指南“从Prysm迁移到Nimbus”已经完成了！
https://someresat.medium.com/e...
复写的副本：
@dannyryan@ethereum@ethStaker@ethnimbus@Teku_ConsenSys@sigp_io@ChainSafeth@prylabs@superphiz
@glenweyl I heard you recently wrote a paper with Puja and some techbro about a potential longer-term solution for detecting and compensating for these kinds of things better? 😊
@glenweyl我听说你最近与Puja和techbro写了一篇论文，讨论了一个潜在的长期解决方案，可以更好地检测和补偿这类问题？😊
@zengjiajun_eth The attacker would have to buy a *really huge amount* of call options for the gains from price change to be as large as the losses from the attack, no?
Probably a large fraction of all the ETH out there.
@曾家俊认为，攻击者必须购买“数额巨大”的看涨期权，才能使价格变化带来的收益与攻击带来的损失一样大，不是吗？
可能是所有ETH中的一大部分。
@krscmax I like how I can't tell if this is "ha ha ha", "wu wu wu" or "ng ng ng"... gaaaah why must there be multiple languages 😂😭
@我喜欢我不知道这是“哈哈哈”、“呜呜呜”还是“呜呜呜”的感觉。。。为什么一定要有多种语言😂😭
TIL: there's actually *lots* of spins on the fence equality/equity meme.
https://www.google.com/search?... https://t.co/hMhlaGGage
蒂尔：事实上，有很多关于平等/公平模因的旋转。
https://www.google.com/search?... https://t.co/hMhlaGGage
@robertwiblin @HenryACHoward Particularly because plenty of non-nerds are interested in AI safety too.
@robertwiblin@HenryACHoward特别是因为很多非书呆子也对人工智能安全感兴趣。
@robertwiblin @HenryACHoward Eh I do think that the details of AI friendliness theory are easier for nerds to get excited about than clean water and bednets.
So the effect is real to some extent, but that doesn't invalidate the importance of AI research in any way.
@robertwiblin@HenryACHoward呃，我确实认为人工智能友好理论的细节比干净的水和蚊帐更容易让书呆子们兴奋。
因此，这种影响在某种程度上是真实的，但这并不意味着人工智能研究的重要性在任何方面都是无效的。
@ne0liberal https://slatestarcodex.com/201... https://t.co/42MVV5Us8W
@自由派https://slatestarcodex.com/201...对不起，对不起。https://t.co/42MVV5Us8W
@30xHans Culture is set by elites, who would mostly not be protected by what I propose. So while I totally agree that risk should be considered, I expect it might not be large in practice.
@30X人的文化是由精英们创造的，他们大多不会受到我提议的保护。因此，虽然我完全同意应该考虑风险，但我预计在实践中风险可能不会很大。
@santisiri @Ronte50867673 @danrobinson Me alabas demasiado, solo puedo hablar un poco.... tengo que pasar 500 dias en españa o america latina como he pasado 500 dias en china, y quizas voy a hablar mejor.
“santisiri”ronte50867673“danrobinson你赞美我太多了，我只能说一点…我在西班牙或拉丁美洲呆了500天，就像我在中国呆了500天一样，也许我会说得更好。