You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I noticed that the structure of the third paragraph might be improved.
This pertains to the following section: "The Ethereum network (and Ether) have functioned as expected for 99.99% of its life. The other 0.01% includes surviving The DAO, multiple large hacks of smart contracts, multiple protocol-level exploits, the Shanghai DoS attacks, constant negative remarks from the wider crypto community and multiple bear markets (including a recent 94% drop in price)".
I understand this section to be designed to demonstrate the robustness of the network, by stating that the network functions 99.99% of the time. In the next sentence, referring to 0.01% in which the network did not function, I think the writer is demonstrating "black swans" which caused disruption to the network. In this vein I think that "constant remarks from the wider crypto community and multiple bear markets" here have not stopped the network from functioning. Therefore, I think that these two categories should be removed to improve the quality of this paragraph.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,
I noticed that the structure of the third paragraph might be improved.
This pertains to the following section: "The Ethereum network (and Ether) have functioned as expected for 99.99% of its life. The other 0.01% includes surviving The DAO, multiple large hacks of smart contracts, multiple protocol-level exploits, the Shanghai DoS attacks, constant negative remarks from the wider crypto community and multiple bear markets (including a recent 94% drop in price)".
I understand this section to be designed to demonstrate the robustness of the network, by stating that the network functions 99.99% of the time. In the next sentence, referring to 0.01% in which the network did not function, I think the writer is demonstrating "black swans" which caused disruption to the network. In this vein I think that "constant remarks from the wider crypto community and multiple bear markets" here have not stopped the network from functioning. Therefore, I think that these two categories should be removed to improve the quality of this paragraph.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: