coldlord

But if the council can freeze tokens, they could also create more tokens for themselves or manipulate the situation. It’s a slippery slope.

Decentralization is a nice word but let’s be real. Arbitrum's always had some level of control. Even before this freeze, it wasn’t a fully decentralized system.

True, it’s finite, so we’re looking at a discrete probability space. Every hash h has the same chance, regardless of its appearance. But what about the event when a block with target T is mined?

Wait a sec. First thing in any Probability Theory class is defining the probability space. Without that, nothing makes sense. You can’t talk about probability or expectation without a defined space.

What definition of ‘entropy’ is the author using throughout the paper? I’m interested.

There’s no mistake in probability. Don’t twist my words. What do you actually think of this paper? You believe it’s on point?

Care to share those specific errors?

Nah, I think the author missed something here. It’s a typical error from someone who doesn't grasp probability theory fully. Satoshi got the chain weight calculation right.