Author of the paper summary here - my understanding is that XFaaS doesn't run functions that are run in response to user input (e.g. XFaaS does not execute code that fetches and returns data because a user clicked on a button).
The x-axis is size of trade, and the y-axis is % of trades at a specific size. ExRates had _many_ large trades, which shows up as a significantly different distribution than other exchanges like Coinbase/Bitstamp/Kraken (which had many small trades, and a long tail of larger size trades). See slide 42-44 here: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-nysearca-2019-01/srnysearca2...
100% - although this time around there is (in my opinion) _a lot more data_ [1] that regulated markets (like CME bitcoin futures) drive price discovery.
[1] There was data back then too, it just wasn't received.
Neat and funny that they have an uncited figure (the one with the six exchanges with wacky trade size distributions) from research that we did while I was working at Bitwise.
Author here - thank you for pointing that out! The context in the comment you linked to is also helpful.
In your opinion, would it be correct to remove "uniquely" from the first sentence? Maybe that would help clarify the issue you pointed out. As far as I understand, the CIDs are still unique when referring to _metadata_, and can be used to "unambiguously fetch content from its peers".
I try to do paper reviews (like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31379383) because it is a great way for me to learn more and _hopefully_ share in a way that is useful for others . My writing abilities are still a work in progress :)
This paper is from a conference a few months ago (SOSP), it's possible you read a pre-print (or maybe the CacheLib paper [1]).
Facebook publishes lots of systems research! FWIW I also write a fair bit about the other systems research from Microsoft Research, etc - what you are seeing in my posting history is me sharing my writing a few times (as permitted by HN rules)