3 ms·

There are several thousand of those articles with the same points scrambled, filled with millions of comments with the same points scrambled. It's bait for peo

by aje403 9y ago

There are several thousand of those articles with the same points scrambled, filled with millions of comments with the same points scrambled. It's bait for people to jump in a pool with sharks. People like Singer and Buffett are driving by in a boat and looking in with binoculars. Hopefully enough people do not jump in that there ends up being a tidal wave.

ShorsHammer 9y ago
Szabo is not another cryptocurrency talking head. He proposed smart contracts a decade before they became a reality.
- lowbloodsugar 9y ago
  Who hasn't proposed smart contracts decades ago? We used to talk about formalizing the legal system so it could be processed by computer while sitting around the undergrad common room. You can't read, e.g. Asimov, without being exposed to such ideas. Not to mention the numerous times such an idea came up on usenet, slashdot, or here whenever some corrupt human-in-authority abused some legal system. Every one of those discussions, however, ended with the lightbulb that, unless you have AI that can comprehend intent, it is as impossible to write a smart contract as it is to write code without bugs. And if you have an AI, then laws written in English are all you need anyway. Coming up with the idea of smart contracts isn't a sign of unrecognized genius, but believing it to be a valid solution is a definite disqualification.
  - ShorsHammer 9y ago
    I'd love to see some formalised non sci-fi works on smart contracts that existed before the mid 90's if you can point me in the direction?
- aje403 9y ago
  Why you believe that validates any of the ideas is beyond me
  - ShorsHammer 9y ago
    I'm not sure you are responding to the right comment?
tim333 9y ago
Well those two are unusual in they were the original ones for the first cryptocurrency. Everything else is derivative. It's interesting the intent was >While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs... And then it argues trustless electronic money could reduce transaction costs. I think it was never intended to be a huge casino.

by aje403 9y ago

ShorsHammer 9y ago

Szabo is not another cryptocurrency talking head. He proposed smart contracts a decade before they became a reality.

lowbloodsugar 9y ago
Who hasn't proposed smart contracts decades ago? We used to talk about formalizing the legal system so it could be processed by computer while sitting around the undergrad common room. You can't read, e.g. Asimov, without being exposed to such ideas. Not to mention the numerous times such an idea came up on usenet, slashdot, or here whenever some corrupt human-in-authority abused some legal system. Every one of those discussions, however, ended with the lightbulb that, unless you have AI that can comprehend intent, it is as impossible to write a smart contract as it is to write code without bugs. And if you have an AI, then laws written in English are all you need anyway. Coming up with the idea of smart contracts isn't a sign of unrecognized genius, but believing it to be a valid solution is a definite disqualification.
- ShorsHammer 9y ago
  I'd love to see some formalised non sci-fi works on smart contracts that existed before the mid 90's if you can point me in the direction?
aje403 9y ago
Why you believe that validates any of the ideas is beyond me
- ShorsHammer 9y ago
  I'm not sure you are responding to the right comment?

tim333 9y ago

Well those two are unusual in they were the original ones for the first cryptocurrency. Everything else is derivative. It's interesting the intent was >While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs... And then it argues trustless electronic money could reduce transaction costs. I think it was never intended to be a huge casino.