3 ms·

> I just named a rather massive one in my comment. You named one that was envisioned by the creator(s) of Bitcoins 13 years ago and was subsequently abandoned.

> I just named a rather massive one in my comment. You named one that was envisioned by the creator(s) of Bitcoins 13 years ago and was subsequently abandoned. Today bitcoin is marketed as a store of value, not money. Also the idea that it is a P2P money without intermediaries is laughable. What are miners other than intermediaries in a transaction?

dmitriid 5y ago
> What are miners other than intermediaries in a transaction? Additionally: What is "programmable money" without programmers writing unverifiable undebuggable code in esoteric languages other than intermediaries that you have to trust? - https://web3isgoinggreat.com?id=2021-12-04-2 https://web3isgoinggreat.com?id=2021-12-04-2 - https://web3isgoinggreat.com?id=2021-12-18-0 https://web3isgoinggreat.com?id=2021-12-18-0 etc.
- olalonde 5y ago
  Sorry to be blunt, but you both demonstrate a poor technical understanding of Bitcoin. Miners are not "intermediaries" and it is possible to send/receive Bitcoin with any regular programming language. The links you posted refer to Ethereum smart contracts which are indeed prone to programming errors. The tooling around them is improving (e.g. debuggers, verifiers) and there are a couple of multi-billion dollar smart contracts which have stood the test of time.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > but you both demonstrate a poor technical understanding of Bitcoin. No, we don't > smart contracts which are indeed prone to programming errors. Indeed. So. In the context of "potential to be a programmable money without government or central authority" you literally have to depend on an intermediary to write a smart contract and depen on that intermediary to write this contract correctly. > The tooling around them is improving (e.g. debuggers, verifiers) and there are a couple of multi-billion dollar smart contracts which have stood the test of time. Either all this is "too early" or "it has stood the test of time". You can't have both. The fact that some contract exists, and handles "multiple billions" in no way, shape, or form disprove my original statement: "Programmable money" relies on intermediaries in the form of programmers writing unverifiable undebuggable code in esoteric languages
    - olalonde 5y ago
      If you think those problems cannot be solved, I understand your skepticism. I don't share this pessimism however.
      - dmitriid 5y ago
        > I don't share this pessimism however. Ah yes. The good old "you don't believe enough". There's literally no way to solve programmable money for everyone without intermediaries.
    - landemva 5y ago
      ' Programmable CARS relies on intermediaries in the form of programmers writing unverifiable undebuggable code in esoteric languages. ' I am also skeptical of the current state of programming in autonomous cars. It's buggy and not perfect today. Even the code in anti-lock brakes is unverifiable and esoteric. /s Maybe new technologies take time to develop?
      - dmitriid 5y ago
        > Programmable CARS relies on intermediaries in the form of programmers Yes. You do trust intermediaries in the form of cart manufacturers. So what's your point exactly?
      - CRConrad 5y ago
        There's not much speculation and Ponzi marketing hype about ABS brakes, though.
  - Kbelicius 5y ago
    > Sorry to be blunt, but you both demonstrate a poor technical understanding of Bitcoin. Sorry to be blunt but you are demonstrating your poor reading skills. > Miners are not "intermediaries" I have some bitcoin. How do I send them to you without miners? > it is possible to send/receive Bitcoin with any regular programming language. dmitriid was talking about, what you called, "programmable money" and not about sending/receiving bitcoin. You don't need knowledge of any programming language to do that.
    - olalonde 5y ago
      Ah I see the confusion now. By intermediary I meant "trusted intermediary" (e.g. like PayPal, Visa, a bank, etc.).
      - dmitriid 5y ago
        Ah yes. Because with "programmable money" we now have untrusted intermediaries: programmers who code scammy contracts (at the very least you'll need those intermediaries). And don't forget those who code the wallets, and the exchanges, and the people who will convert your tokens into actual money you can buy stuff with... Ah, it's so good to finally get rid of these "trusted intermediaries like PayPal, Visa, a bank..." Oh wait, my money is gone, how do I revert the transaction?...

dmitriid 5y ago

> What are miners other than intermediaries in a transaction? Additionally: What is "programmable money" without programmers writing unverifiable undebuggable code in esoteric languages other than intermediaries that you have to trust? - https://web3isgoinggreat.com?id=2021-12-04-2 https://web3isgoinggreat.com?id=2021-12-04-2 - https://web3isgoinggreat.com?id=2021-12-18-0 https://web3isgoinggreat.com?id=2021-12-18-0 etc.

olalonde 5y ago
Sorry to be blunt, but you both demonstrate a poor technical understanding of Bitcoin. Miners are not "intermediaries" and it is possible to send/receive Bitcoin with any regular programming language. The links you posted refer to Ethereum smart contracts which are indeed prone to programming errors. The tooling around them is improving (e.g. debuggers, verifiers) and there are a couple of multi-billion dollar smart contracts which have stood the test of time.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > but you both demonstrate a poor technical understanding of Bitcoin. No, we don't > smart contracts which are indeed prone to programming errors. Indeed. So. In the context of "potential to be a programmable money without government or central authority" you literally have to depend on an intermediary to write a smart contract and depen on that intermediary to write this contract correctly. > The tooling around them is improving (e.g. debuggers, verifiers) and there are a couple of multi-billion dollar smart contracts which have stood the test of time. Either all this is "too early" or "it has stood the test of time". You can't have both. The fact that some contract exists, and handles "multiple billions" in no way, shape, or form disprove my original statement: "Programmable money" relies on intermediaries in the form of programmers writing unverifiable undebuggable code in esoteric languages
  - olalonde 5y ago
    If you think those problems cannot be solved, I understand your skepticism. I don't share this pessimism however.
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      > I don't share this pessimism however. Ah yes. The good old "you don't believe enough". There's literally no way to solve programmable money for everyone without intermediaries.
  - landemva 5y ago
    ' Programmable CARS relies on intermediaries in the form of programmers writing unverifiable undebuggable code in esoteric languages. ' I am also skeptical of the current state of programming in autonomous cars. It's buggy and not perfect today. Even the code in anti-lock brakes is unverifiable and esoteric. /s Maybe new technologies take time to develop?
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      > Programmable CARS relies on intermediaries in the form of programmers Yes. You do trust intermediaries in the form of cart manufacturers. So what's your point exactly?
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      There's not much speculation and Ponzi marketing hype about ABS brakes, though.
- Kbelicius 5y ago
  > Sorry to be blunt, but you both demonstrate a poor technical understanding of Bitcoin. Sorry to be blunt but you are demonstrating your poor reading skills. > Miners are not "intermediaries" I have some bitcoin. How do I send them to you without miners? > it is possible to send/receive Bitcoin with any regular programming language. dmitriid was talking about, what you called, "programmable money" and not about sending/receiving bitcoin. You don't need knowledge of any programming language to do that.
  - olalonde 5y ago
    Ah I see the confusion now. By intermediary I meant "trusted intermediary" (e.g. like PayPal, Visa, a bank, etc.).
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      Ah yes. Because with "programmable money" we now have untrusted intermediaries: programmers who code scammy contracts (at the very least you'll need those intermediaries). And don't forget those who code the wallets, and the exchanges, and the people who will convert your tokens into actual money you can buy stuff with... Ah, it's so good to finally get rid of these "trusted intermediaries like PayPal, Visa, a bank..." Oh wait, my money is gone, how do I revert the transaction?...