Thanks - I have sent him an invite.

(turned out to be a total waste of time as he is not the slightest bit interested in the tech)

The unfortunate thing that is the case with "crypto" news websites is that most of the stories are in the form of "paid PR" (I know that for a fact as I have read such PR material before it was sent along with payment to such websites to then see it appear unedited).

In the case of Burst the PR guy stole all the funds that were supposed to be used to get articles published and faked his own death (yup - this is how shitty this space is and why I am not so active now).

I don't think anyone will bother contacting me unfortunately and I sure as hell am not going to pay them to publish PR (but maybe others will).

Indeed the AT smart contracts have worked without failure for well over 1 year (on two separate coin platforms) but pretty much no-one outside of those two small communities is even aware of this.

Welcome to get Adam to send me a PM here or if you have an email address for him then PM it to me and I'll invite him to the CIYAM Slack (I am online there pretty much every day).

Although not much new development has happened with AT for a while it is still very much alive and kicking on both Burst and Qora (and there are plans for its future which will most likely be unveiled in the coming weeks).

Sorry for the self-moderation but for sure that troll who has been following me will try to disrupt this topic so I will just delete his posts.

Originally after designing AT I was considering the idea of adding a "high-level language" (and in recent times I even discovered a project that looked promising to be able to do this).

Looking at what has happened with the DAO I am now glad that I didn't pursue this path and instead we only have ATs written in assembly code.

By "keeping it simple" (and also "very hard" as few programmers can code in assembly) we have managed to have a "smart contract" system working for well over a year without any issue at all.

Rather than try and rush things we have spent over a year experimenting with our small number of smart contracts to make sure that they are bug free (something it appears that the DAO developers didn't do).

I would guess that you are going to need to "overwrite" the key (with some rubbish) in order to effectively "delete it" (as actual deleting can be problematic with any OS).

Another idea might be to change it to a "watch only" address (although I haven't looked at the wallet structure in detail so I'm not sure whether that would work).

Assuming that the wallet is encrypted then the unencrypted key should not remain in memory (unless you've instructed Bitcoin to unlock) but to be safe you'd probably want to restart bitcoind after the wallet modification is performed.

If you won't even bother to read the information then there is really no point in any discussion.

I'm sure that the @OP is sick of this so I am going to unwatch and leave you to your stupid "final troll" (am sure you will).

(the thing that will piss you off is that I won't read your final troll post and don't give a fuck about you or your stupid posts anyway)

I provided a llink (which you didn't quote) - read it.

And again debating about the meaning of the word "crash" is just your way of trying to save face.

If you didn't try to be such an arrogant "know it all" asshole then these "discussions" wouldn't occur - ever considered that maybe you should try and "tone it down" a notch or two?

I didn't lie (and you have failed to admit your mistake).

The only one with "slimy ethics' here is you (and I have now "caught you out").

Please educate yourself: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.javascript/332YSnPsw_w/discussion

Sorry - you just don't understand how .js works do you?

(now go and read up yourself and apologise after you work out your mistake)

I am enjoying making fun of you.

You really are an idiot aren't you.

Supposedly if one engages in discussion with you then one needs to first check "your personal dictionary" about what words to use.

You wouldn't get a "crash" according to your definition with a GC issue either.



Why don't you just stop trying to be a smart-arse?

(no-one admires you for it)

I don't need to - as unlike you I know how to "debug" my .js.



(thought you said you were a "coder")

My browser crashes are not due to memory leaks so your stupid smart-arse stuff is just proven to be wrong.

(only an idiot would "assume" that GC is the cause of all browser crashes)



So in fact it is your stupid ego that has derailed this thread because you just can't resist trying to attack me.

Fuck off troll!

Just as I predicted - you can't answer my question and resort to further insults.

You are a rather predictable troll (and in fact maybe not actually @AnonyMint after all)

What on earth does GC have to do with that?

Try answering this question rather than another insult if you possibly can (as there is no sensible answer I am pretty certain that you won't).

Except you have never won a single technical argument against me (you idiot).

Try actually arguing rather than insulting next time (but I know you won't as you never do).

What a "wanker" you are.

Not sure why you just come here to troll me with nothing intelligent to contribute at all.

Seems like your supposed IQ has gone on holiday (about 10 years ago I think).

Why don't you do us all a favour and actually "fuck off" for good?

(the only supporters you have here are your sockies)

Plenty of times my browser crashes due to .js (and I use NoScript always).

(if you are trying to be clever then you might want to try a bit harder)

AT is "write once" but in any case that stupid "meme" was from Java and is generally parodied as "write once, debug everywhere".

I'm not really sure why that would be better than AT (as it is about 10x as complex).

And having high-level languages such as C/C++ is not a good idea as I pointed out.

Not sure how that is even slightly relevant - the problem with .js is its dynamic type system and processing (static languages are far easier to secure).