Bitcoin Forum
June 21, 2024, 03:09:08 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 [129] 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 ... 334 »
2561  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why I think neither Ethereum and AT are going to be the future of blockchains on: January 17, 2015, 07:07:27 PM
If this is another attempt at "visual programming" then it will probably fail to provide progress in the same way as all previous attempts at two-dimensional programming degenerated into "freehand paint programs".

Okay - it is not an attempt at "visual programming" at all but works more using "aspect oriented programming" methods.

I can explain the details to you if you want (it isn't that hard to follow).
2562  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why I think neither Ethereum and AT are going to be the future of blockchains on: January 17, 2015, 06:39:20 PM
If I was I would have moved your thread to alt-currencies. Now I'm not saying that your project isn't interesting. I'm just stating that you are off-topic here, in a subtle way maybe, but still off-topic. I let it up to the mods to make the final call on that matter.

So again it seems that you think you should be in charge of what posts go where.

Like you say - let's leave it up to the mods. Smiley

(as you think that a product that has a BTC Wallet and isn't an alt coin should be moved to alt coins)
2563  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why I think neither Ethereum and AT are going to be the future of blockchains on: January 17, 2015, 06:24:18 PM
Lumping together a random project with a blockbuster such a Ethereum and taking a critical tone to make the post sound legit may be smart marketing, but it's still completely off-topic in this sub-forum.

That is rather odd to say - as in fact the CIYAM project was started in 2001 (yes 14 years ago) but okay seemingly you are in charge of what is "on topic" in the whole forum now.
2564  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why I think neither Ethereum and AT are going to be the future of blockchains on: January 17, 2015, 06:08:42 PM
Whether you make a profit is irrelevant. General Discussion is a place to discuss about Bitcoin, not to promote other projects. Please post in alt-currencies.

CIYAM is not an alt currency (it isn't even a currency) and it has a Bitcoin Wallet so please get your facts straight.
2565  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why I think neither Ethereum and AT are going to be the future of blockchains on: January 17, 2015, 06:04:58 PM
MaidSafe will lead the way into true decentralization.

I think it is another great idea - it is probably just going to be a question of which works best.
2566  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why I think neither Ethereum and AT are going to be the future of blockchains on: January 17, 2015, 05:58:28 PM
Whilst there is a lot of excitement about the possibilites of "Turing complete" blockchain transactions that are supported by Ethereum and AT (the latter being my own invention)
Shameless plug / Product placement

AT is an open source and free product - so okay call it a plug but I don't make a cent from anyone using it (and it is in fact the first Turing complete system to be running on a mainnet).

And why should I be ashamed of it?
2567  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Why I think neither Ethereum and AT are going to be the future of blockchains on: January 17, 2015, 03:06:14 PM
it would be much better if they would work with BTC instead of this project  Undecided

Yes - that I think is an important point - CIYAM is not about trying to create a new "currency" so in fact it will be able to work with Bitcoin (there is already a Wallet package).

The vision that CIYAM has for blockchains is for a new internet but there is no reason that Bitcoin shouldn't be the main "store of value" (or general financial transaction mechanism) in the new internet.
2568  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Why I think neither Ethereum and AT are going to be the future of blockchains on: January 17, 2015, 02:54:52 PM
Whilst there is a lot of excitement about the possibilites of "Turing complete" blockchain transactions that are supported by Ethereum and AT (the latter being my own invention) after studying how these work I have come to the conclusion that they are just not going to really scale up to provide us with a "new internet" (which is what I have now come to think of as being the main goal that blockchains should be used for).

If you think of how things like this forum work today (via HTTP/HTTPS) you create a forum post by effectively populating a form with values that gets turned into a HTTP/HTTPS POST request for the server to then turn into a DB operation (after performing validation).

But both Ethereum and AT instead are actually working more like low-level machines (either a Java VM in the case of Ethereum or a virtual CPU in the case of AT) which are very inefficient in comparison to something like HTTP with a web server backend that uses say FCGI.

They have to work this way as otherwise you could create a very simple program like this following:

Code:
while( true )
 str = str + str;

that will run your computer out of memory (causing it to either crash or become completely unresponsive) unless the fees to execute more than X amount of steps are high enough.

But is there another way?

Yes - I designed a concept called Software Manufacturing (http://ciyam.org/open/?cmd=view&data=20121221010507352000_P&ident=M100V112&chksum=b3d538bf) many years ago (which works in a somewhat similar manner to Charles Simonyi's project called "Intentional Software").

In Software Manufacturing the above pseudo code would have to be divided into two components - a looping specification and a separate specification that covers what to do within the loop. As all source code is "generated" you can't stop the resulting code from effectively being something like this:

Code:
while( true )
{
   if( str.length( ) > c_max_allowed )
      throw runtime_error( "str too big" );

    str = str + str;
}

This is not something you can do using either Ethereum or AT as they are simply not high level enough but this is something that can be easily be done using Software Manufacturing (as you have no choice).

Using such a high level approach means that rather than bothering each node with putting a VM or virtual CPU between the network and the DB you can just put in the functional operations themselves (which would look more like SQL statements than machine code).

This will scale to at least the level we have today in regards to internet applications and this is what CIYAM is currently developing.

If you'd like to learn a bit more about what exactly Software Manufacting is then a quick introduction can be found here: http://ciyam.org/docs/methodology.html.
2569  Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: One vs Many Addresses on: January 17, 2015, 02:19:42 PM
With #3 I guess I need to setup some kind of account system too. With cookies, passwords and all that jazz. How does #3 work with #1 exactly? How would I best map the the transaction send address information to the users account return address?

It would probably be easiest to use #2 especially if you didn't want to bother with creating accounts or doing session management (and #1 is not recommended for both security and privacy reasons).
2570  Bitcoin / Project Development / Re: One vs Many Addresses on: January 17, 2015, 02:05:46 PM
3. Get the user to provide a "return" address so then you don't need to try and work out where to send funds to (and works with either 1 or 2).
2571  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: secp256k1 as a library on Windows on: January 16, 2015, 04:56:24 PM
As I want to upgrade my Wallet package to use deterministic sigs I will probably be using this library myself soon.

If you aren't in a huge hurry then perhaps just wait for me to fork it (as CIYAM can be compiled with MSVC so I'll work out how it can be done using MSVC rather than a Linux to Windows environment).
2572  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: secp256k1 as a library on Windows on: January 16, 2015, 04:50:53 PM
I think you are going to have problems - if it uses GMP then you need GMP (unless there is some macro that makes that not necessary).

I doubt it uses high level stuff (like STL) as it is basically a C library (I haven't looked at the source code yet - just took a quick look at the README).
2573  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: secp256k1 as a library on Windows on: January 16, 2015, 04:37:56 PM
Code:
num_gmp.h:10: Error: gmp.h: No such file or directory
 #include <gmp.h>
                 ^

So you are missing GMP - is there a windows version of that library?

2574  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: secp256k1 as a library on Windows on: January 16, 2015, 03:27:02 PM
This code was written in browser, not in C++ editor.
This is only an example how do I see the usage of library.

Okay - but it's hard to help out if you don't post the actual code you are trying compile.

Do you think that this snippet would be better with #include <QString> #include <QByteArray>

It would make it somewhat easier to know for sure what your problem is considering in the OP indicated you were not that well versed in C++.

You should post the compile errors for a start.
2575  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: secp256k1 as a library on Windows on: January 16, 2015, 03:17:14 PM
You do release that your snippet doesn't have any #include's for Qt?

And that "void main" is non-standard C++ (are their still books teaching people to code "void main" these days?).

2576  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: secp256k1 as a library on Windows on: January 16, 2015, 03:00:17 PM
As an aside has the OpenSSL project planned to change to the RFC sig implementation?

(if not then I might work on getting a MSVC Windows build of this library as I have developed a Wallet package that I would prefer uses deterministic sigs)
2577  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Pope on Charlie Hebdo: There are limits to free expression on: January 16, 2015, 04:45:48 AM
If, however, you are actually being (non-hypothetically) hostile to me with your post, then yes, you are actually being a jerk since the insult is uncalled for.

And that IMO is the crux of the whole issue.
2578  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Pope on Charlie Hebdo: There are limits to free expression on: January 15, 2015, 08:10:20 PM
I don't disagree with your assessment that being a jerk causes more problems than not being a jerk, but given the freedom to be a jerk, some people are going to be a jerk. I take the line that it'd be great if everyone acted with kindness and empathy towards everyone else, but some people are just awful people, and it's their right to be awful so as long as they don't physically harm another person or their property.

I must say that your tolerance of my "being a jerk" was pretty good (although you couldn't help yourself in calling me a *jerk* which is in itself a *tell* that I did actually upset you).

So your peace preaching is not really backed up by your post content which is actually attacking me.

Cheesy
2579  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Pope on Charlie Hebdo: There are limits to free expression on: January 15, 2015, 07:11:45 PM
But even if this were true- that they were intentionally trying to insult- I've yet to see a compelling argument for making insulting speech illegal.

Of course it would make little sense to me that even hateful comments should be "illegal" - the simple point is that I can just say "you are a fucking cunt" and if seemingly I have some sort of "voice" (perhaps due to being a Legendary Member) then now we have a problem which if I didn't say such a thing wouldn't be the case would it. Cheesy

Of course to make it a bit more hurtful I should do it like this:

You are a fucking cunt!
2580  Other / Politics & Society / Re: Pope on Charlie Hebdo: There are limits to free expression on: January 15, 2015, 06:05:07 PM
Personally I think it is odd that people think that it is "so important that we should (or should not) be allowed to insult each other" to the point that they think we should start wars over it.

Can't any of these people do something more productive with their lives?

(I am an atheist but I have no interest in either trying to force my view upon others nor ridicule their beliefs)

A "bumper sticker" I saw in some American movie I can't recall the name of right now comes to mind: "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out". This seems to unfortunately be the way things are becoming with the more radical extremes that we are seeing.

It seems that we need a huge "chill pill" to make people remember that humans are actually a "single species".
Pages: « 1 ... 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 [129] 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 ... 334 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!