|
ok not over 9000, but I think we will see over $1K
|
|
|
|
|
its actually good to have a down like this rather than quasi parabolic up for longer
|
|
|
|
|
so if I trade my nxt coins...then I have no nxt anymore?
|
|
|
|
|
NEM has done amazingly well
hard facts.
Though peercoin did very well to, when it was at 10$ versus intial
|
|
|
|
|
what they set out to do was complex, and bound to have unexpected ways to get eth to where other thought it would not go
they were seting out to make a general computing system that was distributed and unable to be stopped or turned off
thats exactly what they did.
it is just a person found a way to write a program that transfered eth in a way the offeres of DAO were not happy about, but logically legit.
in some way I understand that satoshi avoided the general computing in BTC even though he could have put it in, op_codes etc, to avoid this in the early times.
I think there may be too many way to write programs in ways people have not even conceptualiized that can transfer eth in a DAO like environment.
so it may be a limiter on smart contracts.
|
|
|
|
|
can some one fill me in on how NXT is going, it seemed to be one of the best but the devs seem to be going to other projects, this is general impression i had ....
It also seemed to have so many features ....
did the initial distribution kill it?
|
|
|
|
How many times am I going to have to repeat myself and link to my explanation that the quoted Reddit above is INCORRECT! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15273470#msg15273470Vitalik is correct. The Reddit post is not. Period. Turning-complete programming on a block chain can't be guaranteed to be secure. There will always be a gap between "intent" and "execution". The fundamental reason is tied into the Halting problem, in that one can't prove an absolute negative, e.g. prove that no dinosaurs are still alive any where in the universe. It is undecideable. Fundamentally this is the Second Law of Thermodynamics and the fact that time is irreversible so entropy is unbounded. The only way that wouldn't be the case would be if the speed-of-light was not finite, but then the past and future would collapse into the same infinitesimal point of nothingness and nothing could exist. Theorem provers such as Coq produce output that is not Turing-complete. Yet that isn't even relevant, because "intent" can't be absolutely quantified in code or specification because interpretation is relative, i.e. the only account of history which is 100% certain doesn't exist (people will disagree on what happened because no one was every where in real-time, i.e. the speed-of-light is finite). If you can't grasp this, don't fret. It requires a high level of intellect and also understanding of several fields including computer science and physics. The bottom line is that Turing-complete programming on a block chain is "a can of worms" which is what we all told Ethereum since back in 2013 when Vitalik first proposed it. Yeah no. you can make it so the likelyhood is so unlikely is negligible, we all know about the halting problem. Burn a piece of paper and it could reform from its ash spontaneously as reslut of local conditions.... but its pretty unlikely. Much like a key clash is unlikely. |
|
|
|
Yeah, Sure ....  Never Forget! 17/Jun/2016 Vitalik Buterin on brink of 1st bailout for DAOs yes...and this is exactly what happened a unstoppable program and contract was executed.....it just looked like cheating, but it wasn't the maths did not care....the investors just did not realise what this really meant. The smartest person will get the money. |
|
|
|
Vitalikhttps://blog.ethereum.org/2016/06/19/thinking-smart-contract-security/"However, it does show that there is a fundamental barrier to what can be accomplished, and “fairness” is not something that can be mathematically proven in a theorem" well yes it can:If you hold a system will function in a particular way and it does then that is fair, and you can mathematically prove it https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4opjov/the_bug_which_the_dao_hacker_exploited_was_not/TL;DR - Complexity and "Turing completeness" are not the real culprit here - those are all good things that we can have someday. The real culprit is poor language design. Specifically, I would recommend using "functional" (rather than "procedural") languages for mission-critical code which will be driving "smart contracts" - and even better if a high-level "specification" language could be used, allowing formal derivation of a (verifiably correct) program in a low-level "implementation" language (ie, providing mathematical proof that the implementation satisfies the specification - and mitigating the problem where the high-level human-readable "description" is different from the low-level machine-runnable "code"). When I read Vitalik, its boils down to semantics, buzz words and a spin not hard logic/maths, contra vitalik to the white paper of satoshi. Satoshi is almost all business and proofs. Vitalik is obviously good at galveinsing capital behind a project and networking with people, just not so much as CEO of a code based contracts system it seems, as he does not have the understanding to select the coding team and understand what they tell him. vitalik is a no one, just a homeless little kid who spent years attending every bitcoin events to spreads his idea, some dumb whale jump on his boat and ignited this huge crazy fake pump to make everyone fear of miśsing out. he have zero coding credibility. all the eth included smart contract is code by stephan tual, the creator of the dao. I don't think that he is no - one, but it seems there are some largish holes / miss match in his skill set versus the product he is the figurehead for. |
|
|
|
|
what happened to NXT, why are they jumping to waves?
how is the better different to NEM?
|
|
|
|
Vitalikhttps://blog.ethereum.org/2016/06/19/thinking-smart-contract-security/"However, it does show that there is a fundamental barrier to what can be accomplished, and “fairness” is not something that can be mathematically proven in a theorem" well yes it can:If you hold a system will function in a particular way and it does then that is fair, and you can mathematically prove it https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4opjov/the_bug_which_the_dao_hacker_exploited_was_not/TL;DR - Complexity and "Turing completeness" are not the real culprit here - those are all good things that we can have someday. The real culprit is poor language design. Specifically, I would recommend using "functional" (rather than "procedural") languages for mission-critical code which will be driving "smart contracts" - and even better if a high-level "specification" language could be used, allowing formal derivation of a (verifiably correct) program in a low-level "implementation" language (ie, providing mathematical proof that the implementation satisfies the specification - and mitigating the problem where the high-level human-readable "description" is different from the low-level machine-runnable "code"). When I read Vitalik, its boils down to semantics, buzz words and a spin not hard logic/maths, contra vitalik to the white paper of satoshi. Satoshi is almost all business and proofs. Vitalik is obviously good at galveinsing capital behind a project and networking with people, just not so much as CEO of a code based contracts system it seems, as he does not have the understanding to select the coding team and understand what they tell him.
|
|
|
|
|
i suspected there must be quite a lot.
This was one of the reasons irc why satoshi left out or switched this of in BTC.
|
|
|
|
|
the hacker did not hack.
they ran a program, on a system to run un stopable programs.
Now devs DAO want to change the rules/contact/terms of DAO to steal the eths.
|
|
|
|
its not staling if its public info
just can see he knows anything about code, or what he is talking about.
I read a few things he wrote and is seems more puff then based in logic or maths, when you examine it carefully.
I'm not critical of VB for not being a great coder, because that's not his major contribution. I do think he's in the mess up to his eyeballs, and he's obviously got a massive conflict of interest. IMO he should review what happened with the NXT BTER hack. In that case NXT core dev Jean-Luc released the hard-fork code, but without any commentary at all ... he just posted the code and left it up to the 'network' to decide which way to proceed (rollback or not). That's how VB should handle this. I am, critical, becuase how can anything he says carry weight if he does not understand how codeing works I mean ... i had to learn, boolean logic, gate logic, build some gate logic machines, machine code, assembly, fortan, C++, JavaScript. So I understand basically what programing is and does from the ground up. there is no way you could stand up and say X about code product, and that is exactly what Eth and DAO is without at least being able to select a group of people that can code. You also need to take a good hard look at critical parts of the code base. |
|
|
|
|
see I see alot of "He's obviously a smart guy"
but no evidence of that in relation to code or logic etc
sales yes. Front man yes....but you can not selected competent people if you cant code your self and it's kinda showing right now.
|
|
|
|
|
its not staling if its public info
just can see he knows anything about code, or what he is talking about.
I read a few things he wrote and is seems more puff then based in logic or maths, when you examine it carefully.
|
|
|
|
what has this guy done in codeing, maths or logic?
I have yet to find much about his abilities beyond getting people behind him
Not saying that is not a serious skill
but no so much in actually building the product.
Its sorta showing now as in the whole stable of DAO Eth not one of the programmers saw the bug (or did they)
VB is a good writer, a decent speaker, and was prepared to be the public face, so that made him useful, and that made him influential, and that made him rich I get that bit....but it does not equip him to pick a team of competent coders |
|
|
|
what has this guy done in codeing, maths or logic? I have yet to find much about his abilities beyond getting people behind him Not saying that is not a serious skill but no so much in actually building the product. Its sorta showing now as in the whole stable of DAO Eth not one of the programmers saw the bug (or did they) same question raised here in more detail... https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4opjov/the_bug_which_the_dao_hacker_exploited_was_not/so eth have used a bolt on high level language .... this is likely to be riddled with exploits. JavaScript like which is so loosely defined its great to run anything anywhere, but as long as you don't mid restarting your browser every so often. Mission critical not so much. this is sorta the feel I got, and perhaps counter party forced eth to release early .... but in any even Vitilaik, is not the guy who know inmho, who he needs as coders, and what code is and does, not does he seem to have the mathematical power to undertake proofs etc. I hope I am wrong. He seems like a spokesperson, so maybe he should be CCO chief communications officer of something, but a CEO of a contracts with billions of $ on a unstoppable distributed computer needs a grade 1 + coder / mathematician / computer scientist/ computer engineer, so tjhey can personally sort through the bullshit and choose the right codeing team and approach. |
|
|
|
|
This is not a good look.
I tend to think you have to let the contract go through, as that is what is is designed to do.
This imposes market discipline and makes future "dao" like investors and offers much more robust.
BTC did have a similar thing back in the day.
I still don't get what Viterlan Butlerick has actually ever programed or practically done apart from the Bitcoin Magazine.
no one has ever answered me on this.
no offense to him, but it seems to be emperors new clothes ... he's really smart said by everyone that speaks of him .... but what in code has he done?
|
|
|
|
|
This will bubble an pop like every other time, but the new floor will be 1K +
it seems ATH is coming...there are just so many more players and exchanges now.....
people are pulling out FIAT from savings etc and buying into BTC.
this time hmmm 2~5K ATH i would have thought settle back to
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
