The 2.0 throwdown thread

[Sebastien256]

@jwinterm,

From the table update you just made, I think you miss one of my post. 

Thanks you for compiling the data.

That is great work jwinterm!

There are couple of centralized "apps or platforms" using the Nxt blockchain (which write on it, i.e. they are not read-only apps). Maybe put the "Centralized apps utilizing blockchain" at the end of the chart and with another color instead of a green label. Indeed, those are not core features of the blockhain. I would also do the same concerning the decentralized apps since these are done third party.

I made some digging and here a few important one:

Drachmaeconnect
http://www.drachmaeconnect.com/
It use the unique Monetary System core feature of Nxt.

Secure Asset Exchange
http://www.secureae.com/
It allows to invest in Nxt asset with bitcoin in a very very simple manner.

Lyth, the Nxt MMO
http://lythmmo.com/
It plan to use the Nxt platform for it economy.

Nxtty
http://nxtty.com/
It use the nxttycoin of the NXT AE as well as account creation and p2p encryption of Nxt.

Freebieservers.
http://freebieservers.com/
In particular, it use the blockchain to manage account and some transactions on the Nxt network.

If I find something else. I will let you know. Keep up the good work!

Edit:
This one is another decentralized apps runing on top of Nxt:
Helix

http://finhive.com/fh_helix.html
"Helix itself is written as an decentralized app, means it can run signed sourcecode or even code fraqments directly from the NXT blockchain during runtime."

[Sebastien256]

Nxt also has alias tech, so it is not unique to syscoin.

http://nxt.org/about/alias-system/


I think other blockchain 2.0 has this ability to, I'm just not sure which one.

[vincentvincent]

Nxt also has alias tech, so it is not unique to syscoin.

http://nxt.org/about/alias-system/


I think other blockchain 2.0 has this ability to, I'm just not sure which one.

also qora has aliasing

[gjhiggins]

if you would actually read http://ciyam.org/at. I don't know who is saying the at's aren't turing complete....whoever is saying that needs to go and rtfm

Unfortunately, the only description that either DDG (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Turing+site%3Aciyam.org) or I can find in the CIYAM docs is gibberish:

http://ciyam.org/at/at.html Automated Transactions Specification

In brief an Automated Transaction is a "Turing complete" set of byte code instructions which will be executed by a byte code interpreter built into its host.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_completeness Turing completeness

In colloquial usage, the terms "Turing complete" or "Turing equivalent" are used to mean that any real-world general-purpose computer or computer language can approximately simulate the computational aspects of any other real-world general-purpose computer or computer language.

Most programming languages, conventional and unconventional, are Turing-complete. This includes:
All general-purpose languages in wide use.
...
Turing completeness is an abstract statement of ability, rather than a prescription of specific language features used to implement that ability. The features used to achieve Turing completeness can be quite different; Fortran systems would use loop constructs or possibly even goto statements to achieve repetition; Haskell and Prolog, lacking looping almost entirely, would use recursion.

CIYAM's "specification" document is wrong as well as imprecise, ATs in themselves are not Turing complete and scarequotes won't make it so. The document, if it aspires to meet the requirements of a specification, should contain the precise details of the features ensuring Turing completeness of the programming language in which the ATs are expressed.

I can understand why people might want to distinguish sharply between ATs and a Turing complete scripting language.


Cheers

Graham

[jwinterm]

...

CIYAM's "specification" document is wrong as well as imprecise, ATs in themselves are not Turing complete and scarequotes won't make it so. The document, if it aspires to meet the requirements of a specification, should contain the precise details of the features ensuring Turing completeness of the programming language in which the ATs are expressed.

I can understand why people might want to distinguish sharply between ATs and a Turing complete scripting language.


Cheers

Graham

This is my sentiment as well. I'm probably going to split AT and Turing complete into two different rows on the next iteration.

I'll add a row for aliasing as well, and remove that from the unique features for Syscoin.

Also, sorry Sebastien256, missed that one. I'll add those NXT services next go-around as well.

[jabo38]

Great work on this table.  It is really coming together well.   I can see this thread becoming a major focus point in the future. 

[JBC]

Overstock used to maintain a wikia on the 2.0 projects.  Overstock discontinued maintaining their wikia and later launched their own ledger called tØ.  

tØ is a blockchain ledger but not a cryptocurrency nor a solutions platform for the public.  It is not a "2.0" and not a "1.0" project but something entirely else: "blockchain securities ledger" best describes it.

tØ was designed to do one thing: securities listings.   tØ already has 10 stocks listed on it but it is not accessible to the public.  I don't think Overstock will ever make tØ public for download.  As far as I can tell tØ is closed source and that means most companies would never use it.  Would you list your company's equity on something that could have backdoors and other vulnerabilities?  There's no reason to when the future will probably have an open source securities ledger.

[jwinterm]

Overstock used to maintain a wikia on the 2.0 projects.  Overstock discontinued maintaining their wikia and later launched their own ledger called tØ.  

tØ is a blockchain ledger but not a cryptocurrency nor a solutions platform for the public.  It is not a "2.0" and not a "1.0" project but something entirely else: "blockchain securities ledger" best describes it.

tØ was designed to do one thing: securities listings.   tØ already has 10 stocks listed on it but it is not accessible to the public.  I don't think Overstock will ever make tØ public for download.  As far as I can tell tØ is closed source and that means most companies would never use it.  Would you list your company's equity on something that could have backdoors and other vulnerabilities?  There's no reason to when the future will probably have an open source securities ledger.

Interesting, JBC. I'd heard about this t0 project, but didn't realize that it was already live...

Edit: I just went to their site, http://t0.com/ , and it looks like every other bootstrap crypto site I've ever seen

[CIYAM]

CIYAM's "specification" document is wrong as well as imprecise, ATs in themselves are not Turing complete and scarequotes won't make it so.

Please point out exactly (technically) what is wrong as well as imprecise as just saying that something is *wrong as well as imprecise* doesn't make it so.

The AT machine code supports jumping, subroutines, stacks, conditional logic and memory and this is enough to be able to run "any program" in the sense that you could write a C++ compiler with the AT "virtual CPU" as its platform (I assume you are not going to deny that C++ is "Turing complete") and in fact that is one of the potential projects being considered (although we do not have millions of dollars in funding to pay for such work at this stage).

If you haven't read so please check this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_instruction_set_computer and you'll learn that it is so "easy to be Turing complete" that even a "single op code" machine can be so. Basically Bitcoin's Script was intentionally built to not be "Turing complete" as it is actually harder to do that (is has several special checks to make sure it can't accidentally end up looping and numerous op codes were actually removed due to their potential to cause trouble).

There is no "special magic sauce" required in order to be "Turing complete" but just the ability to have conditional logic, variables and loops (all of which AT has).

If you think that a mathematical proof of being "Turing complete" is needed then please show me where Ethereum have provided this and I'll get a math guy to write an equivalent document for AT.

When you read the specs of any CPU it doesn't come with a mathematical proof about being "Turing complete" but instead looks just like the specification that was created for AT (i.e. documenting the instruction set and other key features such as word size, etc.).

So how on earth can we ever create "Turing complete" programs if we are using compilers and interpreters that are running on "Turing incomplete" CPUs?

[gjhiggins]

CIYAM's "specification" document is wrong as well as imprecise, ATs in themselves are not Turing complete and scarequotes won't make it so.

Please point out exactly (technically) what is wrong as well as imprecise as just saying that something is *wrong as well as imprecise* doesn't make it so.

I did, in the post, quoting specifically.

Cheers

Graham

[CIYAM]

Well - if you are referring to a "programming language" you should understand that AT is a "virtual CPU". So it is not a high-level language but is a "machine code" (and it should be noted that Ethereum is also not a high-level language but is a VM which is an approach that I think was far less elegant).

So - if you accept that things like RISC chips are "Turing complete" then it should be obvious that AT is (I even gave you the link to a "single instruction virtual CPU" that is "Turing complete" to show just how simple it is to achieve this).

If you don't accept that CPUs (and thus "virtual CPUs") are "Turing complete" then clearly we have nothing further to discuss.

[jwinterm]

Well - if you are referring to a "programming language" you should understand that AT is a "virtual CPU". So it is not a high-level language but is a "machine code" (and it should be noted that Ethereum is also not a high-level language but is a VM which is an approach that I think was far less elegant).

So - if you accept that things like RISC chips are "Turing complete" then it should be obvious that AT is (I even gave you the link to a "single instruction virtual CPU" that is "Turing complete" to show just how simple it is to achieve this).

If you don't accept that CPUs (and thus "virtual CPUs") are "Turing complete" then clearly we have nothing further to discuss.

OK, you convinced me - I'll leave Automated Transactions and Turing complete lumped together for now. What is the method to prevent an infinite loop being run in Burst or Qora's Turing complete scripting/instruction set? Just the transaction fee on each "instruction"? Is there a fee market on Burst and Qora a la Ethereum, or a hard-coded fee for each instruction/script/transaction?

[vbcs]

Each op code (instruction) consumes a fee, so an infinite loop will need "infinite" amount, but even so there is a hardcoded max number of steps (op codes) each AT program could run on each block.

[tyz]

Could you add smart contracts to the list, too? Would be nice to know what POS coin has it implemented already.

[CIYAM]

Could you add smart contracts to the list, too? Would be nice to know what POS coin has it implemented already.

The term "smart contract" I believe was first coined by Nick Szabo and although I'm not sure if he intended that to mean a general computer language anything that does provide a Turing complete language by definition supports smart contracts.

Think of it this way - AT and Ethereum are both low-level languages that support the use of higher level languages which make it possible to create smart contracts (the smart contract being the program).

A platform that provided a set of smart contracts but didn't provide a programming language to be able to extend them or add new ones really wouldn't be so useful.

[rockethead]

NEM

Average  block time 60s
Recommended confirmation time - 6 blocks
Market peg - Pending completion of Asset Creation
Multisig - Both in wallet and off wallet
Centralised Apps using Blockchain - Pending Asset Creation

Unique features:
Multisignatory can be created as a small footprint thumbdrive signatory with fastboot, real time - off wallet
Do not need a node to run a wallet. Wallet is fastboot and need not sync.
Special purpose small footprint "sub-functions" of wallet can be built without the need to have a node server.
Tiered architecture solution.
Centralised apps can be easily built, i.e., based on block chain technology - open system - e.g., a voting system.
It is a platform solution.

[Irontiga]

NEM

Average  block time 60s
Recommended confirmation time - 6 blocks
Market peg - Pending completion of Asset Creation
Multisig - Both in wallet and off wallet
Centralised Apps using Blockchain - Pending Asset Creation

Unique features:
Multisignatory can be created as a small footprint thumbdrive signatory with fastboot, real time - off wallet
Do not need a node to run a wallet. Wallet is fastboot and need not sync.
Special purpose small footprint "sub-functions" of wallet can be built without the need to have a node server.
Tiered architecture solution.
Centralised apps can be easily built, i.e., based on block chain technology - open system - e.g., a voting system.
It is a platform solution.

Wait a moment, what does it have that burst/nxt/eth don't have?

[Skerberus]

Additions for Qora
Decentralized Apps: built-in social network and decentralized web! What kind of link is needed here? As stated before you can also browse it without a wallet see http://qora.co.in:9090/index/main.html

[patmast3r]

Sorry if this has already been asked but what would stop any plattform from having "centralized app utilizing blockchains" ?
Shouldn't this just be green for all of them ?
Or is this to merely point out the existence of such services ? Even if so...they all have block explorers, faucets or whatever

[jabo38]

Sorry if this has already been asked but what would stop any plattform from having "centralized app utilizing blockchains" ?
Shouldn't this just be green for all of them ?
Or is this to merely point out the existence of such services ? Even if so...they all have block explorers, faucets or whatever

I kind of thought the same.  Anybody that has a faucet has a faucet or tip bot or block explorer basically has a centralized service.