How many of you have actually used Ethereum as a smart contract system?

[benthach]

Even if I have a few Ethereum, I never used the smart contract thing. I don't even know what it can do.

the idea is just there to hype the scam from other shit coins, nothing is useful about it. the idea was to have other shit coins to use it smart contracts and buy into it. the problem with it now is it have no direction with the mist wallet at this moment. this idea and etheoriem got lost in the black hole with 1 etherium.

I would like to see the scientific evidence of your claims.

simple, where is a working wallet/mist with other shit coins smart contract? isn't that what it claimed and hype all about?
two years and you still don't have a solid working wallet with dapp and smart contracts?
if i dissecting the tech you have now it would take forever!

I think the devs would argue this wasn't a priority because it is beta and isn't ready yet for widespread use. They haven't even transitioned to PoS... they don't even know exactly how they are going to do that.  Once they are more confident in everything then they release all the tools and GUIs for general public. It was always supposed to be phased release, although I agree it is behind schedule.

2years they have all these luxury times and with less than a dozen actual coders who have enjoy collecting millions and millions of dollars.
i have tested the beta and this is the reason why i've posts about it, it is going to take forever!
everything implemented into a centralized blockchain is easy but implementing this grand scam into decentralized wallet is not possible by these scammers. oh, wait, it's a mist!

[1714814032]

1714814032

[1714814032]

1714814032

[TPTB_need_war]

1. It is relying on IPFS, which is a decentralied file storage system. IPFS is interesting for orthogonal reasons (which I will discuss below), but there is an insoluble flaw of decentralized file storage in that copyrighted content illegally distributed without compensating the copyright owner, can't be forceably removed from all nodes, and thus the protocol ends up banned by hosts[1].

[...]

[1]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1340057.msg13670558#msg13670558 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1344997.msg13730325#msg13730325 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1342065.msg13782055#msg13782055 (alternate copy: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg13782246#msg13782246)

I received a reply from Juan Bennet (author of IPFS) and he referred me to the following:

• IPFS has as a design requirement that nodes be able to only store and/or distribute content they explicitly want to store and/or distribute. This means that computers that run IPFS nodes do not have to host "other people's stuff", which is a very important thing when you consider that lots of content in the internet is -- in some for or other -- illegal under certain jurisdictions.
• IPFS nodes will be able to express policies, and subscribe to network allow/denylists and policies that express content storage and distribution requirements. This way, users and groups can express what content should or should not be stored and/or distributed. This is required by users to (a) comply with legal constraints in their respective countries, (b) required by users with stricter codes of conduct (i.e. content that is legal but undesired by a group -- e.g. a childrens website).

Question and Answers:

    Q: When I add content, what happens?
    A: It is stored in your local node, and made available to other nodes in your network, via advertising it on the routing system (i.e. the IPFS-DHT). The content is not sent to other nodes until they explicitly request it, though of course some content may already exist in the system (content-addressing).

I don't see how that solves the problem that IPFS is a protocol that enables people to advertising the availability of illegal content on the DHT, and then illegal content can move to new ephemeral nodes, i.e. Whack-A-Mole. Thus authorities are eventually very likely to regulate Hosts and tell them that by running IPFS they are providing hosting for a DHT which routes illegal content. IPFS can infringe the millions of indie artists who struggle to earn an income.

Also as pointed out in that thread, then there is very low guarantee that any data is backed up by the system or that the other desired properties of content being cached closer those who need it will be achieved.

Decentralized file storage requires fungibility of data, but this can't be attained without BOTH a block chain for recording the policies of content owners and algorithms that automatically detect which content infringes other content.

IPFS looks great - and yes, I see the legal aspect - but once the idea is there & great, I just imagine the hunting - but then there will be an IPFS_1, _2,.... and you need to close the internet.

Huh 

And he will not also admit the following is why he incorrect about stealing content.

Governments are organizing now around controlling the internet. The illegal activity through Bittorrent (which also steals from ISPs which have higher upload bandwidth allowances) is helping the governments feel they are justified in regulating the internet via Net Neutrality and other measures. You young fellow feel free to pursue theft of music and other content which deprives the millions of artists of income to pay their rent. You are not going to create the new Knowledge Economy with your theft model. And by advocating theft, you are helping the NWO totalitarianism to take form by providing an economic incentive and political support from millions of artists who are violated by piracy. Dumb. But I expect that from you.

[TPTB_need_war]

Kim.fat.com.idiot was a brilliant marketer (and so was Charles Ponzi)

He tapped into the desire of millions of hackers/people to steal from themselves.

> Fat.com.idiot is a roly-poly savvy marketer and we should partner with him

Anyone can be a good marketer if they create a site to help steal via Bittorrent and then charge a small commission on that activity.

Fat.com had his 10 minutes of criminal fame. Now will receive justice for his crimes.

> As to 'theft' and 'copyright' we are obviusly in disagreement - and let us leave it at that, no need for us to spend energy on that.

Huh  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1350711.msg13796388#msg13796388
Quote from: TPTB_need_war on February 05, 2016, 03:45:47 PM
And he will not also admit the following is why he incorrect about stealing content.

Governments are organizing now around controlling the internet. The illegal activity through Bittorrent (which also steals from ISPs which have higher upload bandwidth allowances) is helping the governments feel they are justified in regulating the internet via Net Neutrality and other measures. You young fellow feel free to pursue theft of music and other content which deprives the millions of artists of income to pay their rent. You are not going to create the new Knowledge Economy with your theft model. And by advocating theft, you are helping the NWO totalitarianism to take form by providing an economic incentive and political support from millions of artists who are violated by piracy. Dumb. But I expect that from you.

[hv_]

I fear that will be really possible only scaled down on an intranet like basis. Not really fully distributed-but is not that exactly banks & corps are looking for? Take a shared part DB instead....