More "smart contract" type features coming to Bitcoin

[cellard]

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-October/015217.html

The abstract:

Simplicity is a typed, combinator-based, functional language without loops and recursion, designed to be used for crypto-currencies and block- chain applications. It aims to improve upon existing crypto-currency lan- guages, such as Bitcoin Script and Ethereum’s EVM, while avoiding some of the problems they face. Simplicity comes with formal denotational semantics defined in Coq, a popular, general purpose software proof as- sistant. Simplicity also includes operational semantics that are defined with an abstract machine that we call the Bit Machine. The Bit Ma- chine is used as a tool for measuring the computational space and time resources needed to evaluate Simplicity programs. Owing to its Turing incompleteness, Simplicity is amenable to static analysis that can be used to derive upper bounds on the computational resources needed, prior to execution. While Turing incomplete, Simplicity can express any finitary function, which we believe is enough to build useful “smart contracts” for blockchain applications.

This looks like an improved Bitcoin Script, which could be delivered in a softfork just like segwit.

I wonder: Do "smart contract" altcoins have any future? Between this and sidechains like Rootstock, it's going to be thought for alts when it comes to justifying their existence. Why are people going to want to deal with more tokens when BTC does everything'

[Franko30]

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-October/015217.html

I wonder: Do "smart contract" altcoins have any future? Between this and sidechains like Rootstock, it's going to be thought for alts when it comes to justifying their existence. Why are people going to want to deal with more tokens when BTC does everything'

Please read this - https://www.equities.com/news/wall-street-is-about-to-witness-disruption-on-a-phenomenal-level-with-blockchain
or this - https://www.financemagnates.com/thought-leadership/trust-not-trust-blockchain-can-mitigate-business-trust-barrier/

I really believe that blockchain can't give us that trust between parties that we need, and smart contracts can solve this problem

[cellard]

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-October/015217.html

I wonder: Do "smart contract" altcoins have any future? Between this and sidechains like Rootstock, it's going to be thought for alts when it comes to justifying their existence. Why are people going to want to deal with more tokens when BTC does everything'

Please read this - https://www.equities.com/news/wall-street-is-about-to-witness-disruption-on-a-phenomenal-level-with-blockchain
or this - https://www.financemagnates.com/thought-leadership/trust-not-trust-blockchain-can-mitigate-business-trust-barrier/

I really believe that blockchain can't give us that trust between parties that we need, and smart contracts can solve this problem

We'll see. Im not sold on the whole idea of smart ontracts just yet. We all saw what happened with the DAO, so if you want to make a smart contract viable, you still need to solve some fundamental problems that I still haven't seen solved, because the smart contracts themselves can have flaws and it can turn into a nice clusterfuck for hackers to exploit.

What I see as very valid is simplier smart contracts. Locktime verify is a smart contract for example.

[Franko30]

We'll see. Im not sold on the whole idea of smart ontracts just yet. We all saw what happened with the DAO, so if you want to make a smart contract viable, you still need to solve some fundamental problems that I still haven't seen solved, because the smart contracts themselves can have flaws and it can turn into a nice clusterfuck for hackers to exploit.

What I see as very valid is simplier smart contracts. Locktime verify is a smart contract for example.

I think that Confideal and Etherparty can change this situation
What do you think?