Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 06:47:07 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: BIP 2112  (Read 10262 times)
2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708



View Profile
November 14, 2012, 11:36:29 PM
 #21

I also was unable to find where it defines the jargon and neologisms it uses.
Yeah, you are 100% right. As written the document pretty much assumes that the reader has a Master of Science in Computer Engineering or equivalent and some past experience reading patent applications in the relevant field.

The more plain-spoken description of "digital prospectus" is: a cryptographically signed machine-executable description of the rules of the block validity. As opposed of the solemny sworn human-language statements of the core development group that they aren't going to materially change the rules for the valid blocks.

As with all "far-looking forward statements" the readability here is low. But the law is what it is and readability comes second after unambiguity.

I'm planning to re-edit the document in the future, once I collect enough feedback how to do it without transoforming it into a meaningless marketing drivel. It isn't an offer to sell anything.

Edit: and by the way, here's the pointer with explanation why it stays 2112 as opposed to the number that it go assigned.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61575.msg723630#msg723630


Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
1481395627
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481395627

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481395627
Reply with quote  #2

1481395627
Report to moderator
1481395627
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481395627

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481395627
Reply with quote  #2

1481395627
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481395627
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481395627

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481395627
Reply with quote  #2

1481395627
Report to moderator
casascius
Mike Caldwell
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344


The Casascius 1oz 10BTC Silver Round (w/ Gold B)


View Profile WWW
November 15, 2012, 12:21:29 AM
 #22

I also was unable to find where it defines the jargon and neologisms it uses.
Yeah, you are 100% right. As written the document pretty much assumes that the reader has a Master of Science in Computer Engineering or equivalent and some past experience reading patent applications in the relevant field.

If you only want comments, suggestions, and ridicule from others with the same particular degree and experience, you ought to consider adding those specific qualifications to your signature line directing us here so that others outside of your assumed audience don't have to waste their time with it.

Little old lowly me, the main ridicule I'd have to offer is that your ability to convey ideas in written form sucks balls and is definitely not on par with the technical aptitude you claim, and that your principal point you seem to be looking to make (if your insistence on a vanity BIP number doesn't make that strikingly clear) is that you consider yourself a badass.

Companies claiming they got hacked and lost your coins sounds like fraud so perfect it could be called fashionable.  I never believe them.  If I ever experience the misfortune of a real intrusion, I declare I have been honest about the way I have managed the keys in Casascius Coins.  I maintain no ability to recover or reproduce the keys, not even under limitless duress or total intrusion.  Remember that trusting strangers with your coins without any recourse is, as a matter of principle, not a best practice.  Don't keep coins online. Use paper wallets instead.
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


Wat


View Profile WWW
November 28, 2012, 01:57:49 AM
 #23

You cannot just make your own BIP and call it 2112. You need to email genjix and he'll assign you a BIP number and help with copy-editing the document. Although first you should email the mailing list with your proposal.




Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


Wat


View Profile WWW
November 28, 2012, 02:08:33 AM
 #24

You might have something there but I didn't really understand it at all.

Any chance you could describe what you want to achieve in a simpler style ?

I assume he means a prospectus embedded in the genesis block. So a new block chain would be a sort of IPO with the contract locked in  forevermore.

2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708



View Profile
November 28, 2012, 02:20:10 AM
 #25

I assume he means a prospectus embedded in the genesis block. So a new block chain would be a sort of IPO with the contract locked in  forevermore.
Well, not "locked forevermore". The only thing locked like this is "root prospectus". Every implementation would need to support "prospectus ammendments" that form tree branches. So every "digital security" is defined by a pair (hash(root prospectus),hash(tip of branch steming from the root)).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_(data_structure)

Edit: I guess the point of this can be summarized: it makes the changes to the algorithms explicit and verifiable in linear time, very much like git does to any general source code.

Edit2: Also, like git and like normal securities exchanges this will allow for orderly and verifiable backtracking and reversal, once the "economic majority" decides that certain branch of the prospectus was erroneous, fraudulent or otherwise undesired.

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100



View Profile
November 28, 2012, 09:32:30 AM
 #26

Quote
The choice of the programming language for the “digital prospectus” needs to be made early. The primary requirement is that the language needs to have very strong theoretical underpinnings: it must be able to efficiently express its own interpreter and there must be existing programs that are capable of proving simple theorems expressed in this language.

Quote
The more plain-spoken description of "digital prospectus" is: a cryptographically signed machine-executable description of the rules of the block validity. As opposed of the solemnly sworn human-language statements of the core development group that they aren't going to materially change the rules for the valid blocks.

Just musing if Coq, Haskell or even Fortran are worth a look ...

MPOE-PR
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756



View Profile
November 28, 2012, 05:15:12 PM
 #27

If you only want comments, suggestions, and ridicule from others with the same particular degree and experience, you ought to consider adding those specific qualifications to your signature line directing us here so that others outside of your assumed audience don't have to waste their time with it.

Little old lowly me, the main ridicule I'd have to offer is that your ability to convey ideas in written form sucks balls and is definitely not on par with the technical aptitude you claim, and that your principal point you seem to be looking to make (if your insistence on a vanity BIP number doesn't make that strikingly clear) is that you consider yourself a badass.

Ah come now, it's not that bad is it.

My Credentials  | THE BTC Stock Exchange | I have my very own anthology! | Use bitcointa.lk, it's like this one but better.
2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708



View Profile
December 01, 2012, 09:00:12 PM
 #28

Just musing if Coq, Haskell or even Fortran are worth a look ...
Another proposed language was Lua. Apparently it rapidly spreads in the computer science departments in Latin America. Unfortunately I'm illiterate in both Portugese and Spanish, so I can't read the most recent research papers.

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708



View Profile
December 01, 2012, 09:05:59 PM
 #29

Ah come now, it's not that bad is it.
I took "suck balls" as a sort of backhanded compliment from Casascius. If he really wanted to put me down, he would've written e.g. "sucks dead Easter bunnies through a bent straw" or "could suck-start a Harley through the exhaust pipe."

English is a virtual minefield of smoothly readable, but ambiguous sentences, e.g. pharmacist dispensed with accuracy.

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
aantonop
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


Entrepreneur, coder, hacker, pundit, humanist.


View Profile WWW
March 28, 2013, 02:47:56 AM
 #30

I suggested recently that the 8.1 patch be evolved (which hard codes certain parameters for all clients), is evolved into a schema validation engine for the protocol and transactions, so that the behavior of the node and client has prescribed and defined edges, defineed by a computable  definition.

Different words form yours, same basic concept - a core interpreter that validates protocol and transactions and is the agreed, reference, signed implementation that is authoritative for testing, QA, interop and attestation of client validity.


Bitcoin entrepreneur - OpenBitcoinStore,SafePaperWallet,BitcoinPressCenter.org... and more.
Host on LetsTalkBitcoin.
Un zafado cualquiera
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 159


aquí dice algo personal.


View Profile
March 28, 2013, 03:45:11 AM
 #31

if it comes real, I up vote for lisp...not like emacs one but a Foss one
kingcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 262


View Profile
April 02, 2013, 01:06:57 PM
 #32

if it comes real, I up vote for lisp...not like emacs one but a Foss one

Emacs is FOSS. However, I would never write software in elisp other than simple utility snippets for use in Emacs. There are several FOSS Common Lisp implementations available. Personally I prefer SBCL. Common Lisp is an ANSI/ISO standard so you don't get into the creeping featurism that you have in many of the dictator languages, like Python (where the semantics suddenly change even though the syntax is the same). Lisp was a dictator language in 1958 but became a standard in 1994.

But why an interpreter? There are quite a few open source Common Lisp compilers out there. Of course they also include an interpreter and compiler since you at any point can dynamically build a s-expr and call eval (eval (cons '+ '(1 2 3))) or even (progn (defun somefun () (+ 1 2 3)) (compile 'somefun) (list (somefun) (compiled-function-p #'somefun)))

When writing Lisp code is quite common to design a domain specific language (DSL) on top of Common Lisp to fit the problem domain. Macros are quite handy in this process. Then you describe the problem using the DSL.

There are some open source Common Lisp based formal tools available, like ACL2: http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~moore/acl2/ ACL2 was used by AMD to prove the floating point operations in some earlier CPU design, etc. A quite fascinating piece of software IMHO.
tromp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 475


View Profile
January 25, 2016, 01:10:43 AM
 #33

What you have in mind is being realized by tauchain

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=950309.0
2112
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708



View Profile
January 27, 2016, 06:18:08 AM
 #34

What you have in mind is being realized by tauchain

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=950309.0
No, really no. The similarities are superficial only.

To clarify the difference I'm saying that this project/idea is scoped to be fully implemented in approximately 1MB of executable code. Somewhat limited implementation could probably be made on the historical CPUs like Intel 8086 or Hitachi HD64180. Fully featured implementation will for sure fit in a CPU with 16MB of address space like Intel 80286 or Zilog eZ80 (the new one, not the historical Z80) or the modern compatibles to the historical PDP-11/LSI-11. Basically any CPU supporting multiple banked/segmented 64kB address spaces is the satisfactory target.

The segmented/banked 16-bit-ness is not a requirement. The implementation could as well use the modern flat 32-bit or 64-bit addressing. However it is my experience that explicitly segmented 16-bit address spaces are a great aid in enforcing security and safety of the code. They are also aids in mechanical proving of the code correctness (even if only partial proofs).

I'm not actually advocating the use of those historical CPUs running with clocks in the single MHz range. I'm thinking of drop-in cores to be synthesized using modern FPGA or ASIC processes with the modern clock rate of high hundreds of MHz . The physical package of such cryptographic kernel device would be similar to the (nano-)SIM card or (micro-)SD card.

The supporting blockchain data is a different story. It would have to be either local storage in the present terabyte ranges or a networked access to the remote storage at single megabits per second speeds.

Edit: Anyway, I've read the tauchain whitepaper as well as all the 18 pages of the tauchain thread with interest. Thank you very much.

Please comment, critique, criticize or ridicule BIP 2112: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54382.0
Long-term mining prognosis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91101.0
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!