Why blockchains might want to consider using AT "Turing complete" txs

[msin]

I don't know if it will be part of the NXT testnet, since it won't be integrated into NXT, correct me if I am wrong. It will initially be implemented in the core of Qora, making it the first world-wide AT integration.

Correction, it will be on Nxt Testnet this weekend.  It's a specific dedicated NxtAT testnet.  Your information about integration is also wrong.  Qora might have an AT testnet up and running in two months (if he decides to actually do something on testnet).

Source's:
https://nxtforum.org/automated-transactions/information-of-the-at-project/msg117316/#msg117316
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=522102.msg9224248#msg9224248

Also, what's a "world-wide" integration?

Thanks for the correction.

But from what I know, it will be implemented into qoras core first.

Yeah, I could see that.  Nxt seems to be focused on other features at the moment and it sounds like Smart Contracts is more of a priority.  Anyway, I hope Nxt implements AT as it would be great to have CCT with other POS like Qora.

[1714054134]

1714054134

[1714054134]

1714054134

[1714054134]

1714054134

[allwelder]

Great progress.

[CIYAM]

Great progress.

Let's see if we can *ramp it up a notch* with this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=826263.0

[Gavin Andresen]

I'm confused. In the lottery example:

get timestamp for @txid and store in @timestamp

What is the timestamp for a transaction? When the node receiving the transaction receives it? The timestamp of the block in which the transaction is confirmed?

[CIYAM]

I'm confused. In the lottery example:

get timestamp for @txid and store in @timestamp

What is the timestamp for a transaction? When the node receiving the transaction receives it? The timestamp of the block in which the transaction is confirmed?

Very nice to see you here Gavin.

The timestamp is not intended to be an *actual timestamp* but instead one that is calculated by block height and tx within the block (i.e. an *artificial timestamp*).

I only used the word "timestamp" as that *makes it easier to follow*.

[coderboo]

This is fascinating work. I will be looking through today to see about implementing within Syscoin's core - I am the lead developer on that project.

[CIYAM]

This is fascinating work. I will be looking through today to see about implementing within Syscoin's core - I am the lead developer on that project.

Please PM me in order to get contact details - and there is a *bounty* on offer (currently 5 BTC) for achieving the first "mainnet" *atomic cross-chain transfer/transaction* between Qora and a Bitcoin/Litecoin (i.e. Script) clone.

[Gavin Andresen]

The timestamp is not intended to be an *actual timestamp* but instead one that is calculated by block height and tx within the block (i.e. an *artificial timestamp*).

Uhhh.... okey dokey. That sounds really dangerous, because it means a blockchain re-org can change the meaning or behavior of a transaction. "There Be Dragons"

[LiteCoinGuy]

@topic

i cant comment on the code but great to have such cool programmers  and such interesting ideas

[CIYAM]

Uhhh.... okey dokey. That sounds really dangerous, because it means a blockchain re-org can change the meaning or behavior of a transaction. "There Be Dragons"

If a re-org occurs then the ATs would need to be "re-executed" (yes - we have thought of this - obviously their state cannot be retained if they are *rolled back*).

The exact mechanism for doing this would need to be worked out for each platform (i.e. how to *undo* state).

It also partly depends upon how you *deal with the state* (i.e. it could be stored *explicitly* in txs or it could be worked out *implicitly* by just publishing hashes).

The explicit approach would make re-orgs simpler (but would cause some bloat), whilst the implicit approach would use very little space but would complicate the re-orgs.

[sidhujag]

Uhhh.... okey dokey. That sounds really dangerous, because it means a blockchain re-org can change the meaning or behavior of a transaction. "There Be Dragons"

If a re-org occurs then the ATs would need to be "re-executed" (yes - we have thought of this - obviously their state cannot be retained if they are *rolled back*).

The exact mechanism for doing this would need to be worked out for each platform (i.e. how to *undo* state).

Great job CIYAM!

A question on re-org...

Would this simply be a linked into reindexing the blockchain? You would only need to reindex/re-execute AT on the transactions in your wallet in that case right?

Can there be a case where a re-org is not detectable thus causing the tx's to be incorrectly indentified in any manor? Is there work to do in this area still?

I can see that tx bloating can be an issue, will this work with thin wallets, SPV and bloom filtering in the same way as normal tx's are filtered in bitcoin?

[CIYAM]

Would this simply be a linked into reindexing the blockchain? You would only need to reindex/re-execute AT on the transactions in your wallet in that case right?

The key point is that all ATs would need to be *restored* to the previous state they had at the point of the re-org (and then re-executed).

[sidhujag]

Would this simply be a linked into reindexing the blockchain? You would only need to reindex/re-execute AT on the transactions in your wallet in that case right?

The key point is that all ATs would need to be *restored* to the previous state they had at the point of the re-org (and then re-executed).

Thanks,

Just to be clear, this is network based and not oracle based right (not an n of m signers trust model?)...

If it is completely trustless then how can you deterministically execute scripts within known times as per spec:

"It can be expected that over time an increasing number of ATs will be created so the cost for running AT code
must be kept to an absolute minimum. This will require AT code to be deterministic, and that its instructions
must not be able to take arbitrary amounts of time. This will limit the set of API functions accessible to an
AT to only those that do not require arbitrary scans over the blockchain (i.e. they should be only applicable
to indexed information)."

If its network based can you have cases where AT's are running trying to access info that is not indexed on the local node it is running on?

Also just to be clear, it is allocating/checking any memory prior to execution right? So its a load/store machine rather than a two address machine?

[CIYAM]

It does not involve Oracles at all (at least for now).

The key is that AT API functions need to be O( log N ) to make sure an AT can't *clog up the works* (we may allow slower functions that cost more fees to execute down the track).

Each AT has its own memory blocks (code and data) which are fixed in size when the AT is created.

[Eadeqa]

This will be released at the NXT testnet first in the coming days right?

I don't know if it will be part of the NXT testnet, since it won't be integrated into NXT, correct me if I am wrong. It will initially be implemented in the core of Qora, making it the first world-wide AT integration.

It's already working on testnet with Nxt

The testnet is ready , and the usecases lottery, dormant and auction have been tested. I will release the testnet tomorrow where i could be all day home providing fixes when needed.

[Spoetnik]

That's up to you to decide. We mostly care for the tech and we believe any coin should have this functionality.

Later steps (not very soon) on this huge project will be to create a c based compiler for translating high level languages into AT code, so anyone without *machine code* knowledge can easily create programs.

Also we are going to release a new coin with a new proof ( at some point in the future, to fully exploit the power of AT), and we also want to integrate it to a btc based blockchain.  

good luck on the IPO 

[Come-from-Beyond]

This thread deserves much more attention but it was buried under usual BitcoinTalk trash...

Bump.

[justusranvier]

That's up to you to decide. We mostly care for the tech and we believe any coin should have this functionality.

Later steps (not very soon) on this huge project will be to create a c based compiler for translating high level languages into AT code, so anyone without *machine code* knowledge can easily create programs.

Also we are going to release a new coin with a new proof ( at some point in the future, to fully exploit the power of AT), and we also want to integrate it to a btc based blockchain.  

good luck on the IPO 

Just what the world needs - more scamappcoins.

[Daedelus]

That's up to you to decide. We mostly care for the tech and we believe any coin should have this functionality.

Later steps (not very soon) on this huge project will be to create a c based compiler for translating high level languages into AT code, so anyone without *machine code* knowledge can easily create programs.

Also we are going to release a new coin with a new proof ( at some point in the future, to fully exploit the power of AT), and we also want to integrate it to a btc based blockchain.  

good luck on the IPO  

Just what the world needs - more scamappcoins.

  

Quoted for future reference .


This thread...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=827725.msg9262650#msg9262650

... is currently THE BEST  thread for examples of sneering, condescending replies while simultaneously being oblivious to outing themselves as completely ignorant of all but a tiny part of crypto development... just like the example above.

AT isn't a coin. It is everything you want in Ethereum (Turing Complete, but based in machine code and soon to be in C++ so accessible to thousands right off the bat) but you don't have to wait as it is here today. It could built into BTC (though not likely in this decade from the pace of development there). Implementation in BTC/LTC clones are planned I believe. This is breaking down barriers between different blockchains.

Let's see how much of a scam AT is in a year....  

[vbcs]

Hey,

I am honoured to say that the testnet is on from Sunday and till now is working fine. We found some minor issues that are going to be fixed and when we have a more tested version the testnet will be available for anyone to use and test it. Till we reach that point, we would like to keep it smaller, for easier managment on updates/fixes.

But as you can see the "proof of concept" works perfectly. The AT core works perfectly from time zero, and only some fixes regarding the API calls the AT is making to the platforms core.

So here  ( http://5.196.1.215:5876/ATs.html , thanks dude for the VPS)  you can see the first AT turing complete programs "surfing" the blockchain. Enjoy!