Introducing Ethereum Script 2.0
-
[url=http://blog.ethereum.org/2014/02/03/introducing-ethereum-script-2-0/]http://blog.ethereum.org/2014/02/03/introducing-ethereum-script-2-0/[/url]
-
That language looks pretty old fashioned. But that’s just my opinion.
-
[quote name=“kris_davison” post=“56961” timestamp=“1391501351”]
That language looks pretty old fashioned. But that’s just my opinion.
[/quote]You mean it looks like machine code? The same thing all modern languages are ultimately compiled down to? That’s what compilers are for.
The problem with this isn’t the fact that it’s machine code, it’s the VM the machine code is designed to run on: It sucks. If I had even a few free cycles I’d show them how to design a language to be future proof. They really need to watch [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ahvzDzKdB0]Growing a Language[/url], it would save them a lot of heartache in the near and far future. They fundamentally misunderstand design using functional languages and completely miss the target with regards to fee voting.
They’re making progress, but it’s two steps forward, one step back right now.
-
Yeah old fashioned like before real languages existed that mean we don’t need to use machine code directly.
Tomato / TomAto etc.
Also do you guys think this ethereum is any good? It seems like a sideways move to me.
-
[quote name=“kris_davison” post=“57080” timestamp=“1391545180”]
Yeah old fashioned like before real languages existed that mean we don’t need to use machine code directly.Tomato / TomAto etc.
Also do you guys think this ethereum is any good? It seems like a sideways move to me.
[/quote]When you’re designing a machine, that’s the level you operate at: The machine code. You can build a compiler for ANY language that could, in theory, compile down to that machine language. You can write your contract in, as you call them, “real” languages with that compiler. No one in my industry actually writes machine code any more except in very rare circumstances, yet all “real” language compile down to it. The designers envision a GUI interface where you drag and drop components together to form a contract.
It’s a great idea, with a shit implementation that seems to be evolving pretty rapidly. The idea itself is potent: Instead of just having a blockchain which enforces a record of account, the blockchain enforces programmatic constructs. You can do this with Bitcoin, but you must do so by leveraging the unit of account features. This separates church from state, making the programmatic constructs the first order entities, which can enforce unit of account ledgers as second order entities, instead of the other way around… or in fact forego the unit of accounts and enforce a programmatic construct that emerges another behavior entirely.
It’s revolutionary in nature: Instead of contracts being enforced by lawyers and judges, they’re enforced by distributed incentivized consensus. It breaks Bitcoin free of the brilliant craziness that Mastercoin want’s to impose upon it, separating it from a potentially disastrous yet highly desirable layer of abstraction, and propping that dissected layer up on it’s own custom built blockchain so the dream can be realized without re-purposing Bitcoin. This has both advantages, and disadvantages, and which side will win is anyone’s guess.
The designers just need to get their heads out of their collective asses with regards to how economies actually operate in free-market conditions.
-
Why re-invent languages! How many times it simply better to use something that is already proven to work. But maybe this time it is worth it as I do not know much about their idea except the big lines.
On that, I still don’t understand how it could scale database size wise?
Also, with too many distributed networks out there, the security get stretched too thin as there is not enough hashing power in one place. One reason why I liked the idea of Adam Back to have a Bitcoin Beta network that eventually rolls in the production Bitcoin network.
-
[quote name=“kris_davison” post=“57080” timestamp=“1391545180”]
Also do you guys think this ethereum is any good?
[/quote]Vitalik is an alien from the future. It will take time for him to harness his complex genius within our simplified system.
In the meantime, start mining @MaxCoin tomorrow. ;)
This is a great interview on Ethereum, Bitshares, MasterCoin, metacoins, DAC’s …
[url=https://soundcloud.com/mindtomatter/e80-beyond-bitcoin-uncut]https://soundcloud.com/mindtomatter/e80-beyond-bitcoin-uncut[/url] -
[quote name=“robep00” post=“57088” timestamp=“1391546420”]
Why re-invent languages! How many times it simply better to use something that is already proven to work. But maybe this time it is worth it as I do not know much about their idea except the big lines.
[/quote]You need a formalized set of grammar when you’re designing a contract language. They’re hardly inventing a new language, more like they are designing a VM and borrowing existing language constructs to program it.
Which was kind of my point earlier: If they moved away from this silly limiting stack based VM design anyone could implement this using whatever VM an implementor wanted to.
[quote]
I still don’t understand how it could scale database size wise?
[/quote]The same way any other blockchain does: Prunable outputs, and Moore’s law.
