Please correct me if I am wrong. To get an idea: If you have 1 tx in a block, then 0 bits of information are needed for the ordering since there is only one tx. Going to 6 txs and you need
Actually it should scale by the logarithm of the factorial now that I think about it.
And the combination of Graphene and CTOR gets rid of that fast growing chunk of information when it comes to network traffic.
It does, and the bigger the blocks, the bigger the relative improvement on graphene. As the blocks scale, the size of the ordering info scales as the factorial of the number of txs.
kind of makes sense, but why is BTC not yet banned from being on exchanges? it was running the Silk Road
.. in BSV) for illegal purposes. That's the most sane solution. Both it and banning the whole platform are pointless of course, as the war on drugs has shown. People always find ways.
kind of makes sense, but why is BTC not yet banned from being on exchanges? it was running the Silk Road
Actually what is said is not 100% true. They could and maybe would avoid banning the platform and instead try to go after individuals that use DSV (or it's script implementation ..
kind of makes sense, but why is BTC not yet banned from being on exchanges? it was running the Silk Road
In the SR case I guess they wanted to go after the website. This won't be the case if the functionality is on the platform though. Then either the try to ban the whole thing or nothng.
Do you think Half-Life 3 is ever coming out?
| Yes |
0 votes
· 0 satoshis
|
| No |
0 votes
· 0 satoshis
|
| Taxation is theft |
0 votes
· 0 satoshis
|
Creating...
Broadcasting...
hmm DSV TXs can be shut down like this as well ...could the platform be partially liable in DSV scenario & not in the tx-script/tx-flow case?
.. And banning a command in a programming language will be a first and would probably be a precedent they don't want to set. They would simply ban the platform if anything at all.
hmm DSV TXs can be shut down like this as well ...could the platform be partially liable in DSV scenario & not in the tx-script/tx-flow case?
I honestly doubt any judge would had any idea what DSV is, and I doubt ANY computer engineer would describe DSV as anything more than a command in a programming language. ..
in Bitcoin a smart-contract is an outside computer; shut that down & no new illegal TXs will be created
.. I don't necessarily agree that pissing them off should be avoided though. I think they will be pissed of anyhow as adoption increases.
in Bitcoin a smart-contract is an outside computer; shut that down & no new illegal TXs will be created
Just to reiterate, I agree that adding DSV bring us closer to pissing them off, but Etherium is already there, and if it wasn't someone would be implementing DSV already in script. ..
in Bitcoin a smart-contract is an outside computer; shut that down & no new illegal TXs will be created
.. blockchain. Effectively they banned the whole platform.
in Bitcoin a smart-contract is an outside computer; shut that down & no new illegal TXs will be created
.. use-case. Right? And 2) How would they ever enforce this? People in other countries would still run the contract, so the ones affected are effectively banned from using the ..
in Bitcoin a smart-contract is an outside computer; shut that down & no new illegal TXs will be created
Well lets say that they can force people to stop running a contract and remove the outputs from the UTXO. 1) This could happen even without DSV if ETH was not around to absord the ..
they will shut down the illegal use-case; if the platform is the use-case then that has to go, but if it is a smart-contract that is illegal, then they will go after that
How can they go after a single contract? You can't remove stuff from blocks. If they ban anything they will ban the whole platform. Or force people to use blacklists.
this assumes that platform native DSV & one included in tx-script are identical under law (i have no clue whether this is true)
.. (if anything) which facilitates the bad use case. Which doesn't bode well for any blockchain as I explained before. But it sounds like a desperate move if they do.
this assumes that platform native DSV & one included in tx-script are identical under law (i have no clue whether this is true)
Also, DSV has valid, legal use-cases as well, like zero-conf forfeits. Which is more reason to believe that they wouldn't ban the native instructions. They would ban the platform ..
this assumes that platform native DSV & one included in tx-script are identical under law (i have no clue whether this is true)
I don't think it's an unfair assumption, because I don't think that courts will try to outlaw DSV, they are clueless, they will outlaw a platform that facilitates an illegal use-case.
i believe that in law intention matters & someone in lets say US government could decide DSV crosses that line & therefore is illegal; does this make sense? this isn't my field
.. complaining about Silk Road? If they had their way, Silk Road which I bet my ass that was the prime use-case for BTC back then, would have simply used another coin.
i believe that in law intention matters & someone in lets say US government could decide DSV crosses that line & therefore is illegal; does this make sense? this isn't my field
.. I think you avoid the issue, temporarily, by pushing people to use another platform instead (like ETH and BCH) for a possibly illegal use. Remember the people that were ..
