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 ..
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
.. like ETH. Take those out and people will find another way to do it. I don't think that by not implementing DSV you are not avoiding the issue by making the platform legal ..
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
.. BSV or BTC or some other coin and those platforms will be equally illegal. The reason why people haven't implemented DSV in script already is because they have easier alternatives..
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
.. Etherium and BCH would be illegal, sure. But the moment people realize that they cannot legally use those platforms to make contracts, they will simply implement DSV in script on ..
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
.. when it comes from a state. They could say that a platform that enables such a usage (in this case by having the DSV command in its language) is illegal. If this were to happen ..
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
.. It seems far-fetched to me that they would decide that a command in a programming language is illegal. This would set a very weird precedent. Of course nothing would surprise me ..
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
Yeah I understand the difference. Someone could claim that you added it when you know that it has illegal uses. But it's literally a command in a programming language. ..
in reality they
* are making you lose access to the original taste
* risk making a shitter taste & going bankrupt
* risk being shut down by adding illegal ingredients in the taste
Ryan has made the argument that DSV can already by implemented in script. Sure, the DSV op makes it easier but if someone wants to do illegal stuff, they can do it on SV as well.
I don't actually get the difference between Reddit style and phpBB style. Aren't they similar? 🤔
phpBB is (usually) threaded (flat) while reddit is a tree of comments. phpBB style is similar to IRC actually if we are limited to short messages like on memo.
"If there is any iron in the lander, it should have melted."
Why? Heat is at the shield. For example ceramic brick, one end +1300 C, you can hold it at the other end 5 cm away
Why ? I don't want to trust anyone else than the miners to get the ""exact"" order of events and don't want to set up a full node just to log everything, the blockchain should do that
.. keep track of ordering in their own database since they are the ones emitting these txs. I guess if there were also another memo instance, my messages there could be mixed up.
Why ? I don't want to trust anyone else than the miners to get the ""exact"" order of events and don't want to set up a full node just to log everything, the blockchain should do that
.. which tx was seen first. BTW I sent a bunch of messages, how does memo sort these messages now that with CTOR they can be in a different order? I guess they do what I say and ..
