The subsequent three Things To immediately Do About Bitcoin > 자유게시판

The CFTC sued Binance for operating what it said were an "illegal" exchange and a "sham" compliance program, while the SEC sued Binance and CEO Changpeng Zhao saying that Binance artificially inflated its trading volumes, diverted customer funds, failed to restrict U.S. Both those essentially give you a lisp-like language -- lisp is obviously all about lists, and a binary tree is just made of things or pairs of things, and pairs of things are just another way of saying "car" and "cdr". For example, rather than the streaming-sha256 approach in Elements, where you could write: "a" SHA256INITIALIZE "b" SHA256UPDATE "c" SHA256UPDATE "d" SHA256FINALIZE to get the sha256 of "abcd" without having to CAT them first (important if they'd potentially overflow the 520B stack item limit), in chia lisp you write: (sha256 "a" "b" "c" "d") which still has the benefit of streaming the inputs into the function, but only adds a single opcode, youtu.be doesn't involve representing the internal sha256 midstate on the stack, and generally seems easier to understand, at least to me. You could also allow things to be pushed onto the stack that (recursively) can push things onto the stack -- the language "Joy" takes this approach.

It seems to end up equivalent to doing things in a list oriented way to me. Gold actually works the same way. Is Bitcoin Issuance Similar to Gold? Normally the purchasing Bitcoin is seemed difficult? Traders believe that technical analysis is the method of applying formulas and measurements to a Bitcoin price chart in order to predict what the market will do in the future. Oops, out of order footnotes. The developing relationship likewise implies the opposite could happen, whereby bitcoin speculators trade out their cryptographic money in harsh circumstances for gold as a less unstable resource. You've heard the argument by fans of the gold standard that fiat currency isn't backed by anything; it's just paper that they can print arbitrarily. Better base your paper on a mineral. What makes fiat more than just pieces of paper is the belief that it will have value in the future. The fact is, it doesn't have to be backed by anything except this belief. The thing that's most appealing to me about bitcoin script as it stands (beyond "it works") is that it's really pretty simple in an engineering sense: it's just a "forth" like system, where you put byte strings on a stack and have a few operators to manipulate them.

NOP`. (OG Bitcoin SCRIPT FTW!) I think the `softfork` form would have to be a syntax though and not a procedure, as I think you want `cost` to be statically determined, and very likely also `version`. However, whether you do or don't support that softfork, as far as the rest of the script is concerned, the expression will either fail entirely or evaluate as zero; so anyone who doesn't support the softfork can just replace it with zero and continue on, treating it as if it had costed "cost" units. The other is to use the "softfork" opcode -- chia defines it as: (softfork cost code) though I think it would probably be better if it were (softfork cost version code) where the idea is that "code" will use the "x" opcode if there's a problem, and anyone supporting the "version" softfork can verify that there aren't any problems at a cost of "cost". If the new opcode, for example, removed an element of the stack, nodes that followed the new rules per the soft fork, well, in that case hard fork, would have a different stack after executing the opcode than old nodes, because old nodes would not interact with the stack at all.

And while I've never really coded in lisp at all, my understanding is that its biggest problems are all about doing things efficiently at large scales -- but script's problem space is for very small scale things, so there's at least reason to hope that any problems lisp might have won't actually show up for this use case. Granted, I've only really been looking at chia lisp for a bit over a week, but it really seems to me like a case where it might be worth putting that philosophy into practice. Seems worth looking into, at least. FOLD and in exactly the same context, I was wondering what the simplest possible language that had some sort of map construction was -- I mean simplest in a "practical engineering" sense; I think Simplicity already has the Euclidean/Peano "least axioms" sense covered. Simplicity requires finite types. Or perhaps you could arbitrarily limit the strings to a max of 520 bytes at a consensus level, and the corresponding Simplicity types to 4160 bits and go from there?