/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.13364114]

What the fuck is a smart contract? I keep hearing it over and over "this is why crypto is gonna be 30 trillion per x one day". Show me a smart contract. Post a working "smart contract" right now /biz/. Let's see it. Where are the smart contracts

[Anonymous No.13364186]

Check out the golem.network for a working one. It renders blenderjobs on the blockchain

[Anonymous No.13364660]

>>13364186
What does it actually do

[Anonymous No.13364683]

>>13364660
He literally just told you. It does 3d renders.

[Anonymous No.13364693]

>>13364683
He didn't. He said some sales speak gobbledegook.
>It does 3d renders
Of what? WHERE IS THE SMART CONTRACT SHOW ME A SINGLE WORKING SMART CONTRACT

[Anonymous No.13364701]

>>13364114
Remember Microsoft clippy? It's like that. It's an AI that gives you advice on your contracts, like it warns you if your stock options are a bad deal.

[Anonymous No.13364703]

An automated agreement that is tamper proof. IDEX is a smart contract. Basically useless unless you have access to real word information that is also decentralized. In conclusion buy Link.

[Anonymous No.13364713]

2017 buzzword

[Anonymous No.13364715]

Here's a smart contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x3fda67f7583380e67ef93072294a7fac882fd7e7
It pools 8 figures worth of tokens to match liquidity providers (earning interest) and borrowers.
Frontend for normies: https://compound.finance/

[Anonymous No.13364757]

If you were looking for an indicator that bull run is coming, this is it

[Anonymous No.13364760]

>>13364660
It’s like twitter but for street shitters

[Anonymous No.13364770]

>>13364114
it's very close to a fart contract

[Anonymous No.13364771]

>>13364757
this, also sumner is close

[Anonymous No.13364823]

>>13364701
How? That doesn't sound right
>>13364757
Posted here since the very day biz board opened but I still have never seen a smart contract or If I have then I didn't know

[Anonymous No.13364833]

>>13364823
nice bait

[Anonymous No.13364835]

>>13364715
So this bit

pragma solidity ^0.4.24;
contract PriceOracleInterface {

/**
* @notice Gets the price of a given asset
* @dev fetches the price of a given asset
* @param asset Asset to get the price of
* @return the price scaled by 10**18, or zero if the price is not available
*/
function assetPrices(address asset) public view returns (uint);
}
contract ErrorReporter {

/**
* @dev `error` corresponds to enum Error; `info` corresponds to enum FailureInfo, and `detail` is an arbitrary
* contract-specific code that enables us to report opaque error codes from upgradeable contracts.
**/
event Failure(uint error, uint info, uint detail);

enum Error {
NO_ERROR,
OPAQUE_ERROR, // To be used when reporting errors from upgradeable contracts; the opaque code should be given as `detail` in the `Failure` event
UNAUTHORIZED,
INTEGER_OVERFLOW,
INTEGER_UNDERFLOW,
DIVISION_BY_ZERO,
BAD_INPUT,
TOKEN_INSUFFICIENT_ALLOWANCE,
TOKEN_INSUFFICIENT_BALANCE,
TOKEN_TRANSFER_FAILED,
MARKET_NOT_SUPPORTED,
SUPPLY_RATE_CALCULATION_FAILED,
BORROW_RATE_CALCULATION_FAILED,
TOKEN_INSUFFICIENT_CASH,
TOKEN_TRANSFER_OUT_FAILED,
INSUFFICIENT_LIQUIDITY,
INSUFFICIENT_BALANCE,
INVALID_COLLATERAL_RATIO,
MISSING_ASSET_PRICE,
EQUITY_INSUFFICIENT_BALANCE,
INVALID_CLOSE_AMOUNT_REQUESTED,
ASSET_NOT_PRICED,
INVALID_LIQUIDATION_DISCOUNT,
INVALID_COMBINED_RISK_PARAMETERS,
ZERO_ORACLE_ADDRESS,
CONTRACT_PAUSED
}

/*
* Note: FailureInfo (but not Error) is kept in alphabetical order
* This is because FailureInfo grows significantly faster, and
* the order of Error has some meaning, while the order of FailureInfo
* is

Is the smart contract?

[Anonymous No.13364836]

a smart contract is just code that deals with money

[Anonymous No.13364843]

>>13364833
Not baiting at all

[Anonymous No.13364852]

>>13364836
Explain some things this smart contract can do

[Anonymous No.13364860]

>>13364835
yeah that and the other 2600 lines of code

[Anonymous No.13364870]

>>13364860
Yeah but char limit. Ok. So what can a smart contract be used for other than shitcoins

[Anonymous No.13364877]

So when I slap your mom's ass and it jiggles that's kind of like a smart contract. I don't have to trust anything, I know that ass will jiggle. The laws of physics, the ETHER around us, we know how things behave, we have the math and our senses that tell us. You can't tamper with the laws of physics, and you can't tamper with blockchain consensus and code, so contracts can be written to be executed in a trustless manner.

[Anonymous No.13364878]

>>13364870
arbitrary computation.

[Anonymous No.13364880]

>>13364843
Here ya go nub
https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-solidity/blob/master/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20.sol

[Anonymous No.13364895]

>>13364880
Thats just some erc20 shitcoin
Give me a real working smart contract

[Anonymous No.13364908]

>>13364870
Nothing. You would need a trustless bridge to outside data but unfortunately such a thing is impossible because of physics. It's tokens all the way down.

[Anonymous No.13364910]

>>13364878
Ah I see

[Anonymous No.13364934]

>>13364895
Uhmm well I have you a simple example because your brain can’t google its way out of a hole

Here’s a working example of a contract that’s let’s you trade on margin like bitmex https://github.com/dydxprotocol/protocol/blob/master/contracts/margin/Margin.sol

[Anonymous No.13364947]

>>13364908
So it's just tokens?

[Anonymous No.13364949]

the door is that way

[Anonymous No.13364960]

>>13364949
>the door is that way

[Anonymous No.13364972]

>>13364934
Doesn't look very smart to me

[Anonymous No.13364975]

>>13364186
You're better off with RenderToken. No one uses Blender besides poorfags.

[Anonymous No.13365002]

>>13364972
>this program doesn't satisfy my arbitrary ideas that I never explicitly stated
brainlet alarm going off

[Gem Anon No.13365029]

https://guts.tickets/nl/ makes use of ETH smart-contract to sell tickets. They have sold tens of thousand already that way.

[Anonymous No.13365078]

>>13365002
Looks like a DumbContract

[Anonymous No.13365082]

>>13364114
>What the fuck is a smart contract?

I've been on /biz/ since 2017 and I have no fucking idea! Made money though!

[Anonymous No.13365130]

frens. i met an attorney in her 30s that's never heard of bitcoin. i feel we may still be early adopters.

[Anonymous No.13365159]

>>13365130
my girlfriend was purchasing something on a website and saw that they accepted bitcoin and was asking me if i think we can trust them, maybe they are scammers etc because they accept bitcoin, we are still VERY early fren

[Anonymous No.13365499]

>>13364114
OP you’re not going to get many intelligent answers from the moonbois here on /biz/. Couple good examples so far but it’s true there’s not a whole lot of ACTUALLY useful or interesting stuff you can do with smart contracts yet....Crypto as a whole is basically still barely out of the womb, even as far as being a fkn simple payment system goes (just look at the brain-numbing circlejerk between block sizes and how the principal argument seems to converge to “muh lower fees”), so this is where you have to use your imagination a little.

My favorite example of a smart contract to date? Probably gotta be FOMO3D:
exitscam.me
(unironically)

It’s too long to explain how it works in detail but if you haven’t heard of it basically it came out in like May of last year, spawned out of the POWH3D game by the same devs, and every player starts by buying “keys” with their ETH to hold throughout the game. All that ETH gets locked up in the smart contract, continuously funneling into a big-ass jackpot. There’s a 24-hour timer at the top of the page that continually counts down. (this is built into the smart contract). Last person to have bought a key, when the timer hits 0, wins the entire jackpot.

The thing is though with each key bought, it adds like 30 seconds back to the timer, as well as raises the price of keys ever-higher for future participants. Why then, would anyone want to buy early on? you ask. Because the other half of the profitability factor is the almighty dividends: a small % of the ETH from all the keys being bought doesn’t actually go into the jackpot, it gets distributed evenly to each key that’s currently being held by someone. So it can be insanely profitable to just ignore the jackpot, and instead buy a fuck ton of keys early in the game, and as long as a bunch of cucks FOMO in after you, you’ll sit back and watch the divvies roll in as you quickly hit ROI on your initial investment multiple times over.

[Anonymous No.13365509]

>>13364852
anything that can be done with data. at the end it's literally just numbers on the screen. you could have code that deletes coins that are sent to a wallet and that'll be a smart contract

[Anonymous No.13365538]

>>13365499
i remember it being spammed yes but thanks for clearing up some things.
>>13365509
what are some interesting things that can be done then?

[Anonymous No.13365579]

>>13365499
it’s a game yeah, basically gambling, it’s not saving the world or anything but it was really a freakin genius concept when it started. First game went like a few months if I remember correctly. I saw how crazy it could potentially get and put in like $15 of ETH at the time, and ended up with $200 of dividends by the time it ended.

Anyway that’s something that could just never be done without smart contracts so I always thought of that as my go-to example when explaining what makes them so fuckin neato. Of course that’s just the tip of the iceberg; if/when chainlink ever gets its mainnet working and working well the way everyone imagines it, that’ll quite literally open the floodgates to the official era of smart contracts. We’re talking not just gambling apps for /biz/ neets but serious products for businesses, mainstay consumer products relying on multi-gorillion dollar smart contracts; and automating away entire swaths of the law industry in general, with undoubtedly tons of other industries to follow. But make no mistake that’s more than enough to earn it a designation of a historical innovation among the likes of the steam engine, fucking agriculture etc.

[Anonymous No.13365595]

>>13365538
Since you seem like less of a tard than the usual fare here I’ll indulge you, what’s your interest in it? what’s your background, are you a developer, or what

[Anonymous No.13365599]

>>13365538
think of any process that can be automated and you pay crypto to use it. the code that processes your transaction and executes whatever has to be done is the smart contract.

[Anonymous No.13365690]

>>13365538
collateralized loans without KYC bullshit
provably fair gambling
time vaults
proof of ownership
authentification (technically signed messages are enough)
stablecoins
private medical records
decentralized credit score
savings accounts
trustless p2p deals (using game theory and burns)
DAOs
secure voting in general
money games with arbitrary rulesets
...
blockchains are consensus engines, ethereum is programmable money. areas where trust is important can potentially benefit from trustlessness, although it's a case-by-case basis

also half of the replies are very obviously chainlink holders, who need to believe smart contracts are useless without decentralized oracles. in truth, none of the applications i listed require oracles

[Anonymous No.13365719]

>>13365499
Holy shit, I never knew how FOMO3D worked but immediately assumed it was a scam and wasn't bothered. That's interesting.

[Anonymous No.13365755]

>>13364870
>We've got a turd in the punch bowl folks
Look kid, no one really knows what the fuck any of this shit is useful for. Just STFU and let us make our money by selling to the greater idiots.

[Anonymous No.13365876]

augur uses smart contracts, I made a super bowl bet on it and it paid out automatically

[Anonymous No.13365888]

>>13365876
Is Augur hard to use? Does it use metamask?

[Anonymous No.13365955]

>>13365690

> collateralized loans without KYC bullshit
How is this done? If I borrow 1.7k from you and I put 10 ETH (current ETH price) as collateral

if I say you scammed me and you didn't give me $1700 (it was fake bills for example), who decides if you actually gave me 1.7k?

If it was ETH to ETH loan and I have to put ETH up for collateral for the full amount, why would I make a loan in the first place?

> time vaults
Can be done on bitcoin via SCRIPT. Believe it or not, bitcoin has smart contracts but they limit what operations are available because bitcoin devs think letting anyone run whatever code they want on the blockchain has huge security implications and it's highly inefficient.

> proof of ownership
Cannot happen without a 3rd party. Any physical object has issues with that. If you buy a house and you died, does that house also "die" with you? It can't be sold or have anyone else own it ever. If you get your keys stolen (do you even hold your own private keys for ETH?), are you going to move out of your house?

>authentification (technically signed messages are enough)

Yep

> private medical records
Doesn't need to be on the block chain. If you want something to be private you generally don't broadcast that to the world and store it forever in a blockchain

> decentralized credit score
For that to happen, it needs to see all your purchases, loans, assets etc. Again, in the house example above, IRL assets are hard to lock to a virtual token. It removes trust but at the same time it removes privacy.

>savings accounts
According to ETH's website:
Ether is to be treated as "crypto-fuel", a token whose purpose is to pay for computation, and is not intended to be used as or considered a currency, asset, share or anything else.

>trustless p2p deals (using game theory and burns)
see above examples

[Anonymous No.13365990]

Every single erc token you see is a smart contract you brainlet

[Anonymous No.13365991]

>>13365719
ya man I’m telling you. Fucking. Genius. That’s the kind of stuff that we SHOULD have more of as crypto users, not trying to outdo the newest platform by making an even newer one with MOAR FEATURES or OMG it supports regular shitty legacy programming languages, look at this stupid gambling dapp or cryptokitties clone or <insert skeuomorphic cookie cutter tripe here>!!!! The technology is basically here. we have the chance to literally redefine how Money works... just gotta think outside of the box

[Anonymous No.13366076]

>>13365955

part 2 -

To be honest, "smart" contracts is a stupid idea in a sense that you let anyone put code on the blockchain. There have been various instances of fuck ups and people have their ETH locked forever or stolen. From a security perspective, it's very dumb. It's like letting anyone come in and use your computer and do whatever they want on it.

To tie a virtual token to a real world asset has huge problems.
1) If you die, does that physical asset die with you? If you own a house, that house can no longer have a future owner?
2) If you lose your private keys (do you even hold your own ETH keys?), do you start moving out because you lost your house and the thief can move in right in front of your face and laugh at you?

In the "smart" contract world where you try to make a "trustless" system means you have to

- learn how to code on the blockchain (however many there would be), for each, you need to understand every technical aspect and fluent in every language. Otherwise, you cannot verify the contract doesn't fuck you in the ass or some unintended bug

- write code that is bug proof (if you've ever done any software development, it is very difficult to do), or else you fuck someone else over.

- Even if you buy an apple, you'll need to review (for example, walmart's smart contract or target's smart contract). You'll need to do this for every item you buy. Otherwise, some walmart coder will steal all your money.

- You'll need to protect private keys with your life, literally. Otherwise you lose everything. If there's any blockchain that tries to do "identity" or "state", if you lose private keys, whoever stole it can say you're dead

- many other scenarios to consider.

The ETH full blockchain is 2.2 TB+ already (and it's younger than bitcoin, where bitcoin's blockchain is only around 200 GB). Something simple like crypto kitties grounded the entire blockchain to a halt.

[Anonymous No.13366104]

>>13366076
part 3 -

There's a reason why ETH's website describes ETH as

There's a reason why on ETH's website, ETH is described as

Ether is to be treated as "crypto-fuel", a token whose purpose is to pay for computation, and is not intended to be used as or considered a currency, asset, share or anything else.

Is your purpose of holding ETH to pay for "computation" on a distributed system? If not, you should reconsider. That's true for all the coins that tries to build around "smart" contracts that let you input arbitrary code into the blockchain.

[Anonymous No.13366238]

>>13365955
>>13366076
>>13366104
What are you working on

[Anonymous No.13366398]

>>13366238

Nothing blockchain related but I've been coding for awhile. I can at least see the technical boundaries of crypto.

- If anyone tries to tie physical property (say, an apple, a house, a car), with a virtual token, it's bullshit. See part 2 of my post.

- If the devs say "run whatever code you want" it's "programmable money!" it'll have a lot of security holes and the blockchain will be huge. It's extremely inefficient too because you can't edit the code to improve it. This is why ETH's full blockchain is already 2.2 TB and that is not sustainable for it to be a "decentralized" block chain.

- If blockchain aims to reduce transaction fees or eliminate it AND have a decentralized blockchain, it is not monetarily feasible. The cost of storing information forever in a decentralized manner has a cost, and it's greater than 0. That blockchain will eventually become centralized or they'll eventually increase the transaction fee.

- PoS will not work. The rich will get richer. It does not reward innovation in securing the blockchain whereas PoW does. External elements can attack a PoS chain at a much smaller cost vs PoW. For example, if you want to attack bitcoin you need to buy as much as rate protecting the network right now +1 for a 51% attack. Even when that attack happens, all you can do is prevent a transaction from going into a block (a ddos on a transaction). At that point, this attacker must sustain the attack and at max, he can only stop the transaction for 2 weeks because bitcoin difficulty algorithm will adjust making it twice as hard to mine a block. Therefore, to keep a transaction off the blockchain, this person must buy 2x the miners AGAIN after 2 weeks. This race becomes impossible to win in the long run, hence why PoW and difficulty adjustment is a good way to protect a network. With PoS, the person doesn't have to spend any money on miners or electricity for those miners.

[Anonymous No.13366441]

>>13366398
>Nothing blockchain related
Don't believe you but thanks for the posts anyway, made me think

[Anonymous No.13366448]

>>13364114
Every erc20 token is a smart contract. Eat a dick troll

[Anonymous No.13366454]

>>13366398
>It's extremely inefficient too because you can't edit the code to improve it
Clueless, verbose schizo detected

[Anonymous No.13366465]

>>13366398

More on PoS: if you want to do a 51% on a PoS chain, the rich will have full control of all transactions. Suppose a group of people own 51% of the coins. They can stop any transaction, forever, at no additional cost.

You won't need to buy 2x the miners and 2x the electricity every 2 weeks to sustain the attack but you'll need to do that on bitcoin. Even if you hold 51% of bitcoin you cannot do this attack unless you decide to burn all your money and you can maybe stop a transaction for a month or two.

For the long term, maybe 5-10 years (or even longer), I see bitcoin as the best investment so far. It doesn't make silly promises and has a very grounded view on feasibility (technological and monetary) to achieve decentralization.

[Anonymous No.13366487]

>>13366441
t. nigger brains
sick meme thread faggot

[Anonymous No.13366513]

>>13366487
Refute what he said then..

[Anonymous No.13366526]

>>13364114
>Go to betdice.one
>gamble your savings away
>congratulations, you just lost your money in a completely fair and transparent way and it's now etched into history until the end of time

[Anonymous No.13366536]

>>13366454
What I mean is you write a smart contract, aka code, but you can't edit it. If you could, then you can change smart contracts arbitrarily.

So for example, if I write a 2.6k line smart contract, and I want to make change, just one variable... I would need to put another ~2.6k line smart contract on the blockchain. Therefore, the blockchain would have a total of 5.2k lines even though I just wanted to change a few lines.

If I want to use someone else's smart contract that they made but change some variables, I'd have to push a very similar contract to the blockchain. I bet you'll find smart contracts on the blockchain that's the same because people copy and paste.

[Anonymous No.13366557]

>>13366536
You can edit EOS smart contracts by default and can optionally make them immutable.

[Anonymous No.13366565]

>>13366536
That's true, and that's the fundamental BENEFIT of on-chain executable code. That some IT miser cna't just come in and change the program that people already started to use. The inefficiencies don't stem from optimizing the code, but from the consensus process.

[Anonymous No.13366691]

>>13366565
> That some IT miser cna't just come in and change the program that people already started to use.
This limits its use cases to very simple contracts that are unlikely to contain bugs. You could never write a decentralized twitter on an immutable contract, or any other complex software. Immutability is beneficial in some cases, but it should be optional. More often than not, you're already putting your trust in the people who own the contract by way of investment. ie. for all the ICO's with erc-20 token contracts they don't need to be able to edit the contract to exit scam and run away with your money.

The real benefit of having contracts on a blockchain is knowing that the history can never be erased or changed, knowing that it's cryptographically verifiable, and knowing that it can't be censored.

[Anonymous No.13366708]

>>13366557
So you'd use a system where someone can arbitrarily change a smart contract?

The definition of a contract is:

a written or spoken agreement, especially one concerning employment, sales, or tenancy, that is intended to be enforceable by law.

You would agree to something then have someone change it? If you sell your house for 300k, we both agree, then I change the contract to say you're selling it for 30k you're ok with this? Not sure if you can even call it a contract.

Letting people arbitrary change a contract is nonsense. Making them immutable is a requirement, it shouldn't be an option. When it becomes immutable and you want to put it on the blockchain, you'll run into the problems described in >>13366536

>>13366565
You have immutability at a high cost. You lose mainly lose storage and bandwidth because people that aren't using a particular smart contract have to store it and they have to transmit it (requirement for a decentralized blockchain).

When that smart contract is no longer used or it's been upgraded, the old full smart contract is still in the system and will stay there forever. If you decide to remove / prune unused smart contracts (aka optimize the blockchain), then the blockchain is not immutable.

For you to have immutability and it to be efficient (smart contract wise), you need to code something that make sure it has no mistakes, it will need no improvements or additional features, until the end of time. Every single smart contract writer needs to do this, every time, without fail, for every smart contract. Also remember that anyone can publish to the blockchain.

For it to be trust less, you'll need >>13366076 to be true as well, which is really difficult to impossible in the real world. Can you imagine spending 3 hours reviewing a smart contract from walmart just to buy an apple so they don't steal all your money (assuming you're even capable of reviewing it)? You'll need to do that for everything you buy. It's non-sense.

[Anonymous No.13366722]

>>13366691
>This limits its use cases to very simple contracts
No. It's the same principle as writing code to operate a robot on mars.
The fact that the typical web app i pure spaghetti doesn't mean that it can't be written with error-resistance in mind. The benefits that smart contracts give are too unique and great to pass on them.

[Anonymous No.13366771]

>>13366691
>decentralized twitter

[Anonymous No.13366788]

>>13366722
>So you'd use a system where someone can arbitrarily change a smart contract?
Depends on the use case and what was at risk. If I just want to post something on twitter and not worry about it being censored by my government, then yes.

>You would agree to something then have someone change it? If you sell your house for 300k, we both agree, then I change the contract to say you're selling it for 30k you're ok with this? Not sure if you can even call it a contract.
That's not how blockchains work. The transaction that has the original agreed to price is still there for everyone to see. Changing the contract doesn't retroactively change all transactions that went through it.

>>13366722
>No. It's the same principle as writing code to operate a robot on mars.
So in order to write smart contracts on Ethereum, you should be as skilled and vigorous as a team of NASA engineers? I mean, good luck with that? You've obviously never been involved in software development. You can define "smart contracts" however you want. The rest of the world who wants actual functioning products don't care about your blockchain religion.

[Anonymous No.13366870]

>>13366722

Standard practice for any code is error-resistance. However, in the real world there's plenty of bugs. On a permission-less smart contract blockchain means that anyone can push code to that blockchain.

Therefore, it is very likely that the blockchain will contain smart contracts that are buggy and will always do so if you want to claim that the blockchain is immutable.

In a truly decentralized, permission-less, immutable smart contract based block chain:

1) everyone can push code to it (permission-less)
2) anyone can run whatever code they want on the systems with the smart contract (smart contract but huge security hole)
3) every participant must keep a copy of the contract (decentralized)
4) every contract cannot be removed (immutable)

Hopefully you can at least see it's not efficient and maybe you see the security implications of it.

To be honest, if you really want to do smart contracts, you would do it on L2 or L3, not on L1.

People don't understand smart contracts or coding in general, so they will need to trust someone (either to review it on their behalf or the coder that made the contract). Even then, mistakes could happen because the reviewer makes a mistake or the coder since they're human. On L2 or L3, the entire network doesn't need to know about your contract. Your contract would be known just the relevant parties and signing is proven with a N/N multisig, where N is the # of people in the contract (kind of what lightening is doing on bitcoin).

Doing it on L2 or L3 would mitigate a lot of the problems I described above but then if you do that, you literally just end up with bitcoin (and bitcoin has other benefits as well) so it's hard to get investors to invest in your "blockchain" tech.

[Anonymous No.13366942]

>>13366788
> That's not how blockchains work. The transaction that has the original agreed to price is still there for everyone to see. Changing the contract doesn't retroactively change all transactions that went through it.


I'm not really familiar with EOS and how smart contracts can be modified. Can you give me an example of changing a smart contract and still claim the blockchain is immutable?

By modifying a contract, I assumed you remove the old code and replace with a new one, as I was discussing the efficiency aspect of storage.

An example of this is If I open up a word document, I can edit and save it (replacing the old document). I don't mean open the document, edit it, save as a new document. In the 2nd scenario, I have an old copy I don't need, hence it's storage inefficient. In a blockchain scenario, people would have to store the old copy (including me).

If the first scenario is true, then the block chain is not immutable. If the second scenario is true, then it is not efficient and potentially dangerous due to bad code.


> So in order to write smart contracts on Ethereum, you should be as skilled and vigorous as a team of NASA engineers? I mean, good luck with that? You've obviously never been involved in software development. You can define "smart contracts" however you want. The rest of the world who wants actual functioning products don't care about your blockchain religion.


Right, dummies will push their code on the blockchain and with bad code comes with a shit ton of holes that every node participating in the network will have to execute. To me, that's a security disaster.

[Anonymous No.13366990]

>>13366942
>I'm not really familiar with EOS and how smart contracts can be modified. Can you give me an example of changing a smart contract and still claim the blockchain is immutable?
>By modifying a contract, I assumed you remove the old code and replace with a new one, as I was discussing the efficiency aspect of storage.
When you upload a new version of the contract, the old version isn't over-written. It's still there on the chain forever, because the byte code for the contract is stored in a transaction which obviously cannot be overwritten. But the newest version is used for execution.

>Right, dummies will push their code on the blockchain and with bad code comes with a shit ton of holes that every node participating in the network will have to execute. To me, that's a security disaster.
This is a problem regardless of whether contracts are immutable or not. You can't stop people from uploading pajeet tier contracts on Ethereum. At least if they're immutable they can be fixed. I mean there have already been blockchain breaking contracts pushed to Ethereum. I'm not sure what your argument is.

[Anonymous No.13367071]

>>13366990

> When you upload a new version of the contract, the old version isn't over-written. It's still there on the chain forever, because the byte code for the contract is stored in a transaction which obviously cannot be overwritten. But the newest version is used for execution.


Ok, so >>13366536 is correct. You have large inefficiencies in storage (storing unused code), bandwidth (transmitting unused code).

Not sure why you quoted me and say you can edit EOS contracts to contract the claim.

> This is a problem regardless of whether contracts are immutable or not. You can't stop people from uploading pajeet tier contracts on Ethereum. At least if they're immutable they can be fixed. I mean there have already been blockchain breaking contracts pushed to Ethereum. I'm not sure what your argument is.


Yeah, no shit. You can't stop it but it has implications aka consequences. I am discussing this consequences. Shit code, everyone has to have a copy, everyone has to propagate that copy on the network. This is just on the topic of efficiency and security. If you want to claim trust-less on top of that, >>13366076 also has to be true.

decentralized, permission-less, immutable, trust-less are all different claims on a smart contract based blockchain. Different conditions must be satisfied for each claim. If you claim all of that, then every condition must be satisfied.

[Anonymous No.13367110]

>>13366942
>Right, dummies will push their code on the blockchain and with bad code comes with a shit ton of holes that every node participating in the network will have to execute. To me, that's a security disaster.
There is already lots of this

[Anonymous No.13367118]

>>13367071
>Ok, so >>13366536 is correct. You have large inefficiencies in storage (storing unused code), bandwidth (transmitting unused code).
They aren't unused though. They're required to cryptographically validate all transactions that they executed. That's the whole point of a blockchain.

[Anonymous No.13367149]

>>13367118
He's saying contracts with errors on are still stored on the blockchain
The old contracts with the errors will be unused but still have to be propagated

[Anonymous No.13367167]

>>13367149
Yes, and I'm saying that they are used whenever you need to validate a transaction that they executed. If they weren't stored on-chain then you could never prove that the transactions they executed actually took place.

[Anonymous No.13367264]

>>13367118

It's not used but it has to be stored and transmitted, which is the storage inefficiency i'm talking about. If it's permission-less anyone can dump code on it and force everyone to store and transmit it until the end of time.

>>13367167
the fact is, unused smart contract is stored on the blockchain and that's inefficient. To make it efficient (prune unused contracts) then it's not immutable. The only 2 options are not immutable or inefficient (storage and bandwidth wise).

Anyway, I'm out of this thread. Think for a minute when blockchain "companies", "foundations", "organizations" promise you the world. "Programmable money!" "no transaction fees!" "permission-less!" "trust-less!"

You'll eventually see it simply can't be implemented in a way they're presenting it or in a way you think. See >>13366398

I understand most of you are just trying to make a buck which is fine. Trade all you want, but I hope some of you look beyond the shilling that happens on this board because if you believe the shilling long term, you'll be the one holding the bag when shit hits the fan.

To be honest, if you actually believe in permission-less, decentralized, immutable, trust-less, censorship resistant crypto that does what it says and doesn't make ridiculous promises, it's called bitcoin. If you just want money by trading / shilling, chose any "crypto" you want.

[Anonymous No.13367271]

>>13367167
Yeah but I think he's saying that it satisfies immutability, but makes it inefficient etc

[Anonymous No.13367275]

>>13367264
If you want efficiency, run things on punchcards, on fortran. Can't beat that.

[Anonymous No.13367286]

>>13367264
All I see in your argument is:
>I can't write safe smart contracts, therefore nobody can.

[Anonymous No.13367287]

>>13367264
>If it's permission-less anyone can dump code on it and force everyone to store and transmit it until the end of time.
It's not free. You have to pay for resources (RAM in EOS's case) to store every new version of your contract. It's no different than paying a cloud service for server space.

[Anonymous No.13367297]

>>13367286
Anyone can write smart contracts, but not well
Think thats his point

[DarkTrip !nNThBA7CKU No.13367311]

>>13364693
>SHOW ME A SINGLE WORKING SMART CONTRACT
what dont u make us tough guy
you wanna see a smart contract? really?
i don't think u do. ur not ready to see one clearly.
you got a lotta thinkin to do bucko.
come back next week when you're ready to apologies.

[Anonymous No.13367321]

>>13366398
The way ethereum is implementing PoS, if you attack the chain you get your staked ether wiped. With that change it becomes very secure on par if not more secure than PoW

[Anonymous No.13367329]

>>13367275

Yes, centralized systems are much more efficient than decentralized systems. However, if you want decentralized systems to be successful, efficiency is important. Why? Because people need to run a full node so they can validate it themselves. When you just add block space (not optimizing block space) or let people dump huge amounts of code on the blockchain, it becomes harder and harder for a full node to do so because cost rises. And when that happens, it leads to centralization.

>>13367286
No, I'm saying people will write shitty smart contracts or they want to update their contract. If you say your smart contract blockchain is decentralized & trustless, people will have to store and brodcast those shitty contracts or unused contracts. I am assuming people will write shitty contracts or want to update their contract. It will happen because it's permission-less. I'm not saying anything about me or my ability to write a good contract. Even if I write a good contract, I can never edit it or improve it with additional features.

Anyways, got to go.

[Anonymous No.13367342]

>>13367329
Cya later m8
>>13367311
Cuck bin isn't ready for smart contracts

[Anonymous No.13367344]

>>13367321
How does that work? Who decided that someone is attacking the network, and how does someone's staked ETH get wiped in a so called decentralized system?

[Anonymous No.13367350]

>>13367297
So use well tested frameworks like openZeppelin.

[Anonymous No.13367352]

>>13367329
>However, if you want decentralized systems to be successful, efficiency is important. Why? Because people need to run a full node so they can validate it themselves.
A normie running a full node for a smart contract platform that does 100+ transactions per second is not realistic no matter how efficient the system is.

[DarkTrip !nNThBA7CKU No.13367361]

>>13367342
>he doesn't own 10K corbyncoin
>he doesn't have his own copy of the labourchain
>he isn't running a rednode rite now

[Anonymous No.13367364]

>>13367329
>However, if you want decentralized systems to be successful, efficiency is important
Don't look for efficiency in diddling with minutiae of code. The consensus algorithm is the bottleneck.

[Anonymous No.13367376]

>>13367350
Eventually it might get to that point where that can happen, but is that now or anytime soon?
>>13367361
Give me the rundown on this, unironically

[Anonymous No.13367381]

>>13364114
>spoonfeed me

[Anonymous No.13367400]

>>13367381
Just wanted to stir up some shit

[DarkTrip !nNThBA7CKU No.13367413]

>>13367376
>votes and services as smart contracts
>you poll red you get divvies and gibs when labour win
>you don't then you must buy corbyncoin on exchanges
>govt services bought in corbyncoin
>weekly votes on hot issues, network decides policies set

[Anonymous No.13367430]

>>13367413
>govt services bought in corbyncoin

[Anonymous No.13367480]

>>13367413
now THAT is an ass

[Anonymous No.13367483]

>>13364908
But most of the world is basically tokenized anyway. Your car has an identification number that can be associated with an entry in a decentralized ledger. To simply sell a car without as many middle men as usual you can have a contract that transfers the entry of ownership of the car to someone that deposits the correct amount to the contract address.

[Anonymous No.13367589]

>>13367483
Or I can just give them the title once they paid me, honestly that's way easier than using a smart contract for it

[Anonymous No.13367646]

>>13367589
>Or I can just give them the title once they paid me
what if you dont

[Anonymous No.13367674]

>>13367589
The title is a centralized paper entry with a huge bureaucracy behind it. With smart contracts all the bureaucracy can be slowly phased out including the original vehicle registration. The more you tokenize in a way that's compatible the more options become available. Simple things like putting up your car as collateral for a loan and more advanced things we haven't thought of. Who wouldn't want to leverage their car on Bitmex?

[Anonymous No.13367900]

>>13367329
You keep ignoring the fact that launching a contract and every transaction thereafter costs something to run. If you make a bloated, inefficient contract, you and the people using it will pay the price. Saying smart contracts are inefficient and therefore will never be viable is like saying the internet will never be useful because dialup is so inefficient. Turns out, humans find ways to become more efficient when they hit on a technology worth using.

What we should be talking about isn’t whether smart contracts are optimized in their current state, but is this form of digital agreement a useful technology worth improving on.

The same could have been said about cars, electricity, literally any world changing technology. Right when they’re invented the brainlet brigade comes in with the inefficiency rhetoric.

[Anonymous No.13367949]

>>13364186
Your girl gave me a blenderjob.

[Anonymous No.13367985]

>>13364114
Pepe posters always post the most inane retarded garbage. Frog posters truly are the most braindead scum. What's funny about it is you never see people complaining about frogposters on /biz/ because everyone here is an actual retard. /biz/ is the board where all of the dumbest people from all the other boards come to try and fix the lives they've flushed down the toilet.

[Anonymous No.13368024]

>>13367985
Brainlet

[Anonymous No.13368123]

>>13367900
But inefficiency is caused by human error because pajeets can create any contract and it stays forever. Any mistake stays forever and to correct that mistake means creating a new contract so now there are 2 contracts, one of them doing absolutely nothing, forever, that needs to be propagated and this has to be the case for it to be immutable. If this isn't the case then it isn't immutable, if this is the case then it's inefficient and poses security risks because anyone can run whatever they want and the blockchain will only keep growing

[Anonymous No.13368139]

>>13367985
>/biz/ is the board where all of the dumbest people from all the other boards come to try and fix the lives they've flushed down the toilet.
Truth

[Anonymous No.13368144]

>>13368139
No it isn't

[Anonymous No.13368260]

>>13367985
Never again speak Kek's name in vain. Tread carefully, for this is a holy medium.

[Anonymous No.13368268]

>>13368144
Brainlet cope

[Anonymous No.13368319]

>>13368123
Go launch a billion pajeet contracts and break ethereum. Report back on your financial situation

[Anonymous No.13368342]

>>13368319
Not saying it will be done maliciously, but just over time...

[Anonymous No.13368373]

>>13368342
As long as it doesn't scale infinitely Crypto is pointless except as a non central store of value where transaction rates don't matter much and actually discouraging them is okay. I don't think smart contracts can really work on any current system because none of them scales.

[Anonymous No.13368414]

>>13368373
wut

[Anonymous No.13368439]

>>13368373
>Think smart contracts can really work on any current system because none of them scales.
What do you mean

[Anonymous No.13368518]

>>13368439
Each transaction causes too much load on the systems to be practical to implement even slightly complex systems on it. Basically cryptokitties is too slow and one service getting popular shouldn't slow down the entire system. You should be able to implement practically infinite cryptokitty sites without slowing down the system. A blockchain is a serial ledger that has to wait for all parts to finish before writing the next entry so it can't really work.

[Anonymous No.13368544]

>>13368518
Is this some sort of reverse shilling?
I think that's what they've been working on for the last number of years with off-chain whatever and sharding whatever the fuck else money skelly is up to

[Anonymous No.13368582]

>>13368544
I know. If LN or whatever actually works we will get smart contracts. This was basically the consensus reached at least as far back as 2014. You need some kind of off chain scaling or fancy parallel chains or whatever. In the current state which is basically the same as 2014 none of the dreams of selling tokenized pictures of cats on a large scale can be realized.

[Anonymous No.13368602]

>>13368139
>>13368268
let me guess, you are the exception?

[Anonymous No.13368606]

>>13368582
So what you're saying is that in your opinion they have failed to scale, and will fail to scale? Keep in mind I'm a brainlet end user not a developer desu, so break it down into retard steps if possible

[Anonymous No.13368634]

>>13368606
>they have failed to scale, and will fail to scale?
No it's just hard and will take a lot of time. When you're into the markets you want everything to happen right away. The actual development is an insanely long and tiresome process partly funded by your interest in the markets.

[Anonymous No.13368643]

>>13368582
Great to hear that bitcoin will someday do the bare minimum, in the meantime ethereum will have PoS, sharding, plasma, pruning and until then it’s firmly establishing itself as the umpire of web3 by choosing to support developers and their innovations. But great to hear that someday bitcoin will be so kind as to allow entrepreneurs to create new interesting applications on it

[Anonymous No.13368654]

>>13368643
I'm not talking about btc specifically. Anyone who accomplishes scaling well while maintaining real decentralization will win. Eth doesn't work either right now, it might one day and then it will eventually blow up harder than any bullrun before when the applications gain momentum.

[Anonymous No.13368663]

>>13368634
Well what did you mean by pointless then? Or are you just saying Ethereum is pointless?

[Anonymous No.13368714]

>>13368663
It's all pointless as anything else than the store of value meme until it scales. All the projects also serve the purpose of helping development so they aren't completely pointless but they aren't ready for consumers.