Makes zero sense...
At scale, a Turing-complete blockchain can be a platform for extremely expensive trust-minimized computations. Not a "World Computer" or "Web3.0". With very carefully written & very small no-library programs, it would be suitable for large-sum financial smart contracts.https://twitter.com/jon_choi_/status/1014913203145326592 …
-
-
-
I mean, "Turning Completeness" basically means it can do every computational process at universal scale... (or am I mistaking?)
-
No computer can do everything (some well-stated problems are mathematically impossible to solve), but Turing-complete programs can do far more than non-Turing complete programs. Scale is a different issue.
-
Strictly speaking, this is right - You can be turing complete but not scale. But should scalability really be AN ISSUE for such a
#Blockchain? That is what I find a bit confusing about your statement. -
Computational and social scalability are practically always both important issues. Ethereum has huge problems simply with computational scalability, but it would lose its value propvs. far cheaper alternatives if it solved them by trading social for computational scalability.
-
What you mean by "social scalability"?
-
Dunno but I find this utterly wrong... "Nobody has discovered any way to greatly increase the computational scalability of the Bitcoin blockchain, for example its transaction throughput, and demonstrated that this improvement does not compromise
#Bitcoin’s security." - 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
So any blockchain touring the Web 3.0 ability is either delusional or just fluff going for a cash grab? Genuinely asking.
-
The people doing the touting are, not necessarily everybody involved with the blockchain, and its influence on the blockchain design itself may be lesser or greater.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
If it relied on identified nodes or on a very small number of nodes it would not be trust-minimized, thus not very socially scalable or seamlessly global.
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
At one level of analysis sure, but there's also a personal benefit from having a machine under one's control that can validate a transaction (including running any shared computation that might be of interest, including those that effect oneself) for oneself.
- 1 more reply
-
-
-
It depends on how you aggregate and keep "liveness" of data. I think with IPFS or content addressable storage and with a suitable aggregation scheme it can be a "world computer". What are your thoughts on TEE (trusted execution)?
-
IPFS is not trust-minimized -- not suitable for socially scalable / seamlessly global smart contracts.
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
This Tweet is unavailable
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.