Something like that. In theory you can constructs arbitrary physical objects with a makeAtomOfElement instruction, but hardly practical.
-
-
Likewise a lot of things are "uselessly Turing complete". Regardless of Bitcoin's theoretical status, in practice non-Turing-like by design.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @nikuhodai @shibuyashadows
lol. still missing the big picture! you won't write arbitrary programs, no. that's not what it's for. it's a non-erasable turing machine.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
the future of a crazy lot of things will make heavy use of this architecture. social proofs, chains of custody, wills, credential pipelines…
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @CTZN5 @shibuyashadows
Bitcoin is a great thing, but if you insist on saying it's Turing complete, show me a Bitcoin script affected by the halting problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @nikuhodai @shibuyashadows
I'm getting reaaaallly tired of saying this: ***Script != Bitcoin***
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
"Ball-point pen != biro" "Vacuum cleaner != hoover" This is not a hill worth dying on.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
more like, Ethereum isn't fucking Solidity. I really am baffled that this needs to be said. When I say Bitcoin, I mean fucking Bitcoin.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
"Bitcoin" is going to mean block-chain based Internet in general. That's baked into the cultural-historical cake.
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
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.