Reposting:
I feel that you are really limited, you try to make the clever for nothing by giving definitions that everyone knows. I'm going to explain what a blockchain is, it is like a database, and I'll save hash in that database.
So when the smart contract will be hashed in sha256, it will serve as an id.
Now A wants to make a trade, it leaves coins for sale and goes offline, how the database will call its smart contract? She will call it using using the hash.
I will help you learn a few things, when you read definitions ask yourself what are they for, you will be able to understand them better, so after the definitions, it is the functions.
I've tried my best to stay objective and unbiased, as all I ever wanted was to get clarity on the claimed security of the validator's private key signing the smart contract, and I very well appreciate the language barrier (btw, English isn't my first language either).
Why was I trying to get that clarity? - Because I wanted to be sure that I'd be making a sound investment.
But throughout these almost two weeks, I kept seeing a lot of smoke and mirrors. You know, it's totally understood when a given mechanism is just a trade secret and the author doesn't want to disclose that information so early.
But then it would make perfect sense to just state it as-is, instead of going in circles but never actually delivering a consistent and clear picture of the intended implementation.
The direct undeserved personal attacks and baseless name-calling is very inappropriate, especially when the respondent themselves is well aware of the problems with the language barrier and Google Translate.
I don't feel like I need to embark on a defense line here, because what I've been told speaks more about the person saying that than it does about me.
But anyone interested in verifying my professional experience which is only 25 years too late to be "limited" is more than welcome to PM me and obtain a link to my LinkedIn profile.
So, I pass on this one.
Good day all! And good luck!
instead of going in circles
I do not want to make circles, I try to explain in a clear way because when I publicly reply it is necessary to be clear, not only to the person who asked the question, but also to those who read the question and the answer, who need to have other notions to understand.
personal attacks and baseless name-calling
On the other hand it is complicated to answer a question where you are told that you are not capable, in the final, it is a question or a provocation? I do not know what to say.
Allo you talk to me about mathematical breakthrou, it is to take me for an idiot, it is not nice to talk like that, imagine that it is a miss expression or typo, it is not that severe.
I also have to answer here to answer emails at the same time, given that we have a hundred a day, there are technical questions I have to answer on skype, so try to be kind enough not to disparage our work.
But then it would make perfect sense to just state it as-is
Since the beginning I said that the source code would remain closed, but I still tried to explain some mechanisms.
too late to be "limited"
What I mean by limited is that sometimes we ask a question and try to belittle at the same time, there is a limit of open-mindedness here. I do not insult anyone, but sometimes you have to take a step back and see what really disturbs.
In addition, if I remember well, it is you who brought the question from safeforum, and I thank you for it, because it made me pleasure, but after you tell me, if you do not do that, you are not capable, at the end it disturbed me because I had thought that at the beginning it was part of a good intention, but instead it was to try to put me in a bad position, and I did not appreciate it, I think its understandable.
There is no problem, and I wish you courage, and I hope that you will find a project that will suit you.
And I honestly tried as best as I could to get myself convinced that there was a solid foundation
Regarding the foundation, i don't think that Coinpayments and their CEO would risk their reputation in a baseless project if they didn't trusted it.
)