On the way to the post-Ethereum world - page 3.

kushti

full member

Activity: 317

Merit: 103

Quote from: CIYAM on June 17, 2016, 08:23:27 AM

There is a reason why we didn't provide a high-level language and developed each "smart contract" ourselves (with literally months of testing).

Getting smart contracts "right" is a very difficult thing to do so you need the "attack surface" to be as small as possible.

Interesting. And what do you think about Solidity? Isn't it a language helping developers to make deadly errors?

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: CIYAM on June 17, 2016, 08:23:27 AM

There is a reason why we didn't provide a high-level language and developed each "smart contract" ourselves (with literally months of testing).

https://bitshares.org/technology/industrial-performance-and-scalability/#smart-contracts

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

It should be noted that Automated Transactions (AT) has been running for over 1 year on two separate blockchains without incident (and yes I will accept the fact the two blockchains involved don't amount to a huge amount of capital but certainly ATs have been handling amounts above 1 BTC regularly).

There is a reason why we didn't provide a high-level language and developed each "smart contract" ourselves (with literally months of testing).

Getting smart contracts "right" is a very difficult thing to do so you need the "attack surface" to be as small as possible.

kushti

full member

Activity: 317

Merit: 103

A note: I worked for Nxt(core dev) in 2014 and now working on Scorex ( https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scorex-ultracompact-cryptocurrency-engine-for-researchers-1103640 ).

Nxt core devs were sceptical about smart contracts inclusion into core. I myself was also sceptical about some things included into Nxt core

Bitcoin developers switched off many opcodes for a reason ( http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/25225/what-was-the-vulnerability-in-v0-3-4-that-allowed-an-attacker-to-steal-coins ). Then Vitalik complicated security conundrum with its "Turing-complete" approach.

Now Ethereum guys are making the biggest error in their career going to do a hardfork, because not all the contracts are equal and some of them are too big to fail. There are some talks(copied from Bitcoin community) on "miners will decide", but it is unlikely miners will have any reasonable discussion. Instead, they will just follow the "digital Lenin".

It is time to go another path. The core must be as simple as that. But it also need to be powerful enough to support protocols and applications built outside the core.

There are many designs possible, and there are many open questions and concerns about them. Nevertheless, as the topic is going to be hot, I would like to propose one design in July or August (after Scorex 2.0 release).

Topic: On the way to the post-Ethereum world - page 3. (Read 1945 times)