elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
Express your wish (Smart Contracts) singapore
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Latest Nxt Client: Nxt 1.11.15

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All

Author Topic: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)  (Read 37232 times)

Berzerk

  • Ex-Staff Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +118/-40
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1530
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #20 on: July 14, 2014, 12:42:04 pm »

How do Smart Contracts relate to Automated Transactions? Should they at least use similar languages, to reduce the burden on people who must know both (eg, core maintainers)?

SC <> AT.

What does <> stand for?  :P

<> == !=  :P

unequal ;)
Logged

v39453

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +12/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 155
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #21 on: July 14, 2014, 01:02:16 pm »

Options contracts on assets would be interesting because options are a leveraged instrument. If the asset price increases by 10%, (theoretical) call option price increases by more than 10%.

I don't know if futures contracts can be done in a decentralized environment, but it seems to me that options contracts would be a possibility. The options writer would get his asset locked until  expiration or exercise of the option.
Logged

jefdiesel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +88/-77
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1275
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #22 on: July 14, 2014, 01:28:11 pm »

I'd like to be able to create a smart contract to share ownership of a project.

principals can be nominated into electable "trustee" accounts. the trustee accounts maintain their powers and responsibility upon change "of office"

like the way a president or police chief always has the same powers, the account could maintain the same powers within a contract.

This would allow to set up a board of directors, to equally and beneficially run a business.
Logged
Member of D.O.R.C.S., creators of Lyth - An Emergent Trading Game | Asset ID: 2318361924203311027

innovator256

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Karma: +24/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #23 on: July 14, 2014, 02:33:37 pm »

@CFB

I recently had a discussion with stark thru email, although he will be back from a long vacation just in time for nxtpoker alpha...So some key things business / cooperative functionality in this new paradigm: We need functionalities that will enable DACS : decentralized autonomous cooperatives I think "corporation" is inappropriate in this new paradigm unless for established business entities

these are a few functionalities that enable such an DAC organization:

done: voting you guys did it, bless kushti !
you are implementing: profit sharing : (some may call token payments or others call it dividends)

---Multisig account storage and spending
        basically the manager is allowed to spend DAC funds: pay devs or other cooperative members: board members, worker etc based on approval of action (voting and board concensus) through multisig. A better or more ideal solution is to have an 'account' like you mentioned make payments based on a prior token holders vote and then subsequent action: approval of cooperative board.


---Hiring and Firing of cooperative board members to DAC :
        this process is jump started by general board findings, token holder votes. then board holder action based on voters consensus. Current board member should be officially represented on DAC in blockchain


---DAC developer/worker "token" vesting with cliff provisions (most important) (opposite of "equity")

       I had this email discussion with Stark who plans to take over nxtpoker allocation and management to nxt community and beyond for a short while...This is a means that workers in a DAC can vest tokens (some may call them cryptoshares). Very important when thinking about aligning the interests of token holders and developers or workers. A typical vesting schedule is 4 year vesting and 1 year cliff..but in in nxt maybe we can have 1 year vesting with 4month cliff.  It helps keep people focused on the project or protect the DAC if someone decides to quit and you need to hire new people. Check this example startup article for

clarification:http://thestartuptoolkit.com/blog/2013/02/equity-basics-vesting-cliffs-acceleration-and-exits/

I am curious to know your thoughts



Note A cooperative is different than corporations and rightfully treated so...
A cooperative is an autonomous association of persons who voluntarily cooperate for their mutual social, economic, and cultural benefit.
Logged

msin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +138/-18
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1288
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #24 on: July 14, 2014, 06:09:31 pm »

Are you working with ChuckOne on this?  Is there a general time-frame?

I'd like to see SC used in gambling testcases, as a way to pay out winnings in an automated way. 

1. Gambling administrator announces bet and odds.
2. Gambling administrator sends Nxt to two SC accounts x and y, the Nxt represents the amount of winnings administrator is willing to pay out.
3. User sends Nxt to same SC account depending on his/her choice for winner (his bet), x or y account.
4. Once Gambling administrators funds (potential winnings) are maxed by equal amount of User Nxt sent, based on odds etc, the account is locked.
5. Depending on winner (y for example), Gambling administrator is required to release Nxt for y account in order to receive Nxt from the x account. 
6. Each user that sent Nxt to y account receives their Nxt plus the gambling administrators Nxt (winnings). 
7. If Gambling administrator doesn't release Nxt winnings from either account, all Nxt (including Gambling administrator Nxt) is released back to Users from both account x and y.  This discourages scamming from Gambling administrator.
Logged

Come-from-Beyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +794/-671
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4013
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #25 on: July 14, 2014, 06:27:50 pm »

Are you working with ChuckOne on this?  Is there a general time-frame?

I'm working alone. And I'm planning to implement only a part of SC.
Logged

Canaanite

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +17/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #26 on: July 14, 2014, 07:52:38 pm »

+1 to v39453

I would love to see derivatives and hedging tools.
Vanilla options (Call & Put), forward contracts & futures

I also think that such features will attract a lot of financial people towards NXT as these type of contracts tends to be efficient, when people see something that is not efficient they take the arbitrage (therefore - more volume to NXT)
Logged

msin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +138/-18
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1288
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #27 on: July 15, 2014, 01:59:20 am »

Are you working with ChuckOne on this?  Is there a general time-frame?

I'm working alone. And I'm planning to implement only a part of SC.

Who can/will finish it?
Logged

Come-from-Beyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +794/-671
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4013
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #28 on: July 15, 2014, 06:24:08 am »

Who can/will finish it?

Any coder familiar with SQL and Nxt core.
Logged

Brangdon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +229/-25
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1389
  • Quality is addictive.
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #29 on: July 15, 2014, 11:24:38 am »

SC <> AT.
Granted they are not the same, I'm still not sure how they relate to each other. What should you be able to do with Smart Contracts that you couldn't do with Automated Transactions, and vice versa? To take my example, can regular payments be expressed as a Smart Contract?

I don't yet have clarity on why this isn't just different takes on the same concept by different programmers.
Logged

Come-from-Beyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +794/-671
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4013
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #30 on: July 15, 2014, 11:51:53 am »

Granted they are not the same, I'm still not sure how they relate to each other. What should you be able to do with Smart Contracts that you couldn't do with Automated Transactions, and vice versa? To take my example, can regular payments be expressed as a Smart Contract?

I don't yet have clarity on why this isn't just different takes on the same concept by different programmers.

Smart Contracts r not Turing-complete. There r a lot of thing that can be done with AT but can't be done with SC.
Logged

Brangdon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +229/-25
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1389
  • Quality is addictive.
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #31 on: July 15, 2014, 07:50:09 pm »

Do you think not being Turing Complete is a good thing? I think it's a limitation which will cause problems in the long run. People will start writing and using Smart Contracts, and then as their requirements get more demanding they'll have to switch to Automated Transactions. Having to code the same thing twice is a burden, and having to ensure the behaviour is identical will be a challenge that may need to be satisfied for legal reasons.
Logged

Come-from-Beyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +794/-671
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4013
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #32 on: July 15, 2014, 07:54:25 pm »

Do you think not being Turing Complete is a good thing? I think it's a limitation which will cause problems in the long run. People will start writing and using Smart Contracts, and then as their requirements get more demanding they'll have to switch to Automated Transactions. Having to code the same thing twice is a burden, and having to ensure the behaviour is identical will be a challenge that may need to be satisfied for legal reasons.

I think it's a good thing. We don't need to care about trojans and worms.
Logged

Brangdon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +229/-25
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1389
  • Quality is addictive.
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #33 on: July 15, 2014, 08:03:40 pm »

I think it's a good thing. We don't need to care about trojans and worms.
Those could have been eliminated in other ways. For example, by not allowing ATs to create other ATs. ATs could only spend their own coins, which also limits the damage they can do. We would also severely limit the number of opcodes an AT could execute to, say, 20; that would still allow many kinds of automated transaction while guaranteeing they were quick to execute.

Ah well. I get the impression the core Nxt devs are dead set against AT, so I'll stop arguing about it.
Logged

Come-from-Beyond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +794/-671
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4013
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #34 on: July 15, 2014, 08:25:20 pm »

Ah well. I get the impression the core Nxt devs are dead set against AT, so I'll stop arguing about it.

It's a wrong impression.
Logged

Canaanite

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Karma: +17/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #35 on: July 15, 2014, 08:27:13 pm »

Quote
Ah well. I get the impression the core Nxt devs are dead set against AT, so I'll stop arguing about it.

If Nxt won't adopt it, someone else will.. there are enough NXT clones that will be willing to take the risk.
I think AT is a huge step in crypto 2
Logged

jl777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +718/-123
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6170
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #36 on: July 15, 2014, 08:33:03 pm »

I think it's a good thing. We don't need to care about trojans and worms.
Those could have been eliminated in other ways. For example, by not allowing ATs to create other ATs. ATs could only spend their own coins, which also limits the damage they can do. We would also severely limit the number of opcodes an AT could execute to, say, 20; that would still allow many kinds of automated transaction while guaranteeing they were quick to execute.

Ah well. I get the impression the core Nxt devs are dead set against AT, so I'll stop arguing about it.
From  a practical point of view, would you rather solve a crossword puzzle that is (1000 x 1000) or (10 x 10)?
Which could you solve to your satisfaction sooner?

Nobody is against solving the giant puzzle, but it just seems much more practical to solve the smaller puzzle first.
Also, 100 * (10 x 10) puzzles is probably a lot less work than a single giant one, you also get incremental progress along the way as each one is done

Divide and conquer

James

P.S. If we had pre-canned solutions to all useful things an AT can do, then it seems quite a good approach especially if it avoids the incalculable risks of allowing free running code.
Logged
There are over 1000 people in SuperNET slack! http://slackinvite.supernet.org/ automatically sends you an invite

I am just a simple C programmer

Brangdon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +229/-25
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1389
  • Quality is addictive.
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #37 on: July 15, 2014, 09:35:20 pm »

Ah well. I get the impression the core Nxt devs are dead set against AT, so I'll stop arguing about it.
It's a wrong impression.
Perhaps; but Jl777, kushti and now you all seem to want something which is not Turing Complete.

From  a practical point of view, would you rather solve a crossword puzzle that is (1000 x 1000) or (10 x 10)?

Nobody is against solving the giant puzzle, but it just seems much more practical to solve the smaller puzzle first.
ATs can be limited to (10 X 10). And then they can grow to (11 x 11) when that proves desirable, and to (12 x 12), all the way up to (1000 x 1000), at whatever rate we feel comfortable with. Where as switching from SC to AT involves a change of language.

Quote
P.S. If we had pre-canned solutions to all useful things an AT can do, then it seems quite a good approach especially if it avoids the incalculable risks of allowing free running code.
Agreed. However, as I understand it, SC does not provide pre-canned solutions. It will be a language, albeit a simpler and less capable one. We will have to learn how to read and write smart contracts in this language. It won't - can't - be so simple as to eliminate bugs.

Also, part of the argument in favour of AT is the claim that it can be done safely. It isn't "free running code". It doesn't embed Java bytecodes into transactions, or anything uncontrolled like that.

(Incidentally, I'm not opposed to functional languages. Or even to using one that is initially not Turing Complete, provided that TC-ness can be added later. I do think that Turing Completeness will be needed in the long run, and I think it would be shame to end up having to learn 4 languages to use Nxt: Java, Kushti's pattern-matching state machine, Come-from-Beyond's SQL SELECT scheme mentioned here, and Automated Transaction opcodes when they eventually get done.)

(I'm also not opposed to pre-canned solutions. Although implementing such is in some ways harder and slower; anything that goes into the core needs to be bug-free, and it needs to fill a lasting need. The core devs need to accept it, and all the nodes need to be upgraded for it. If we had AT, effective new features could be added with it quickly, safely, with only client changes. The best ones could be integrated more efficiently into the core later; foolish ones could be discarded.)
Logged

jl777

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +718/-123
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6170
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #38 on: July 15, 2014, 09:41:46 pm »

Ah well. I get the impression the core Nxt devs are dead set against AT, so I'll stop arguing about it.
It's a wrong impression.
Perhaps; but Jl777, kushti and now you all seem to want something which is not Turing Complete.

From  a practical point of view, would you rather solve a crossword puzzle that is (1000 x 1000) or (10 x 10)?

Nobody is against solving the giant puzzle, but it just seems much more practical to solve the smaller puzzle first.
ATs can be limited to (10 X 10). And then they can grow to (11 x 11) when that proves desirable, and to (12 x 12), all the way up to (1000 x 1000), at whatever rate we feel comfortable with. Where as switching from SC to AT involves a change of language.

Quote
P.S. If we had pre-canned solutions to all useful things an AT can do, then it seems quite a good approach especially if it avoids the incalculable risks of allowing free running code.
Agreed. However, as I understand it, SC does not provide pre-canned solutions. It will be a language, albeit a simpler and less capable one. We will have to learn how to read and write smart contracts in this language. It won't - can't - be so simple as to eliminate bugs.

Also, part of the argument in favour of AT is the claim that it can be done safely. It isn't "free running code". It doesn't embed Java bytecodes into transactions, or anything uncontrolled like that.

(Incidentally, I'm not opposed to functional languages. Or even to using one that is initially not Turing Complete, provided that TC-ness can be added later. I do think that Turing Completeness will be needed in the long run, and I think it would be shame to end up having to learn 4 languages to use Nxt: Java, Kushti's pattern-matching state machine, Come-from-Beyond's SQL SELECT scheme mentioned here, and Automated Transaction opcodes when they eventually get done.)

(I'm also not opposed to pre-canned solutions. Although implementing such is in some ways harder and slower; anything that goes into the core needs to be bug-free, and it needs to fill a lasting need. The core devs need to accept it, and all the nodes need to be upgraded for it. If we had AT, effective new features could be added with it quickly, safely, with only client changes. The best ones could be integrated more efficiently into the core later; foolish ones could be discarded.)
What is wrong with multiple solutions?
I think that is the only issue here. If you like AT, then use AT. If somebody likes SQL based then they SQL. If someone want to do FSM, they do FSM.
Nobody said you had to do all of them. If one works that is good enough.

NXT is going to be very big, limiting it to just one language is like saying all programs to run on Internet must be written in C. While I wouldnt mind that, I bet all the python guys would scream :)

James
Logged
There are over 1000 people in SuperNET slack! http://slackinvite.supernet.org/ automatically sends you an invite

I am just a simple C programmer

msin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: +138/-18
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1288
    • View Profile
Re: Express your wish (Smart Contracts)
« Reply #39 on: July 15, 2014, 09:43:28 pm »

Also, part of the argument in favour of AT is the claim that it can be done safely. It isn't "free running code". It doesn't embed Java bytecodes into transactions, or anything uncontrolled like that.

+1, need to make an effort to test AT and try to implement.  It's here and hopefully ready to test soon.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All
 

elective-stereophonic
elective-stereophonic
assembly
assembly