One of the things people sometimes claim about bitcoin as an asset, is that it’s got both the advantage of having been first to market, but also that if some altcoin comes along with great new ideas, then those ideas can just be incorporated into bitcoin too, so bitcoin can preserve it’s lead even from innovators. A particular advantage of lisp-like approaches is that they treat code and data exactly the same — so if we’re trying to leave the option open for a transaction to supply some unexpected code on the witness stack, then lisp handles that really naturally: you were going to include data on the stack anyway, and code and data are the same, so you don’t have to do anything special at all. For example, rather than the streaming-sha256 approach in Elements, where you could write: “a” SHA256INITIALIZE “b” SHA256UPDATE “c” SHA256UPDATE “d” SHA256FINALIZE to get the sha256 of “abcd” without having to CAT them first (important if they’d potentially overflow the 520B stack item limit), in chia lisp you write: (sha256 “a” “b” “c” “d”) which still has the benefit of streaming the inputs into the function, but only adds a single opcode, doesn’t involve representing the internal sha256 midstate on the stack, and generally seems easier to understand, at least to me.
To level-up from that, instead of putting byte strings on a stack, you could have some other data structure than a stack — eg one that allows nesting. The decentralized nature allows it to operate on a peer-to-peer network whereby users are able to send funds to each other without going through intermediaries. The high level of energy required to perform bitcoin mining also helps keep the network secure. That way they can put their liquidity to use somewhere else that is more productive for the rest of the network. And while I’ve never really coded in lisp at all, my understanding is that its biggest problems are all about doing things efficiently at large scales — but script’s problem space is for very small scale things, so there’s at least reason to hope that any problems lisp might have won’t actually show up for this use case. This homoiconicity greatly tempts LISP programmers to use macros, i.e. programs that generate other programs from some input syntax. Unfortunately, programming at scale requires multiple programmers speaking the same language. One approach is to just define a new version of the language via the tapleaf version, defining new opcodes however we like.
Using a lisp-style approach seems an improvement in general to me. Alice & Bob that are using the escrow provider. DIEHN: I think it would take a turnkey provider that we could go to that would essentially say yes you can just put this little widget on your site, you can set your prices in dollars, we will do all the translation on the backend, we will take all of that headache off of your shoulders. In the case where a user does not pay the fee, the company can take this as a signal that they are no longer interested in the service. The idea was to implement a monthly service fee that requires the user to pay a fixed amount if the channel isn’t being used. The user purchasing liquidity can make the choice to pay the liquidity fee, or not to pay it. So it’s sort of a recurring payment for liquidity as a service, at least that is how I’m thinking about it currently. FOLD and in exactly the same context, I was wondering what the simplest possible language that had some sort of map construction was — I mean simplest in a “practical engineering” sense; I think Simplicity already has the Euclidean/Peano “least axioms” sense covered.
Both those essentially give you a lisp-like language — lisp is obviously all about lists, and a binary tree is just made of things or pairs of things, and pairs of things are just another way of saying “car” and “cdr”. Then programming at scale is hampered because each LISP programmer has their own private dialect of LISP (formed from the common LISP language and from their own extensive set of private macros) and intercommunication between them is hindered by the fact that each one speaks their own private dialect. Although this may sound like a simpler method of trading to earn profits, 바이낸스 OTP분실 해결 but it isn’t something that one can do on their own without keeping their eyes glued on the system 24×7. This platform also allows its traders to customize their bots even if they don’t have any knowledge of coding. You have bitcoins spread across multiple addresses – one containing 6 BTC and another containing 4 BTC…