Ethereum programming for web developers
happyfuncorp.com
happyfuncorp.com
Anyways, if Ethereum really will become Web 3.0, then comparatively speaking I'd say we're not even in the 56k modem era yet.
Especially when a cryptocoin includes strong anonymity, betrayal has very low downside since no retribution would be possible. However even if such anonymity is not present, it may not be possible to get retribution if the entity on the other side is (for example) the mafia.
This is a classic example in which a user ran an in-game bank for some time, before making away with all of his clients assets.
but why?! WHY?!
i thought the whole point of this blockchain stuff was that there was no trust in any one entity/group of entities (aside from the chain itself)
as soon as you have "blockchain plus a few trusted people", does that not completely undermine the whole idea?
why not just have a few trusted people?
Here is a [old] post from the horses mouth https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/07/22/ethereum-and-oracles/
Sorry for the basic question, but is it legal to do a lottery application like this with Crypto Coins because they aren't real money?
EDIT: Besides crytocurrencies, I mean.
I guess the question would be: if you don't trust a central authority to keep that database immutable and add records honestly, how do you design a distributed solution?
Blockchains are pretty much just an append-only log, but they were the first decentralized answer to the double-spend problem. So I'm not sure it's a case of what blockchains can do that immutable databases can't - they're a way of implementing decentralized immutable databases.
By this definition, ethereum is not a blockchain[0]
> they were the first decentralized answer to the double-spend problem
Physical reality is decentralised answer to double-spend problem (the gold molecules 'exist' in your hand, no centralised god manifested it but physics worked on universal matter in a decentralised manner). The 'problem' is created when we assumed centralised trust is even possible.
A blockchain is decentralised answer to double-spending a 'non-physically interactable' good(don't mean 'virtual' because POW is real).
[0]https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/9535/how-does-a...
Once more assets are represented this way, many kinds of applications would be valuable. One simple and powerful example is escrow.
Enabling one-shot, instant escrow with strangers on the Internet has real-world benefits. For example, the current safest way to exchange Burning Man tickets is to meet someone in person, inspect the tickets and cash, and trade them by hand. If they were a blockchain asset, they could be traded nearly instantly and safely across the world. With a stable dollar asset, the official escrow service could even make it more difficult to sell above face value.
Natural for marketing-team maybe but not for developers. They only seem natural because they both look like 'value' transfer. But there is a huge difference. The value in-case of currency-use is inherently generated using proof-of-work whereas there is no decentralised way to map a real asset to virtual token.
So NO, none of these 'assets on the blockchain' are decentralized or even need blockchain non-trivially.
But you're right, the legal issues are a dime and a dozen. It'll take some time for the law to catch up (eg. digital wills). The technology is ready for this, we just need to right confluence of factors to make this a reality.
Maybe it lowers the cost of transferring assets, and there is the flexibility transferring to anyone on the planet. Maybe the use case is having funds in an escrow until both parties can verify that the transaction is cleared. I think there are trust companies that already do this. Maybe if people are motivated to deal with the legal(or private entities would exist to fill the need to simplify it) themselves it could work itself out.
It could be that through this method less lawyers are involved. If the transfer of assets can be standardized or at least abstracted away for all/most countries in one system I could see why people could be interested in it.
Also if your looking to sell an asset, or looking to buy an asset that you expect to increase in value, it might be interesting to have a global market to purchase/sell these assets with price signals for less risky or higher return assets.
Yes, they should be on the same chain, so that the transaction is atomic. This is trivial to do in Ethereum (and other blockchains, presumably).
If the tickets were on the blockchain, they could be exchanged in the way that you describe.
The best use cases for smart contracts are gambling apps (i.e., financial markets, exchanges), escrow services (collateral-based trustless loans), and perhaps some identity services
If we take a look at Bitcoin, think how much easier it is to implement if we just didn't use blockchain -- it's literally just a single SQL table of transactions and some sort of API to be able to submit transactions. From an application development perspective, all the extra cruft that Bitcoin needs to work makes blockchain less useful for normal application development.
The point of a blockchain is to essentially be able to do what we do normally in a centralized application in a decentralized way with a different set of controls in terms of trust. It also acts as a specific secure by design architecture that allows us to build these distributed applications using an established model.
Don't get me wrong, though, having a different trust model is significant. It can allow us to make applications which we otherwise couldn't make before because of non-technical reasons. For example, an application like secure voting isn't done (or is discouraged) with an immutable database because we don't trust the central authority -- but with blockchain, we can better trust that all votes are valid.
An example I'm working on right now is a system of authentication using Ethereum to replace passwords. The decentralized identity of addresses, combined with the cryptographic primitives provided, paves the way for a whole new way of managing identity and authentication even in the "old web" world. Hopefully I'll finish my demo by the end of the weekend.
We've had hashing, dencentralisation, public key cryptography etc for years, but all of it was kind of academic, kind of out of reach.
Similarly AOL brought email, the web, IM together into a nice package that people could get behind and use even though there wasn't obvious inherent value to those who were using the internet beforehand.
AOL brought the news homepage, Ethereum has brought crypto-cats. AOL gave 8-year-old me an interest in dial-up connection sounds, bitcoin gave me an interest in staring at financial graphs.
i actually think it's a pretty good simile
its bringing a new tech development to the masses in a very clunky way - just what AOL did.
you're missing the point here dude; me and the other guy are just saying that it's a similar situation:
> X brought Y together into a nice package that people could get behind and use even though there wasn't obvious inherent value to those who were using the Z beforehand
that applies to AOL and blockchain.
>>X brought Y together into a nice package that people could get behind and use even though there wasn't obvious inherent value to those who were using the Z beforehand
If AOL provided a major innovation not available in either X or Y, then it would be analogous to the blockchain. The reason why AOL faded away and the blockchain won't is that the latter solves a major problem that could not be solved by any previous technology, including any of its component technologies alone, while the former did not.
I'm not sure this necessarily couldn't be implemented otherwise, but it is a core part of how it has been functioning as far as I know.
Also for anyone starting Ethereum or Blockchain development, I'd recommend learning and understanding The DAO Attack of 2016: https://www.coindesk.com/understanding-dao-hack-journalists/
I guess 2018 will be the year of blockchain and cryptocurrency.
I don't think Tensorflow et al have been busts, or have even fallen short of what experts expected from them. They were just never consistent with the slavering hype they got from university press offices, tech journalists, and startup hucksters.
I'm less convinced that blockchains will have a major long-run impact, but I expect solving the double-spend problem will prove useful one way or another.
Right now, I am enrolled in https://www.udemy.com/ethereum-and-solidity-the-complete-dev...
It looks good but I haven't finished it yet.
This course feeds into a 12wk paid course with certification: https://academy.b9lab.com/courses/course-v1:B9lab+ETH-21+201...
Both the tutorial links and Vagrant setup is here -
Btw this is my utube channel of tutorials for ethereum / blockchain development:
But isn't that, like, the whole point of the language? It was literally written for moving money around. Cripes.
> Be very careful if writing real money-transfer code; do your security homework, get others to review your code, and seriously consider an official security audit or even formal verification.
Amen.
Once you understand the Ethereum abstract machine (i.e. the thing described in the http://yellowpaper.io), the "quirks and pitfalls" of the programming languages built on it (Solidity, LLL, Serpent, Mutan) become more like obvious design constraints.
https://happyfuncorp.com/whitepapers/webthereum
Way more readable, links to github etc.,