Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

I think sickpig is joining the bsv testnet, and we plan to do another round of isolated testing the summer.

But whether there is anything novel in any of nchain's patents is I think a pretty interesting subject so please point me to anything that you know about.

I'd love for you to be right on this as, in general, I'm against patents in the open source space. the last thing we need is patents obstructing hard fork possibilities as the ultimate arbiter of Nakamoto Concensus. that said, I don't think patents are a deal breaker if they're confined to stuff built on top of BSV.

I sure hope BU takes the opportunity to become a BSV client. the only devs I really trust to not be swayed by financial conflicts of interest, or at least to be transparent about them, are the BU devs.

 

[Zarathustra]

I think sickpig is joining the bsv testnet, and we plan to do another round of isolated testing the summer.

But whether there is anything novel in any of nchain's patents is I think a pretty interesting subject so please point me to anything that you know about.

I thought novelty is a requirement and non-novel inventions are not patentable.

 

[shilch]

And another 128MB block. I can still remember the 64MB block during the hashwar (and the other large blocks). Now, 128MB is like nothing special anymore

 

[Norway]

 

[theZerg]

https://coin.dance/blocks/transactions

TX isn't really a lot higher? Are they tx with large OP_RETURN? OP_RET doesn't take much to process.

What's really important to prove scaling is the average script and CHECKSIG density...

unless your end goal is to have tx with a lot of data. But if so, its not much work for any client to get that.

 

[Richy_T]

con 24 trolled

Amusing.

 

[lunar]

public par Fig. 1ent key

Lol
damn you, outsmarted by c&p

`*edited

 

[Otaci]

What really matters is fees and congestion.

 

[shadders]

@theZerg

It's great that @sickpig is doing this. I fear BU falls behind the curve in the scaling department and becomes obsolete and outdated in the next year if we don't step up the game. I hope I'm wrong.

I don't think BU is in much danger of falling behind anytime soon. They were way ahead of ABC in terms of performance when we forked the code so we've had some catching up to do.

 

[cypherdoc]

OP_RET doesn't take much to process.

that's great to hear. yeah who knows if opreturn will be the tx type that butters the miners bread first followed by p2p tx's later.

unless your end goal is to have tx with a lot of data.

it is actually. because miners can then transition to a fees only model.

 

[Norway]

 

[Otaci]

I was actually pretty surprised by that, I didnt expect them to be so close. Hence the second tweet, I checked some more servers. Setting up more detailed monitoring.

 

[attila]

Also, vision of BSV blockchain as a storage device for arbitrarily large data blobs IMO not compatible with p2p cash.

False.

BCH no longer preserves the necessary causal ordering within blocks and as such is no longer Bitcoin as clearly defined in the WP.

Furthermore, it's dificulty to create a timeline of the transaction history at scale.

How does an enterprise generate the timeline of accounts paid and received at scale? Let block size = 10 TB and imagine the company does 1,000's of transactions every 10 minutes.

What's the algorithm to produce the timeline history of transactions? How does one know there is no mistake or buggy software that produced a corrupted timeline?

 

[Zarathustra]

unless your end goal is to have tx with a lot of data. But if so, its not much work for any client to get that.

What's your/BU's end goal? My end goal is to have a lot of tx as well as tx with a lot of data.

 

[digitsu]

I have spot checked a few of his patents and have not found novel innovations. For example, I just clicked your link and downloaded the first patent. In it is the following:

[0139] The present disclosure relates to controlling performance of a contract by providing that the contract (e.g. license) remains in effect as long as there is a valid unspent transaction output (UTXO) on the blockchain representing the contract.

The earliest foreign filing (for priority) was Apr 29, 2016 (see the first page).

But the idea of controlling a rental or other contract (called "smart property") was a well known concept back in 2012. A quick google search yields an article from 2013:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6791756

"One can even design smart property – for example, a car’s electronic key so that when and only when a payment is made by the car buyer to the seller, the seller’s car key stops working and the buyer’s car key (or mobile phone) starts the car. Imagine your self-driving car negotiating traffic, paying fractional bitcoin to neighboring cars in exchange for priority."

The Bitcoin wiki entry claims the idea was invented in 1994: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Smart_Property

Therefore, this patent seems to be a rehash of a well known concept.

The thing about patenting the whole kit n' kabootle is that you file as much as you can and see what sticks. Finding one that seems to have prior art is not proof of anything but proof that the common patent strategy is being adhered to. I have read a couple patents that have clear innovations and have real potential practical usage. (the one for secret sharing without a trusted dealer, and another on atomic swaps using Bitcoin, for instance...oh and one on how to effect obfuscated transfer of data using blockchain.)

So keep reading. (if you care). Else, well, pucker up because you will likely be on the receiving end of a infringement claim in the not so far future.

 

[freetrader]

For the historical record, the elected officers of BU regard the legal action against ABC and other parties, as reprehensible

Happy to see this statement, @solex. I know you three have individually expressed your sentiments on the issue quite clearly.

What do people think about a public letter that could be signed by the entire part of the BU membership that rejects and condemns this legal action against Bitcoin's open source developers?
[doublepost=1554113371][/doublepost]

The thing about patenting the whole kit n' kabootle is that you file as much as you can and see what sticks.

There is a word for this strategy.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

lol, never let a chance to split pass by

 

[freetrader]

Else, well, pucker up because you will likely be on the receiving end of a infringement claim in the not so far future.

Given that this is BU's "home thread", are you implying a patent infringement threat against BU in the not so far future?

I re-iterate my caution against BU developers co-operating with SV. They are not benevolent in the least.

You must ask yourself: given the resources at their disposal (hundreds of millions of dollars in nChain's case) why do they not hire someone themselves to set up some BU instances on their STN?
[doublepost=1554113711][/doublepost]

lol, never let a chance to split pass by

BU leadership has spoken out clearly against this frivolous suit.

Now is time for the BU membership to show their colors.

 

[Otaci]

I cant quote freetraders post, not sure why.

We don't run BU systems on STN because that's not what is interesting. What's interesting is having the BU *team* on STN.

 

[freetrader]

You can't quote it because the forum doesn't allow quoting the last post. Kind of sucks, but that's how it is.

We don't run BU systems on STN because that's not what is interesting. What's interesting is having the BU *team* on STN.

@Otaci, why doesn't nChain hire some FTE devs to contribute to BU?
Not only would you then have a "BU team" working on STN / SV , but your organization would collect valuable know-how and experience related to BU.