Can I make money on Binance? What makes gold money and copper a metal? It’s gold’s millennia-long history of use as money, which induces the belief that it will continue to be valued as money into the future. Fred doesn’t think that the world will abandon national currencies anytime soon. For example if you are a lighting manufacturer competing for the domain ‘BrightFuture.com’ then all the educational institutions or websites in the world could become your competitor for domains, or partner potentially; or you could sell it to them at a huge profit if you are a good investor. Everyone in the world wants to do business with the US and its citizens, so the rest of the world holds dollars so they can pay for goods and services produced in the US. Let’s compare gold, the metal, with unbacked paper dollars. You’ve heard the argument by fans of the gold standard that fiat currency isn’t backed by anything; it’s just paper that they can print arbitrarily. Things have started looking up in 2023 and it’s currently worth around $30,000, but the digital currency was on a downward trajectory throughout 2022. So what fuelled it?
Granted, I’ve only really been looking at chia lisp for a bit over a week, but it really seems to me like a case where it might be worth putting that philosophy into practice. 100kB of serialized clvm code from a random block gzips to 60kB; optimising the serialization for small lists, and perhaps also for 바이낸스 2FA small literal numbers might be a feasible improvement; though it’s not clear to me how frequently serialization size would be the limiting factor for cost versus execution time or memory usage. 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. To me, it seems like chia lisp is a better answer to the problem here than the Simplicity language. Of course, “defun” and “if” aren’t listed as opcodes above; instead you have a compiler that gives you nice macros like defun and translates them into correct uses of the “a” opcode, etc. As I understand it, those sort of macros and translations are pretty well understood across lisp-like languages, and, of course, they’re already implemented for chia lisp.
I know, how to soft-fork in new jets isn’t yet well established. The other is to use the “softfork” opcode — chia defines it as: (softfork cost code) though I think it would probably be better if it were (softfork cost version code) where the idea is that “code” will use the “x” opcode if there’s a problem, and anyone supporting the “version” softfork can verify that there aren’t any problems at a cost of “cost”. However, whether you do or don’t support that softfork, as far as the rest of the script is concerned, the expression will either fail entirely or evaluate as zero; so anyone who doesn’t support the softfork can just replace it with zero and continue on, treating it as if it had costed “cost” units. Pretty much all the opcodes in the first section are directly from chia lisp, while all the rest are to complete the “bitcoin” functionality. By contrast, chia lisp has fewer opcodes than Simplicity’s jets, has feasible approaches to low-impact soft forks to increase functionality, can be used with only two levels of abstraction (lisp with macros and the opcodes-only vm level) that seem not too bad to understand, and (in my opinion) doesn’t seem too hard to implement/maintain reasonably.
Despite the bearish trend, Dogecoin’s price has managed to stay above the mentioned support level for the past three days. With the advancement of technology, man has been able to fulfill his imagination which has raised the level of imagination in return. So do we want our money’s value to fluctuate based on stochastic geological processes? I was looking through the notes and I don’t know if we want to get into the details of each one of these, but some things that stuck out to me from the notes were, “In what way does it not fit LN as it’s currently designed? It’s a lot easier to get a Cloud Mining service or to get a mining or a bitcoin trading share, … There are a number of brokers that offer bitcoin trading and a few of them even accept bitcoin deposits and withdrawals. Or perhaps you could arbitrarily limit the strings to a max of 520 bytes at a consensus level, and the corresponding Simplicity types to 4160 bits and go from there? 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.