Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     last year (edited) 

    Great!
    Lucky this will remain on Blockchain so no need to printscreen ;)
    We will have smart contracts one day, but not those ones.

    [-]
     last year  

    Why dont you think that will be it?

    [-]
     last year  

    Ok. I mean and I think you also hope, functional. Because you can't go outside announcing "look look, we have smart contracts now!!!" and then is something full of bugs and compromising the Blockchain credibility.
    Why I don't think will be. Think on the best dev or devs you think Hive have and why they didn't made it and we still not having smart contracts?
    I believe except one (blocktrades and team) no one have capacity, know how, skills, to create functional smart contracts. Don't you think that in 6 years or so and 20, 30 devs was time enough to put outside smart contracts if it was easy?

    $0.10
    • Past Payouts $0.10
    • - Author $0.05
    • - Curators $0.05
    2 votes
    Reply
    [-]
     last year  

    Hey VSC dev here. We've already been running a very experimental testnet over the last 6 months that has demonstrated and tested a large majority of the concepts that will be implemented in VSC. All of this well before even doing a proposal and without pay. Right now it's fully publicly available for anyone to run a node and deploy basic smart contracts.. Now, we are working on maturing our experimental network into a proper testnet over the next 4 months with a reasonable expectation of security and overall network reliability and subsequent mainnet

    There are two important things you are missing here: Politics and L1 technical complexity. There is a lot of discussion around whether smart contracts should be on L1 or not to begin with. I've heard numerous times smart contracts shouldn't be on HIVE L1 at all and leave it solely up to L2 networks or app specific L2s. Additionally, changing the L1 functionality is massively more complicated than L2 approach. Introducing more complexity and risk on the L1 is a massive job to get right, because if something goes wrong, the entire chain is at risk. If there isn't clear support for L1 smart contracts across leadership and technical challenges, I can understand why this hasn't happened yet, even if I don't agree with it.

    With all this in mind, implementing L2 smart contracts are significantly simpler than a L1 approach. An isolated L2 network can be easily tested and destroyed without affecting the L1 system. Keep in mind, L2 smart contracts will still have ways to directly interact with HIVE and even more so in the future mainnet. I'm happy to answer any further questions you may have.

    [-]
     last year (edited) 

    Hi vaultec!Thanks for replying!
    Let me try to resume the questions I have about VSC.

    • How many devs are working on VSC and who are they?
    • In percentage how do you think custom json tx will be increased compared to right now?
    • In which language are you writing the core code?
    • Do you think that L2 contracts have the same credibility and security as L1?
    • Don't you think that being at 3 projects at same time as dev is like playing to much instruments at same time?

    Now about L2 or L1.

    • Do you agree that instead of excuses about complexity, being pragmatic, the real reason is that smart contracts on L1 is just for best ones on C++?
    • Forgetting complexity, do you agree that smart contracts on L1 is much better than any smart contract on L2?

    Last one, sorry for the questionare lol

    • If your second proposal is not approved what will you do?
    Loading...