Dhruv Bansal Profile picture
Jan 28, 2018 10 tweets 4 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
1\ Have you heard this reasoning? "#Ethereum is better than #Bitcoin because it can do more." => "The EVM is Turing-complete and Bitcoin Script isn't, so Ethereum is a better cryptocurrency." => "Bitcoin's creators were too early/stupid/blind to make Bitcoin Turing-complete."
2\ This is a blatant misunderstanding! To a non-technical person, Turing-completeness and being able to compute anything is *obviously* better. But programmers know that Turing-completeness is Pandora's box: you don't know what it contains and you can't close it once opened...
3\ ...Turing-completeness is like a nuclear explosion. Once the threshold density/temperature is breached, fission fuel self-ignites and explodes. The hard part isn't blowing past the threshold, but staying as close to it as possible: energy => criticality => balance => control.
4\ Similarly, once a threshold in capabilities is passed, computing systems become Turing-complete and the possibilities they can express runs away, unboundedly. The hard part isn't *becoming* Turing-complete when you want to, it's *avoiding* it when you don't: sub-criticality.
5\ Here are some examples of systems that are accidentally Turing-complete: #MagicTheGathering, #PowerPoint slides, HTML5&CSS3, #Minecraft, #Pokemon Yellow, #Braid, and my fav. example, #SuperMarioBros on the SNES (thanks @gwern for your great list): gwern.net/Turing-complete
6\ Bitcoin's creators were judicious in their choices for opcodes in Bitcoin Script b/c they *did not want* Turing-completeness! As the network matured, more complex scripts were allowed. But slowly, so as to *avoid* unintended consequences & stay computationally "sub-critical".
7\ Why so much caution? B/c unbounded computation is *dangerous* when you're trying to build sound money! Turing-complete systems are harder to constrain & scaling is ultimately about the engineering of constraints. So if you want blockchain Visa you might need to give up Turing!
8\ IANA Bitcoin maximalist. Turing-complete blockchains like Ethereum are extremely valuable. But they are building a "world computer", not creating sound money. The use case is different, so the code is different, and the scaling process more difficult. But just as worthwhile!
9\ An opposite example: #mimblewimble uses an *even more limited* computing system than Bitcoin Script. This tradeoff allows for a degree of homomorphic encryption which creates better scaling & complete transaction privacy. Bitcoin & Ethereum can't do this: they are "too smart"!
10\ Computation isn't love or empathy, more is not always better.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dhruv Bansal

Dhruv Bansal Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @dhruvbansal

Jul 22, 2018
1\ Do any other Bitcoiners like the book "The Once & Future King" by T. H. White?

It's one of my favorites and I've been revisiting it recently, thinking about cryptocurrency, political representation, & blockchains.
2\ It opens with Merlyn teaching a young King Arthur (Wart) about different forms of government, the fallacy of "might makes right", all through a series of adventuresome allegories.

Disney's "The Sword in the Stone", is a cute (if imperfect) adaptation of this part of the book.
3\ But "The Once & Future King" is ultimately a tragedy.

With the help of his storied Knights of the Round, Arthur builds Camelot, the fairest kingdom.

But Arthur is manipulated into self-conflict, his personal desires at odds with the principals he must uphold.

Camelot falls.
Read 10 tweets
Jul 10, 2018
\1 I continue to struggle with @ParityTech's software design decisions. My #Parity node keeps dropping peers. The advice I get is "upgrade to the latest unstable version". Parity is even configured to auto-update itself by default. Why do I have to run at the edge just to work?
2\ Parity is either (a) consumer software or (b) bad software.

It's (sometimes) OK when consumer software forces you to upgrade b/c, as a consumer, you're dumb & insecure. Business (or prosumer) software achieves a higher level of security & control by sacrificing ease of use.
3\ Consider: if Parity upgrades itself automatically that means /usr/bin/parity can edit itself. I have to completely trust that the Parity code, DNS, &c. prevents any peer from causing my Parity to change to something unintended. I hate this "feature", so I turned it off.
Read 6 tweets
Feb 8, 2018
1\ A thought experiment: The year is 2277. You're the bartender at a spaceport in a faraway Earth colony on a planet orbiting α-Centauri: a distance of ~4 light years. Guy walks into your bar, slams down a credit chit, and asks for a drink.

How do you know his money is any good?
2\ If the credit chit were guaranteed by a bank or a blockchain or something local to α-Centauri it'd be easy, just like it is here on Earth in 2018.

But say this guy is fresh-thawed after his long journey from Earth aboard a lighthugger. What kind of wealth could he even have?
3\ He's unlikely to be carrying base metals. Like natural resources, they'd still be valuable, but too heavy to transport from Earth. Physical fiat (bank notes) wouldn't be accepted either: too easy to 3D-print forgeries.

So what form of wealth survives interstellar voyages?
Read 17 tweets
Jan 22, 2018
1\ Physicists have a word "crank": a person who doesn't know physics but persists in promulgating their personal theory. Cranks pop in all fields of physics but especially in certain areas: quantum mechanics, field theories, relativity, cosmology, &c.
2\ Why these subjects? B/c they are abstract & esoteric. It's hard to crank in Newtonian mechanics because your bogus theory is easily disproved by direct human experience. It's easier to crank in quantum b/c few outside the tribe of physics really understand quantum mechanics.
3\ Bad cranks are just crazy people. But good cranks are interesting. Their work *looks like* physics (has math, equations, diagrams) and, because its engaging an abstract subject like quantum mechanics, can be mistaken for real physics by laypeople who can't tell the difference.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(