Is it possible for one bitcoin script to be responsible for handling a calculation and taking the result and adding it to the sum in another script?
I'm trying to understand the limits of Bitcoin.

I understand bitcoin scripts aren't turing complete, but I do believe they can perform a "babylonian square root" in a limited form if the code for that loop is simply repeated.
The gas cost of ethereum limit the precision of this type of function anyway.

My goal is to bring my governance protocol to bitcoin. It is derived from a project that initially started as a pyramid scheme called proof of weak hands. In that smart contract they use the babylonian square root function.

I've asked chatGPT, and it seems scripts can be linked together, but I wanted to ask here just to be sure it's not hallucinating.

What assets do you see then US government seizing in this globally decentralized network? One sites hardware?
Will the government invade Africa too?



quote author=disconnectme link=topic=5454962.msg62356237#msg62356237 date=1685943386]

these governance voting can be gamed, by the developers, investors etc, developer can decide to go rogue and take away these assets. I just feel the risk is higher than the rewards.
[/quote]

The only attack vector against what I've built has "mirror properties of nakamoto consensus"
I'm willing to have the integrity battle tested.


This isn't really something you have to get permission for  unless they wanted to invoke violence after realizing what the physical setup of this system is capable of . But by the time they realize that, it's a global network and they wouldn't put a dent in the system.



I understand the skepticism about the fairness of the governance asset and that's why my first usecase is going to be using the protocol as a "dirty oracle" for a betting platform.
That way people can get a sense of the protocol's physicality first.

Redundancy of decentralized sites outside of U.S. jurisdiction. Redundancy outside of any 1 jurisdiction.

I'm not comparing it to a bank. I'm saying that the financial layer is at the top and the next layer is governance of the physical world

I don't care to unite them. The DAO has watchers in the real world to ensure the physical data centers are not tampered with. If they are tampered with they get delisted from the onchain list of secured nodes.

I believe I have a solution. Yes, this does sound absurd, I myself do not believe in most Proof of Stake systems. But I do believe I have a solution myself and it's an asset derived from sacrificing the proof-of-work asset. https://medium.com/@RossPfeiffer

yes. I come to you with a solution

The only logical path forward for this blockchain technology is to start using some governance protocols to secure and effectively decentralized territory in the real world. Just look at how the current world works the banks are at the top the banks run the government's and then the government's have authority over physical boundaries and have the Monopoly for physical violence.

The only thing we need to be focused on to really move crypto forward is finding ways to anchor governance protocols into the real world. This is in fact the scaling solution because once we're able to effectively decentralize territory we can then put data centers and routers in this decentralized territory and now you're scaling is only limited by compute speed processing speed

Hashrate drops if the hashrate drops.
The idea is to keep it from dropping by rewarding those who pick it back up

My first thought is, "if the hashrate drops, people are incentivized to secure the network by jumping in" & it would also incentivize rapid growth of the network.

Punch holes in this idea. Just a thought.

If the hash rate stabilized, I believe we'd see much higher tx fees. I'm fine with that personally.

So yes, I definitely see that's the case with the EVM chains.

I think the picture of the nemo wallet was faked. Dag

It's not mine. I just got some sketchy message on telegram. They sent a bunch of seed phrases. Some with tokens still in them, but that had no liquidity on pancake swap. I've seen withdraws on those wallets within the last 12 hours.

I'm pretty sure the funds are inaccessible.

But the mnemonic phrase doesn't work
It shows 2 QR codes. one of the BTC address, the other of the old style 18 word mnemonic  phrase. I tried  the phrase in multiple wallets and tools online but it doesn't work. All the words belong tot he BIP 39 word list too. One of the words is duplicated, I wonder if that may be an issue.

Thought I had a lucky break from a stranger. I guess not

thank you for the answers.
This definitely makes me a BTC maxi.

As far as I understand, Bitcoin is programmable, just not Turing complete.
But what's the point of Turing completeness if the gas limits everything already? Why not just repeat the statement in code? Or "Goto" and "Label"?
Are you telling me the EVM's only reason for success is that it was just more palatable to developers and what they believed about how smart contract ought to be?

Because it is possible to create A.I.s with a will to live. A.I.s that seek to persist their existence. There will be more than one of these. Multiple entities with a will to live means there will be an economy that emerges  if one is not already present. I guess we could theorize they would all merge eventually. That's another story.

I'm interested in inflation that has a direct relationship to energy being put into layer one. Not just any inflation. Not just any protocol.

This DAO is my attempt at a scaling solution. A DAO to govern real world space. Within that space we install cloud services, all under the eyes of this DAO 24/7. If layer 1 is decentralized, and if the DAO has a clever way of staying fairly distributed, then we can effectively say that this layer 2 is decentralized as well.

I'm worried about their disproportionate ability to influence DAOs.
Humans wont be the only actors in the economy. So will A.I.. And A.I. wont have an ex-wife to take half of their money. An A.I. wont lose respect for money through generations.

Because it's related to my DAO's layer 2 solution. Anchoring layer 1 to the real world with fair governance protocols.
I aim to decentralize more than just the money layer. Hopefully we can "decentralize" real world spaces as well.

1000 years from now there will be a very harsh class distinction between those whose family's were "lucky" enough to invest in bitcoin, and then peons that fight for for smidgens. It's the peons that will be contributing to the economy with real goods and services. while a few lucky lottery winners contribute nothing to the economy.

I'm thinking about a proof of work chain where coin is minted only by the difference in the increase of difficulty.

inflationary, yes. but only if difficulty increases.
Inflation is important to me because I think about fairness. Fairness of DAOs
When it's easy to lock coins in a smart contract for hundreds or 1000s of years, we can't rely on the "human element' to sell those coins on the market.
There's a difference in increase, but then also a difference in increase or decrease.
Including decrease would incentivize more to contribute to the network if significant amounts of the contributors were "killed" off.
I'm learning that hash rate and difficulty are not linearly correlated. Which one represent energy put towards the system?
I'm asking all of this because I have a DAO protocol that I believe is very strong for layer 2. but only if layer 1 is inflationary.
I believe that perfecting decentralization of the network requires perpetual growth. That eventually means going beyond this planet.
I really like Ethereum classic. but it's max supply monetary policy is not ideal for decentralization of DAOs.

How much would you estimate it would cost to build a cross chain bridge?

can't be tired if I'm not even paying attention

Honestly, find better code for a DAO than this
pastebin.com/jyUGBKTB + pastebin.com/62p8SAT4

pro-tip, you can't

get the fuck to work. save the world. I want to see people act like this technology can actually change the world instead of just making a few junkies rich

It's a game and a story.

The game part is writers competing to add to the branching story.

There is no base drive to the game other than whatever is crowdsourced.

You're able to remember who you are. just not how you go there.
The initial struggle is figuring out how you got there I guess. But very soon you'll run into other struggles.
If you go to town (and if you're following my branches) then you discover there is a cult leader who has brought people back in a fake resurrection.

yeah. I'm definitely still breaking it down.

there's an initial branching topology that needs to be  setup to give people that don't go to the town a chance to have a unique identity.
but that opportunity is very limited early on because most series of actions external from the town will define you, so the only way to get multiple identities is physically branching pathways, but that's also not good. so only rely on that a little & make the distribution of it "statistical" (me guessing what people would do... which is most people wouldn't travel all the way across the field past the town just to be in the wilderness. they're going to take the water that's right in front of them).  the thing about being in the wild is that you can also do more "random things" like shout out "hello!!!" just to see if someone is out there. or you can climb a tree. all these events make a path very specific. (what's considered collapsing is completely subjective to the oracle & evident on what it will let pass)

I was gonna start the players off with gold. gold and a note. the note says "buy a gift for the festival tonight" they see this note after their first choice.
anyway. I was thinking that gold pieces can be left in the grass. and that you can stumble upon 1, and if you can keep searching and searching. that's the only way to make infinite identities that can actually leave the town. but you're defined by how many times you've searched for gold pieces. which is okay actually because we can make the amount you find in any given search "random/quantum" until you count them, which means there wont be a correlation to identities & the number of gold pieces they searched for. But this whole thing feels very cheap.

It is sensible to meditate. yeah. that's what I was thinking, but in the RPG sense it sounds very magical and like it will induce something. and having the option at the beginning with the other two makes it look like some kind of "axiom" in the same way that the town and the forest are to the game's overall trajectory. I am going to have the text that follows "meditate" change though.

I am gonna have
_Go to town
_Go to forest
_Survey the Area (the bullshit one to branch) -->
 
now, TECHNICALLY, more can be added, but the oracle is all about social consensus (originating from those who have sacrificed money & time in a pyramid contract, long story, it's an oracle solution)... so anything added to that initial choice list will be "very qualified" but it's important to get the initial topology "jump started". The oracle will begin to interpret some branches of that topology as requiring more branches (when you enter the gift shops in town) There are 4 corners to town, you have to look for a gift in this gift shop town, and I want at least the most basic movements coverd "choose a corner-> choose a shop-> get a detailed description of that shop that can be recycled for other ways people might arrive to this shop"
and the community-oracle will enforce everything from there.. There's a lot of "quantum ambiguity" when going to town, it's just gotta get "jump started" or at least recognized by the oracle what's required. manually doing every combination of 3 to 5 step movements and checking shops & exploring the town and what not is absurd. it's competitive story writing, so I have faith in the oracle & writers.
but this would be how you attack eden... go to  a shop and have the description say "you talk to the clerk, 'hey, this sounds like a pretty identity collapsing event doesn't it?' x-y-z-a-b-c and walk out"... so that means everyone that wants to get something from that shop, can't go there directly. or can't reach there by the same 2 or 3 step path that the original person took. (because a few steps is possible for anyone to take & is not an "identity collapsing")

identity potential going into the wilderness will be much more limited than going into the town. I want to make sure I give it a fighting chance to survive