dynamic

5 ms·

1.
Simplicity: implementing a smart contract language in 30 lines of Haskell(medium.com)
1 points by dynamic 9y ago|0 comments
2.
Ivy for Bitcoin: a smart contract language that compiles to Bitcoin Script(blog.chain.com)
24 points by dynamic 9y ago|1 comments
3.
by dynamic 9y ago
Checking the head of an empty list is a simple example. (Although see https://wiki.haskell.org/Non-empty_list for an approach to avoiding these runtime errors in Haskell). Here's a more advanced example: https:/&
4.
by dynamic 9y ago
Last I heard, he had switched from Gmail to Inbox.
5.
by dynamic 9y ago
Even in this... implausible scenario, the contract would only need to verify the solution to the equation. The party creating the transaction would then be responsible for generating a solution.
6.
Show HN: Tracestack – Instantly search Python error messages on StackOverflow(github.com)
2 points by dynamic 11y ago|0 comments
7.
by dynamic 11y ago
It's a term used to refer to applications that run some of the same code client-side and server-side. See: http://isomorphic.net/
8.
by dynamic 11y ago
Good point and I'll concede that the overReaction had a real positive impact (that wouldn't have been possible if it had only been a few pedantic open source law geeks). It's really cool to see developers taking an interest i
9.
by dynamic 11y ago
Some people do! Check out the top story on HN right now, which is about EFF invalidating a patent held by a patent troll: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9356767 . Nobody was suing EFF (admittedly, that's almost a
10.
by dynamic 11y ago
I'm a developer as well. And I am politically opposed to software patents and would prefer that software not be patentable. But I'm confused by your statement that you want the license not to mention patents because you want to le
11.
by dynamic 11y ago
Yes! This isn't legal advice, but, speaking loosely, the license gave you an irrevocable patent license to use React (that's the first sentence). That license only terminated when you brought a claim against Facebook (or a related
12.
by dynamic 11y ago
I agree, and that's what I was saying in the second paragraph (I've edited it a bit to try to make that clearer). This is definitely an improvement from that original language. But I don't see how the original license was som
13.
by dynamic 11y ago
[Lawyer, but not a patent lawyer] I was perplexed by the uproar on HN about the original patent language (in the thread announcing the release of React Native [1]). This kind of open-source patent license--which, in effect, allows Facebook
14.
by dynamic 12y ago
If this is just a terminology debate, O'Hagan-style misappropriation theory cases are called "insider trading" cases by nearly everyone, including the SEC[1], the Justice Department[2] and the SDNY (a judge recently issued an
15.
by dynamic 12y ago
The copyrights are often dispersed, with different publishers owning different rights. It's not a matter of just "arrang[ing] for worldwide licensing." It's dealing with a completely different set of owners who may hav
16.
by dynamic 12y ago
He isn't saying that there's a possibility "however remote"; he's saying that we have absolutely no reason to prefer one explanation over another. "So although we have seen evidence for it time and time again&q
17.
by dynamic 12y ago
Great post. I don't know why you feel so hesitant--it's your design and implementation that made the game a hit. Looking forward to trying your app version.
18.
by dynamic 12y ago
Under these facts (the prosecution theory was a stretch that they don't want tested; the original conviction was caused in part by the defendant's stupid behavior during the first trial; the defendant already served time; the New
19.
by dynamic 12y ago
You're almost right, but the judgment was vacated, so the prosecutors could bring it again. They won't, though.
20.
by dynamic 12y ago
No, because the judgment was vacated. They didn't grant a judgment of acquittal. So the government is still free to bring the case again. Still, the prosecution is really unlikely to do so.