Re: [bitcoin-dev] Standard BIP Draft: Turing Pseudo-Completeness

[Luke Durback <luke.durback@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 979 bytes --]

Tomorrow, I'll work on writing a way to do voting on proposals with BTC
used as voting shares (This will be difficult as I do not know FORTH).
That seems like a fairly simple, useful example that will require loops and
reused functions.  I'll add a fee that goes to the creator.

IMO, if you write a complicated system of scripts that's used frequently,
it makes sense to charge a fee for its usage.  A decentralized exchange
between colored coins, for instance might take a small fee on each trade.


On Dec 10, 2015 10:10 AM, "Luke Durback via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> This, combined with the ability to make new transactions arbitrarily
would allow a function to pay its creator.

I don't understand what you mean by "a function" in this context, I assume
you mean a scriptSig, but then "paying its creator" doesn't make much sense
to me .

Could you provide some high level examples of the use cases you would like
to support with this?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1367 bytes --]