Here's the ethereum proof of stake code that will go live on ethereum sometime this year: https://github.com/ethereum/research/blob/master/casper4/sim...
This is the actual production code (though of course still in draft form, under review)
> just toy applications that have no practical purpose
The UN uses an ethereum app to send aid to Syrian refugees via vouchers: http://www.coindesk.com/united-nations-sends-aid-to-10000-sy...
Until it goes live, it's vaporware. The issue isn't "can proof of stake code be written" the question is "will eth continue to function safely and correctly using a proof of stake system"? We'll talk when it hits production.
> The UN uses an ethereum app to send aid to Syrian refugees via vouchers:
The details are not really clear from the article. How does this work? Why was this possible with eth but not with bitcoin or dogecoin or any other cryptotoken? How do displaced Syrian refugees accept, manage, and spend digital currency? I am highly skeptical of this without lots of details.
That's a ridiculous definition. So nobody can advertise that they plan to add a novel feature to a piece of software, even if the code already exists in draft form, without being labeled a vaporware peddler?
That could be worse than vaporware. There probably needs to be a term for touting a feature that may turn out to be like the DAO.
SchrodingerWare?
Here's the World Food Programme referencing the system with no technical details: https://www.wfp.org/news/news-release/wfp-introduces-innovat...
Here's a Coindesk article (who are obviously very pro-crypto, but more pro-Bitcoin and less pro-Ethereum) from today on some vague details: http://www.coindesk.com/united-nations-sends-aid-to-10000-sy...
I'm still trying to find out how this all worked. There have been articles saying this was their plan in various sources for over a month, though. I'd like to know as well. It's at least clear there was a program involving digital vouchers.
Found one --- here's Wired Germany outlining that it was in fact Ethereum the UN/WFP used with IrisScan to provide a benefit payment method for refugees. They are still scant on specific technical details, but if you are really starved, then it sounds like you should contact Parity.
https://www.wired.de/collection/tech/blockchain-fluechtlinge...
The situations simply aren't analogous. At the time ethereum was still seen as speculative and didn't have another project nipping at its heals for dominance in the turing complete contracts space. But now, ethereum is nipping at the heels of bitcoin to be the dominant blockchain currency. If bitcoin falters and money starts flowing out of bitcoin and into ethereum, there is no reason to be confident that it'll retain dominance.
There are a few very interesting things in the pipeline. Here are a few: https://golem.network/ https://status.im/ https://gnosis.pm/ https://basicattentiontoken.org/ https://augur.net/
And that's the crux of it. As I said, I'm yet to see anything that's actually useful. There are a lot of claims about all the amazing things that will be possible at some point in the future, but besides internet gambling, I've yet to see a demonstration or even a coherent explanation of something useful that these systems are capable of that isn't already possible and less complex with existing systems. (Just so you know, I was already aware of status and augur, but I examined your other links as well before responding)
Wait for the hype to run out, then look at it again when it's not at a peak value.
Invest now! Someday the network is gonna be really useful. You'll see!
However, I think I should share this because the above two comments seem to have not caught wind of it. A number of enterprise-level organizations both within and without this org are working on projects and experiments both utilizing the public blockchain and private chains using the technology.
I think there is some validity to the project that is simply not yet mainstream yet.
What? Look at all the ICOs:
and this:
http://www.coindesk.com/150-million-tim-draper-backed-bancor...
and here more:
Sound great, like most cryptocurrency marketing hype... where is the product? How do I get my hands on it? Let me guess "coming soon".
> http://www.coindesk.com/150-million-tim-draper-backed-bancor...
Ok, so a bunch of people spent their money on eth internet tokens... what exactly is the practical use case here?
> https://www.coingecko.com/ico?locale=en
So you've linked to a huge list of projects begging for donations. If you don't mind, can you pick just one project out of that list that actually has a product or service I can use today and explain to me why this wasn't already possible without cryptocurrencies?
Use case here is that there is smart contract that guarantees you that you are the owner of those specific tokens.
How you want to solve that with bitcoin?
It's not a rollback since the original contract is still on chain, just without money. If you fuel it with some money you can use it.
So, uh, how about all those ERC20 ICOs? I admit that you may wish to classify them as "Internet roulette."
This is plausibly better than if they had just rolled it by hand outside of Ethereum for a few reasons, e.g.
- You automatically have a way for users to trade real value for your currency via ETH. (This is probably easier for devs than setting up Paypal or Stripe integration, but harder today for users.)
- The currencies are something you have that's more tangible and auditable than an entry in some company's bespoke centralized database. Everyone can see it and believe in it.
- Users can easily send the currency to each other by default without all the transactions having to go through you. (I don't actually know whether this is a pro or a con for many use cases.)
- It's trivial to make interoperable software that accepts or holds or sends these currencies, like exchanges and wallets.
- The above facts probably mean that there is something like an open liquid market for your currency, if anyone cares about it. That means people can perform mutually beneficial trades! Mutually beneficial trades are mutually beneficial.
As to whether it's useful to have a bunch of currencies for different things, I think so? I mean, there already are a ton of things like this in software which behave as de facto currencies -- free-to-play games and MMOs are a good example -- and those seem like they would be well-suited to be ERC20-style tokens. And as someone who believes in incentive structures, I'm excited about the prospect of quantifying more things which are currently vagaries ("attention", "reputation", "compute time") into currencies with a market. Augur's design is a good example of this.
This already happened to eth when the creators hard forked the chain in an effort to roll back operations of an eth application that was used in a way that the creators did not anticipate. If this didn't kill ethereum why would it be a problem for bitcoin? Fortunately for bitcoin, there isn't a highly influential and transparently self-interested creator lording over the project.
> Bitcoin transactions can take anywhere from tens of minutes to several hours, depending on how busy the network is.
An unsolved growth problem for the reining incumbent that remains unsolved by ethereum. Transactions take a long time because decentralized proof of work verification is slow. A lot of people will say "proof of stake is coming!!!" but it's essentially vaporware and all signs point to the conclusion that it will remain that way for the foreseeable future. Yeah, people are working on it, like all vaporware.
> Ethereum is actually a platform for new kinds of decentralized (often financial) applications (dApps) that run on a peer-to-peer network of computers
Except this isn't actually happening in practice. I am yet to see any "new kinds of decentralized applications", just toy applications that have no practical purpose besides internet roulette
> TL;DR: Bitcoin’s dominance is slipping because its utility is limited and weakening versus other more recently developed, less politicized cryptocurrencies.
Bitcoin's dominance is not slipping because it's utility was marginal to begin with and eth certainly doesn't offer much in the way of compelling improvements over bitcoin.