News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Bootstrapping Urbit from Ethereum by rhencke on Saturday September 23, 2017 @12:25PM (#15320402)
Urbit claims, like you, exactly-once messaging is impossible: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14666015

But that doesn't mean we can't provide systems where, for all practical purposes, it is a guarantee.

Another way to think about it: SHA1 cannot provide a unique hash for every possible set of content - there are overlaps. This is the pigeonhole principle.

Yet, we have entire systems designed around assuming SHA1 is and will always be a unique hash for a piece of content (Git), and, for all practical purposes, it is a guarantee good enough to work despite that.

[dead]
Re:Bootstrapping Urbit from Ethereum by rhencke on Saturday September 23, 2017 @05:07PM (#15321733)
From all reference I have read, the phrase "exactly-once messaging" does not have a strict technical definition. Neither of your links define or use the exact term "exactly-once messaging". If you can point me to a definition of this specific phrase's standard terminology, I would be grateful. But, I cannot find one.

I don't understand why you address me with such a hostile tone. What have I done to deserve this? You accuse me of playing word games, but this is not my intent. I am just trying to have a conversation about the technical aspects of a system.