Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Conways Game of Life on Blockchain

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 53 posts

Re: Conways Game of Life on Blockchain

#33

Post by pavel_lishin »

zadler wrote: post #15
joosters wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's my point, it is already NOT in the EVM , the cost is so high that the author didn't commit the code to it - ethereum fell at the very first hurdle!

Unfortunately for naysayers, Ethereum or other blockchains will achieve cheap and long running dapps sooner or later.

Next year on the blockchain!

Re: Conways Game of Life on Blockchain

#35

Post by throwaway_kufu »

Kiro wrote: post #34
i_love_limes wrote: post #18

If I could buy an NFT of the source code of this, would I have reached peak blockchain meta?

Minting NFTs of NFTs is the next level.

I may have beat that, the day before Jack Dorsey blew up the service I bid on the tweet of the CryptoKitties Genesis NFT.

So a NFT of a Tweet of an NFT.

Re: Conways Game of Life on Blockchain

#37

Post by rawtxapp »

Taek wrote: post #22
eoo wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming some market efficiency, those fees should be fairly similar to the cost to process that transaction into a block, so, 2,000 usd

This assumes that there's no inflation I believe. But on Ethereum there is inflation.

Until EIP 1559 goes into effect in July, then it might vary between deflationary and inflationary at times.

Re: Conways Game of Life on Blockchain

#38

Post by ggggtez »

Taek wrote: post #21
throwaway4good wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then try to calculate the energy / processing power spent per step.

The electricity isn't just paying for the one transaction it's paying to secure all historical transactions and all current balances. When counting how expensive a visa transaction is, you don't also consider the price of all the bank vaults in the world and the staff protecting those vaults, because protecting existing ownership is orthogonal to enabling new transactions.

There is a point to be made, but you've made it all wrong.

You could argue that the $2000 transaction is actually validating all previous transactions... which sure. I will grant you that.

But by that reasoning, you need to amortize all future purchases as paying for part of the Game of Life transaction! If you do that then the cost of the transaction approaches INFINITY DOLLARS as time goes to infinity!

Obviously, this way of looking at the cost of the transaction is useless to the point of being meaningless. So let's stick with $2000, which has a clear meaning in reality.

Re: Conways Game of Life on Blockchain

#39

Post by jcoder »

Taek wrote: post #21
throwaway4good wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then try to calculate the energy / processing power spent per step.

The electricity isn't just paying for the one transaction it's paying to secure all historical transactions and all current balances. When counting how expensive a visa transaction is, you don't also consider the price of all the bank vaults in the world and the staff protecting those vaults, because protecting existing ownership is orthogonal to enabling new transactions.

I honestly can’t tell which model you’re arguing in favor of.
Post reply on HN