SSM

freistil90

Do you know that the SSM is also not getting their confirmations instantly? So you’d need to rely on eventual losses being small and so on? Would you want to set up a small machine that needs to trust that the user is not malicious and does not rely on a mathematical proof (you know, the whole reason you dinghies cryptography stuff) that the transaction is valid? You’re essentially describing what a check is with the hope that not so many checks bounce. Welcome to 1880. Since you apparently are new to the concept of computers, let me give you a brief summary of the problem concurrent computing is solving and how that is represented in the BTC state machine. Assume you want to execute a function on a remote machine - you don’t know how long it runs and you don’t want to block your application (that in turn might need to react to some other request, you know) but you also want to represent this as something that represents an eventual value. What for? Chaining, mapping, all the functional stuff, developing with it as you would have a result already. The way this „eventual result“ is called a future and there is an abundance of ways to tell the runtime how to handle the eventual replacement of that future with its value. In the meantime you can see whether you can’t progress the state of another future, maybe you can „order the derivation“ of something else concurrently and wait of it together etc. In BTC, you instantly return your network call. You know it has been „successfully sent“ but this is not a verifiable result, e.g. the transaction is not verified yet. That’s what mining effectively does. And until that process is through (as all these transactions are processed in batches), your counterparty doesn’t know if you just faked the transaction or not. Another future call would be the block verification - after the transaction is indeed verified that future can be resolved into an answer pretty much instantly - before that it’s a chained future and is no faster than the initial transaction verification (it depends on it). The satoshi snack machine (SSM) fails because it needs to rely on not relying on transaction verification. It assumes that not many people want to cheat as you cannot rely on the miner verifying the transaction (as that would take too much time). That is, as mentioned, like a check that you’re not calling the bank to check (what a system like SWIFT is doing since decades with the same cryptographic security by the way, so that is a step back in functionality and security!). Zero confirmation just means that transaction transmission is a non-blocking call to the BTC network. That’s as low of a barrier as it gets. And it is banking technology from the 1800s from what it is representing.

Odlavso

FBI reading this thread 

Emotional-Ad-3475

You are right. I missed that. "Its (military drones) development commenced in 2009 with financing from the Undersecretariat for Defense Industries (Savunma Sanayii Başkanlığı, SSM) and the industry department of the Ministry of National Defense (Milli Savunma Bakanlığı), the Bayraktar TB2 IS has become the most prominent armed drone produced in Turkey."