> Can we just stop this and act like engineers and actually _try_ to understand each other?
Let's do that. I only wish these blind crypto absolutists would actually look at real world from time to time.
> Where did you understood that?
From your statement: "You can have hybrid smart contracts, that rely on oracles inserting real world data on chain"
Oracles are always cenralised data providers that you trust. And for may, many, many applications there will be only a handful of them.
> There are multiple ways to handle this, a lot of future crypto contract implement something very similar to:
Again. None of these are much of an issue for existing systems. Have you been to a real concert in the real world lately? You buy a ticket, you go to a concert, done.
No need for "five oracles to validate that a concert happened". There are hundreds of thousands of concerts happening all around the world without this inanity. What exactly does blockchain bring into this equation? Or "smart" "contracts" (which are neither smart nor contracts)?
> It's about how that could be implemented with a smart contract.
Indeed. That's what I was addressing. You wanted to talk like real engineers trying to understand each other? So try to understand this: you are proposing a mountain of complexity to solve what is largely a non-issue.
Your entire description on how ticket sales happen have literally no basis in the real world. And that's on top of the fact that you completely ignore what the original comment (and then I) said: your ticket is issued by a trusted central authority, and then is validated at the entrance by a central trusted authority. What does blockchain bring into this euation except lots of "coulda shoulda oracles"?
Edit:
Even in the cryptoutopia world the "contract" for the ticket will of course be released by the central authority running the concerts, and you'll have to trust that they didn't screw up the programming. And no, "you can always check the contract" doesn't work since there are now multiple cases of these "smart" "contracts" passing multiple security audits and still having glaring holes in them. A human-readable cotract you have with the concert organizer can actually be audited by regular people, and is enforceable.
> Chainlink is already used since multiple years to secure billions of dollars of pegged tokens, sport bet results, election results, insurance, etc.
Let's do that. I only wish these blind crypto absolutists would actually look at real world from time to time.
> Where did you understood that?
From your statement: "You can have hybrid smart contracts, that rely on oracles inserting real world data on chain"
Oracles are always cenralised data providers that you trust. And for may, many, many applications there will be only a handful of them.
> There are multiple ways to handle this, a lot of future crypto contract implement something very similar to:
Again. None of these are much of an issue for existing systems. Have you been to a real concert in the real world lately? You buy a ticket, you go to a concert, done.
No need for "five oracles to validate that a concert happened". There are hundreds of thousands of concerts happening all around the world without this inanity. What exactly does blockchain bring into this equation? Or "smart" "contracts" (which are neither smart nor contracts)?
> It's about how that could be implemented with a smart contract.
Indeed. That's what I was addressing. You wanted to talk like real engineers trying to understand each other? So try to understand this: you are proposing a mountain of complexity to solve what is largely a non-issue.
Your entire description on how ticket sales happen have literally no basis in the real world. And that's on top of the fact that you completely ignore what the original comment (and then I) said: your ticket is issued by a trusted central authority, and then is validated at the entrance by a central trusted authority. What does blockchain bring into this euation except lots of "coulda shoulda oracles"?
Edit:
Even in the cryptoutopia world the "contract" for the ticket will of course be released by the central authority running the concerts, and you'll have to trust that they didn't screw up the programming. And no, "you can always check the contract" doesn't work since there are now multiple cases of these "smart" "contracts" passing multiple security audits and still having glaring holes in them. A human-readable cotract you have with the concert organizer can actually be audited by regular people, and is enforceable.
> Chainlink is already used since multiple years to secure billions of dollars of pegged tokens, sport bet results, election results, insurance, etc.
Of course it did none of that.