#block chain

Blocsys helps fintechs, exchanges, and digital asset businesses build production-ready blockchain and AI-powered platforms. We design tokenisation systems, trading infrastructure, and intelligent compliance workflows built for secure, scalable, and enterprise-grade operations

Worst day of my life, guy trying to shill nfts at me blocks me before I can deliver my death threats

In the dynamic landscape of technology, Blockchain has emerged as a revolutionary force, fundamentally transforming the way we perceive and engage with digital transactions. In this comprehensive guide, we will unravel the intricacies of Blockchain technology, exploring its core principles, applications, and its pivotal role in the creation of digital currencies such as Bitcoin.

1. Understanding What Is Blockchain Technology:

At its core, Blockchain is a decentralized and distributed ledger technology that records transactions across a network of computers. The term “Blockchain” is derived from the way data is structured, forming a chain of blocks, each containing a list of transactions. What sets Blockchain apart is its transparency, security, and the absence of a central authority, making it a paradigm shift in how we approach data integrity and trust in digital interactions.

2. The Building Blocks of Blockchain:

To comprehend the essence of Blockchain, it’s essential to delve into its foundational elements. Blocks, cryptographic hash functions, and consensus algorithms play a crucial role in maintaining the integrity of the chain. These building blocks collectively contribute to the secure and transparent nature of Blockchain, ensuring that once a block is added, it becomes an immutable part of the chain.

3. Decentralization and Trust:

One of the revolutionary aspects of Blockchain is its decentralized nature. Unlike traditional centralized systems, where a single authority oversees transactions, Blockchain relies on a network of nodes, each maintaining a copy of the ledger. This decentralization ensures that no single entity has control over the entire network, fostering a trustless environment where transactions are validated through consensus mechanisms.

4. Applications Beyond Bitcoin:

While Bitcoin is the pioneering application of Blockchain technology, its potential extends far beyond digital currencies. From supply chain management to healthcare records, Blockchain is disrupting various industries by providing a secure and transparent platform for data management. Understanding the diverse applications of Blockchain is crucial in grasping its transformative impact on modern systems.

5. Bitcoin and Blockchain Synergy:

Bitcoin, the first and most well-known cryptocurrency, relies on Blockchain technology for its operation. Transactions on the Bitcoin network are recorded in blocks, forming the immutable Blockchain. The symbiotic relationship between Bitcoin and Blockchain showcases the inseparable connection between digital currencies and the underlying technology, emphasizing their role in shaping the future of financial transactions.

6. Overcoming Challenges:

As with any groundbreaking technology, Blockchain faces challenges on its path to widespread adoption. Scalability, energy consumption, and regulatory frameworks are among the hurdles that the technology must address. Acknowledging these challenges is essential for the continued evolution and integration of Blockchain into various sectors.

Conclusion:

Since I occasionally get likes on my Fer,al art, I felt like I had to make a post about the current situation. Wildworks, the company behind Animal Jam and Fer,al, has been using Fer,al for 2 whole years to make a block-chain and NFT based game called Cinder. they are reusing all the assents of Fer,al. Cinder will be released next year while Fer,al is still currently in BETA.

I cannot support this and will therefore put my fer,al characters on hold until they've been redesigned and assigned to another universe. I will no longer be playing this game. more of my thoughts under the cut

Edit: Sorry, I wrote this post in a blind rage and messed up NFT as UFT KFLJADSKLFDSJA

Edit 2: Here is a Toyhou.se forum post explaining more coherently what happened

I originally wanted to start this post with a list of changes in the games industry, changes to games, how they are developed, released, and played, and explain how they made gaming worse over the last 25 years. I decided against it. If you do not understand how day-1 patches, on-disc DLC, microtransactions, invasive DRM, and the absence of LAN/offline play have made games worse over time, I don’t know what to tell you. The same economic pressures that made AAA games more expensive to fund and soul-crushing to work on also those games less fun to play. In order to squeeze as much money as possible out of games, game design has been tainted by monetisation, and monetisation takes every opportunity to take the fun out of games and hide it behind a paywall.

Even existing games are not safe from this. You used to be able to play Rocket League on Linux, but now you can’t.

Not all games have become FarmVille, but games becoming more like FarmVille - not fun, but a tedious grind - has been normalised. A large part of the hype around NFTs is just a re-branding of existing monetisation schemes.

This poses a significant problem when I look at the criticisms of “NFT games“. Almost none of the drawbacks of NFT games are new. They are same the things we have seen for years, but now they are on the blockchain. The blockchain is almost always an afterthought, and the developer’s servers are the actual authority on game state. Most NFT games could easily “patch out“ all the blockchain and smart contracts with an update, leaving the gameplay side intact.

Some games have already showed us that the game code takes precedence over NFTs, and have removed tokens - so much for provable, unassailable owenership of digital goods! Games could even selectively blacklist some NFTs and not others.

Taking the blockchain out of a tedious NFT game like Axie Infinity would leave a FarmVille style game, with all the microtransactions that make the game not fun still intact, and all the digital goods stored on directly game servers.

Conversely, adding blockchain technology to an existing AAA game will not automatically make the game design worse, what makes it worse is pay-to-win mechanics, a degraded standard experience intended to make the player reach for the wallet to alleviate pain and boredom by paying his way out, advertising DLC you are “missing out on“ if you play the main game without it, and so on. Storing those on the blockchain will not degrade the game. Having in-app purchases at all is the problem.

Theoretically, backing in-game inventory with NFTs on the Ethereum blockchain could allow players to trade items outside of the game, but in practice, this only makes sense if the items are worth real money. There is no reason to trade items between players of different games any more than I have a reason to add playable bored ape characters to my next game jam game and limit them to NFT holders - which is to say the reasons are hype and novelty, because I can, and maybe it would be fun to implement. It definitely wouldn’t be fun to play.

Theoretically, you could even have trading card games where individual cards are stored on the block chain, and you could trade them outside the game. Again, the block chain does not really enable anything truly new, it would just be the data storage for card ownership. It would probably make people who buy card NFTs as investments mad if they were nerfed or superseded by stronger cards. You could also just make a game where everybody has all the cards, and building a deck is the main focus, or you could make a draft mode, or you could design your game so playing your cards right within a match is more important than deck building, or you could allow mods and custom cards. Collectible card games already have monetisation strategies that exert negative influence on game design, NFTs or not.

Tradeable items sold for real money with the game developer’s blessing have already existed in the Diablo 3 Real Money Auction House (RMAH), and continue to exist in Eve Online. Why did Diablo 3 fail where Eve succeeded? I think it’s because Diablo 3 had an un-fun game design, with too much emphasis on grinding and not enough on game play, whereas Eve has varied and interesting gameplay. Interestingly, blizzard later re-designed Diablo 3 and took out the RMAH, and only then could they re-design the game, re-balance drop rates, and create a sensible in-game economy. Backing tradeable items with NFTs would introduce the same problems the RMAH had, but

Of course, the negative environmental externalities of a blockchain are much worse, and transactions may take a long time to finalise. But that would be giving the NFT hype too much credit. Most “adding NFTs to games” schemes do not use the blockchain all that much. It’s just hype. It would be inefficient if every rare item dropped in a hack-and-slash game was committed to an eternal public ledger, and since this is all hype, AAA games that want to have “NFTs“ as just another bullet point next to “crafting”, “progression mechanics”, and “open word” would probably just mint five hundred custom texture packs and auction them off, instead of tying their core game loop to the Ethereum blockchain.

Most of the problems of “NFT“ games are already present in non-blockchain games. Most of the cool applications of blockchain tech in games were already possible, and nobody built them.

None of the above is new. There is a new type of game, like Axie Infinity, which I will call financialised games. Those present themselves as an investment opportunity, a new line of work, or a financial instrument. They are trying to create their own version of the World of Warcraft gold farming industry or the Eve Online space ship market out of whole cloth. They are trying to establish their in-game currency as an investment.

The driving idea behind financialised NFT games like Axie Infinity is not just storing your Mii or your Blue Eyes White Dragon on the block chain. It’s creating a new fungible (yes, fungible), sellable token that is “backed” by wasted time in the same way bitcoin is “backed“ by wasted electricity. Instead of the price of electricity, this token can be mined for the minimum wage.

I don’t think I have to explain to game designers why it doesn’t work like this, but in case you work in finance are the kind of guy who gives other people unsolicited stock advice at cocktail parties, here is the problem: Gold farming in World of Warcraft was profitable because the game was a slow grind, and Blizzard got paid by the month, and they made it so you couldn’t just grind the game in one sitting, so people who wanted to do high-level raids with their friends had to commit a lot of time every week to keep up, or they paid people to farm gold and level their characters. The value of gold in-game was so high because there was cool content behind the grind, and there were people in there who played the game for fun.

The same goes for Eve Online. It has a large player base of dedicated players who play it for fun, and to socialise with other Eve players. They hang out on forums and in chat rooms to strategise.

Play-to-earn games on the other hand are not marketed as places to hang out with your friends or rich worlds full of cool stuff to discover, with weeks worth of story content. They are marketed as opportunities to earn money. Nobody even pretends that they are fun to play for more than a couple of hours. If they were, they could charge money up-front, like regular games. Instead they pay players who otherwise couldn’t be bothered to play the game on their free time, because the game is not fun. And the game can’t be fun, or that would drive up the supply of in-game currency. Game design again suffers from monetisation, but in the case of play-to-earn games, it suffers more. That means the value of in-game money cannot be driven by people who want to get ahead in the game for fun, only by people who see it as an investment opportunity.

And then what? Who will you sell your in-game currency to? Other people who hate playing it?

60강 프로젝트 개요

참여자는 1eth를 내고 추첨에 참가한다

매니저가 lottery contract에게 추첨을 작도시키고 당첨된 사람에게 모아진 금액을 전달한다

.

.

61강 lottery proj에 필요한 변수 ,함수 개요

solidity의 데이터 타입

.

.

64강 lottery proj

call function 이건 sending transaction to function이건 grobal variable msg를 통해 address를 얻을수 있다. 

.

.

65강

solidity refrence data type

array 관련 간단한 작업 예시

.

.

67강

solidity ,javascript 둘다 nested array 지원하지만 중간의 연결역할을 하는 library가 이를 지원하지 않아서 생기는 문제

In Solidity, it is only possible to have dynamic storage arrays. Memory arrays have a fixed size and are not permitted to use push() in order to append additional elements.

Solidity is currently (v0.8) not able to resize an in-memory array. So you can't just define an empty dynamic array in memory and then push() into it. But there's a workaround to return a dynamic array containing the predefined list of items:

.

.

68강 lotter proj ballot.sol파일

.

.

69강 lottery proj ballot.sol파일

.

.

71강 lottery proj ballot.sol

랜덤하게 우승자 뽑는 함수 만들기

solidity는 랜덤 숫자를 뽑는 library가 없다. 그래서 우회방법으로 아래와 같이 한다.

.

.

72강 lottery proj ballot.sol에서 랜덤 인덱스 만드는 과정

.

.

73강 lottery proj ballot.sol

우승자를 뽑아서 주소로 상금 보내는 과정

.

.

74강 lottery proj ballot.sol

참가자 주소들 지우기 

new address[](0) 은 길이가 0인 다이나믹 array를 만든다.

new address[](5) 은 최초 길이가 5이며 기본값을 가지는 다이나믹 array를 만든다

.

.

75강 lottery proj ballot.sol

manager만이 pickWinner함수를 작동하게 하는 과정

.

.

76강 lottery proj ballot.sol

중복되는 코드는 modifier를 이용한다.

.

.