Those claims were debunked long ago. Bitcoin Script doesn't have the necessary control structures (i.e. goto operators) to allow for a two-stack automata. I don't know why anyone bothers to spend his time publishing that stuff.
Backdated blog posts
Anthony Young
Noah Wright
also by definition any turing machine can emulate any other turing machine so if you can't implement javascript interpreter in bitcoin script it's not fucking turing complete end of discussion.
Gavin Taylor
the only instruction you need for turing completeness is a conditional looping operator. like the subleq. if your machine can't emulate the subleq instruction it's proof of it's turing incompleteness also.
Ryan Perez
i made a twitter account just to follow him.
he is retweeting Mike Enoch and Ramz Paul all the time.
Szabo is unironically redpilled on the JQ and this is why he invented Bitcoi- I mean Bitgold.
Zachary Richardson
He's not talking about script, he's talking about the entire system of Bitcoin. Read the paper Greg.
Jonathan Hughes
not how it works. you need to be able to write a script that runs loops without your meddling or it's not turin complete. if you can only do it by an external turing machine (say an oracle) then you are fucked.
Andrew Smith
>trying this hard
Josiah Harris
Refute it, you cant
>not how it works. you need to be able to write a script that runs loops without your meddling or it's not turin complete. if you can only do it by an external turing machine (say an oracle) then you are fucked.
Read the paper, Greg. I'm not gonna hold your hand, figure it out for yourself. You don't need loops.
Henry Cooper
i did read it back in the days when i still made an effort of checking out faketoshis wild claims. it's bullshit. and no matter who much you squirm if you can't do loops it's evidently not turing complete because all turing machines can do loops.
Xavier Reyes
>back in the days
Now I know you didn't even read the link I posted. It's not Craig's paper, Ian Grigg wrote it and published it like a week ago.
>Even though the notion of Turing completeness is usually associated with loops, this can be finessed with the method of unrolling the loop [9]. As a system, if transactions can be linked by validation rules in e.g., Script, to ensure that new transactions replicate the GA with some small chance of mutation, evolution is simulated [4]. Iteration within a GA is computationally heavy, and to do so on-chain within many transactions would require an economic or gamified incentive. More likely, iteration would be done off chain, with only the best optimized generation posted as a new epoch. In the future, genetic algorithm iteration could be programmed as a new proof-of-work process, re-using the energy currently spent on mining.
>In practice, it is shown by Chepurnoy et al. that Turing-completeness of a Script-based blockchain system can be achieved through unwinding a set of recursive calls between multiple transactions and several blocks on a blockchain, instead of using a single block to do it [23]. Their method implemented a rule 110 cellular automaton (CA110), a control script to ensure that the CA110 transformation keeps the same rules during future iterations together with a validation script for the output representing the single bit, and the unbound grid (Figure 3).