
A Prehistory of the Ethereum Protocol - CryptoPunk
http://vitalik.ca/general/2017/09/14/prehistory.html
======
shpx
The idea of smart contracts is actually older than Bitcoin, Nick Szabo wrote
about it in 1997.

[http://nakamotoinstitute.org/formalizing-securing-
relationsh...](http://nakamotoinstitute.org/formalizing-securing-
relationships/)

Abstract: Smart contracts combine protocols with user interfaces to formalize
and secure relationships over computer networks. Objectives and principles for
the design of these systems are derived from legal principles, economic
theory, and theories of reliable and secure protocols. Similarities and
differences between smart contracts and traditional business procedures based
on written contracts, controls, and static forms are discussed. By using
cryptographic and other security mechanisms, we can secure many
algorithmically specifiable relationships from breach by principals, and from
eavesdropping or malicious interference by third parties, up to considerations
of time, user interface, and completeness of the algorithmic specification.
This article discusses protocols with application in important contracting
areas, including credit, content rights management, payment systems, and
contracts with bearer.

~~~
sillysaurus3
Was there any consensus on whether Szabo is Nakamoto? He seems to be on the
short list of people who had both the brains and the talent to pull off
Bitcoin.

~~~
brndnmtthws
He's just one of several candidates[1], although I think the late Hal Finney
is more likely to be Satoshi.

Another theory is that the Satoshi persona was created by a group of
individuals (cypherpunks) who were involved in the early Bitcoin community,
including Hal Finney and Nick Szabo.

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satoshi_Nakamoto#Possible_iden...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satoshi_Nakamoto#Possible_identities)

~~~
brndnmtthws
And for those curious about Hal Finney, here's a fascinating post he wrote
before his death:
[https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155054.0](https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155054.0)

~~~
vernon99
Except he didn't completely die, he was actually cryo-preserved. Although you
can look at it in multiple ways.

~~~
smitherfield
All available evidence suggests that cryonics is likely pseudoscience in
theory and certainly pseudoscience in practice. Irreversible brain damage
occurs within seconds (and total brain death within minutes) of oxygen
deprivation, and freezing cell tissue in water ice permanently destroys it.

~~~
DiThi
We don't really know. Cryonics avoid ice formation with cryoprotectants or via
vitrification. And assuming there _is_ brain damage, in theory it's still
possible to recover as long as the _information_ of the brain hasn't been
destroyed. It's akin to having the mainboard and the read head of a hard disk
destroyed, but having the plates intact.

