Replying to Avatar DoctorBug

I still remember this useless (and endless) fight with Tierion's CEO... As we say in France, it was a real 'concours de bites' at that time.

I still wonder why open timestamp had to be an undocumented binary format (I know, code is the documentation and bla bla bla).

All this shit was totally unproductive.

My platform (not dead yet) supports both formats anyway, but integration of open timestamp was not easy at that time.
Avatar
Peter Todd 1y ago

Nah, that was a useful fight. Especially the email I linked to above. In a different timeline Chainpoint might have gotten W3C standardization, screwing over OpenTimestamps adoption. By arguing publicly I was able to make clear to everyone that Chainpoint just wasn't a good protocol, and OTS was.

Re: the binary format, it is documented. Read the protocol spec, the python-opentimestamps library. Though there's little reason to unless you're writing your own OpenTimestamps library; if you aren't, just use an existing library.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
DoctorBug 1y ago

Afaik, Open timestamp has not been standardized by W3C neither. Nothing on this scope had been standardized. I don't see any good output form this sterile debate.

You could have worked together propose it to the W3C.