Bitcoin Forum

Nobody understands every interlocking element about crypto, whether it's the obscure differences in elliptic curves, economic theories, the legal system, whatever.  One thing that's generally agreed upon by the people who spend a lot of time deciphering these elements is, they can all be categorized into one of two systems:  permissioned ledger and permissionless.  The fallacy of many of these crypto analysts is, they assign these two distinctions solely at a protocol level, if it's possible or not to interact with the system at all.  In the case of IOTA, the economic variables alone can cause the same permissioned ledger distinction to take effect.

Yes, it is true, I can technically "interact" with IOTA on a "permissionless" level, but that interaction has no purpose unless you're first able to acquire the native token of the protocol.  It doesn't really matter if you can interact with it in some meaningless way if you're not spending native coins.  Since it's a currency and not a theoretical object on a drawing board, the interaction is required to be economically motivated in order for the permissionless attribute to apply.  In this case, it is not a permissionless system because I cannot acquire native tokens in a permissionless manner...just like proof of stake.

Where do the native coins come from?  Issued with the wave of a hand, for profit, just like central bankers do to enrich the issuer of course!  

Many will likely not want to accept this conclusion, but I believe this is a shockingly obvious flaw of unprofitable PoW, to be relegated into the same permissioned ledger status as proof of stake.  Because you're not circulating native coins in a permissionless manner, the external entropy to attempt to secure the underlying protocol, completely abstracted from coin creation and distribution layer, is kind of meaningless to begin with.

This is in addition to all the other issues of IOTA, such as limits of practical application concerning CAP Theorem, how the chain could find convergence without centralization or actually be secure at all without a huge tipping point of adoption, unprofitable PoW being easier to attack, the likelihood checkpoints would be required forever, etc.  

TLDR version:


The permanent peg is absent in IOTA.  It's not a decentralized currency or permissionless system.

But on another note, why is the word "extortion" in the title?:



Point two:


You have to give credit where credit is due, Russia is the leader in creating the two biggest, for personal profit schemes in cryptoland so far.

https://i.imgur.com/pUCQqXh.png

Has Come-from-Beyond actually released IOTA yet?

Or is it still imaginary?


 8)

Agree.

Bitcoin is dangerously close to that as well. The pricing of SHA2 ASICs is basically an extortion scheme.

Still calling BS on Proof of Stake Claims.
Which Proof of Stake coins are you unable to Acquire?

 8)

Yea, but it's just like any real free market in that there's no guarantee other's won't find a competitive advantage over you, survival of the fittest.  Whether that advantage is building a factory with Chinese peasant slave labor, or operating an unlicensed nuclear reactor on the bottom of the ocean floor.  As long as you can perform the hash function on a CPU that existed before Bitcoin was even releaesd, the fact remains that it is a permissionless ledger.

In theory yes. In practice it closer to permissioned. You remember USB dongles for copy protection? Much the same as Bitcoin ASICs. They're not an absolute barrier to copying of course (which if possible would make use only by permission), but they put up a wall. In theory you could hack a stakeholder and steal their stake, making it permissionless. But the wall is there.

All of them, without permission from an existing stakeholder (hacking exception from previous post noted)

You can go to an exchange and buy some, instead of making up stories.
If BTC owners don't sell their coins , you can't buy them either, so your Logic is Flawed.  ;)

You act like people are sealed in a bubble, fact is there is always something someone else has, that someone else wants, and to get those services & goods, we must trade with each other. IE: Food , Water , Healthcare, Companionship, Entertainment , New Cars, all of this require you give something up, the idea that someone can live without trading anything is beyond fantasy.

Because you still have to buy the asics or cloud mining from someone, so without their permission, you can't get BTC.  :P

In other words you have to get permission from the ISP, Hardware Manufacturers, and electric company , before you can even attempt mining,
so this permission verses permission less theory is really just a load a BS.


 8)

FYI:
So in other words For any System to Work Requires Permission from someone, which totally destroys your Argument.   :)

So the world has to conspire to take away electricity  (that can be used for anything), hardware (that can be used for anything) and ISP (which can be used for anything) in order for POW to be equally permission-based as a POS coin? WTF, dude.

If you going to make weak theories , don't be surprise when you're called on it,
or can you build an asic from stuff out of your yard?  :D

 8)

FYI:
You still need Permission from the electric company and an ISP?

FYI2:
Better & Funnier Yet.  :D
Prove me wrong, go out in the wilderness and create a BTC miner that can actually mine BTC , and then post the pics so we can be in AWE at you.
You can't buy ASICS, you can't pay a ISP, And you have to make your own Electricity, so that no one gives you permission.

FYI3:
You know even if you pull all of that off, You Still Need Permission from an Exchange to sell your BTC,  SO EPIC FAIL!!!

FYI4: Regarding Electricity , in your Hubris you believe everyone has access to it, Think Again.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/electricity-gap-developing-countries-energy-wood-charcoal/

Or how about I divert the electricity from my toaster to my computer to run on the same isp that I download porn with? My point was that no one monitors the first two and the third is barely monitored and I can move to a different service whenever I feel like it. But maybe with IOT I'll need to get permission from my toaster to use its electricity, but we're on good speaking terms, so it's probably cool.

Your argument is terrible. Nearly all of the things you mention (excluding new cars perhaps) are inherently available from many different sources. Food, water, etc. Go to probably millions of distinct habitable locations on earth and you will find them. Companionship is available from billions of people, healthcare from millions of providers, etc.

In nearly all existing proof-of-stake systems, the stake is highly concentrated by anywhere from a handful to possibly a few thousand people, in the latter case a group which likely has large internal concentration.

Moreover, the nature of paper wealth is that it is not subject to physical constraints of space or crowding and therefore tends to reach extraordinary concentration. Nearly all of the paper wealth (trillions or quadrillions) that exist in the world are controlled by a handful of banks, or in turn collude via entities such as central banks and the IMF. That control over the bulk of wealth allows them to extend that control all the way down to banning weed stores from getting bank accounts and encumbering nearly all physical wealth in a web of debt.

Any system based on control of notional wealth is in practice permissioned.

Systems based on control of physical devices such as computers or even physical phenomenon such as electricity may become permissioned (as I would suggest Bitcoin largely has at least for the moment), but they have a fighting chance in a way that wealth-based systems such as proof of stake do not.

You still need permission from the Electric company to have electricity in your home.
Don't pay your light bill for 3 months, and you will see them deny you permission.  ;)


 8)

No you don't. https://www.google.com/search?q=off+grid+electricity

And beyond that there are many, many, different electric companies throughout the world, all largely equivalent in terms off the service they provide. To the extent that they are centrally controlled that is through a paper wealth system (i.e. fiat proof of stake).

My Argument is better than yours,
yours required a person be enclosed completely in a sealed system. (Complete Fantasy)

Stake has to be traded , if the owner want to buy anything with it, if not why do they even bother to stake.

Any Wealth paper or otherwise has no point if it is not traded, how many rich people do you know that don't spend a penny of their money for food , if nothing else, therefore guaranteeing they are not in a sealed system and destroying your premise.

 8)

LOL, you then need permission from the Credit Card company and a Shipping Company and the Hardware Reseller.
Without their permission you don't get your little toy.

 8)


FYI:
You also needed permission from the ISP to even place the order.

 

That's called an extortion scheme, and it's not a permissionless ledger either.  The extortion blueprint is:

1)  Create PoS or IOTA tokens out of thin air with most or all residing in a genesis block which you control.

2)  Attempt to convince or force others to require them for some purpose

3)  Since you cornered the market already on day one by design, everyone is now required to go through you and your associates to be extorted at will


That covers the extortion part.  As for the second part, for it to be a permissionless ledger, there has to be a constant turnover of coins accomplished in one of two ways, either finite coin count and TX fees in block reward, or permanently inflationary mining where outsiders can acquire them without being forced to go through the original holders, exchanges, or other parties.

While IOTA is both a permissioned ledger and extortion scheme, the original PoS coin, Peercoin, attempted to not be an extortion scheme by having coins issued via mining, yet it fails in the aspect that it still is a permissioned ledger by being a recursive, closed entropy system.

Wealth accumulates wealth. Large stakeholders will earn large returns, and spend a little. Small stakeholders will live paycheck to paycheck and spend whatever they earn.

Furthermore, most proof-of-stake systems have in-built mechanisms that exacerbate this phenomenon. For example, a quieting time before you can stake. If you transact a lot (say from working and buying food) then you never stake. If you sit on your wealth you stake all the time, thus your return is higher. So more accumulation.

And we haven't even gotten to superlinear returns on unequal voting power. I'll leave that to someone else because I'm bored of you.

Really do you go to the Supermarket and claim it is extortion, when you buy food?
Buy it don't buy it your Choice.  :D

 8)

Wealth accumulates wealth.
Really tell that to the Farmer , that wealth is divided between their children upon their deaths.

Are all of you Guys Single and don't spend any money on a Wife or Children because you seem too confused about the real word and our links to it?

 8)


FYI:
That longer that quieting time, the less chance a big stakeholder can block the poor from staking.  :)
People can always set aside some for staking and the other for spending, you know like a Checkings & Saving Account.
PoW can monopolize the earning 24x7, Proof of Stake with a decent recovery time of 15 days or more, means the large stakeholder can't stake , leaving the poorer member the opportunity to stake until they recharge, it is a much fairer system than PoW.

Is it ironic to anyone else that this guy is hyping up some PoS coin called Zeitcoin, which is an interest based, rich get richer system as the cure for all of societies monetary problems?  That coin, if I'm not mistaken, was actually based on that "Zeitgeist movement" thing.  Some viral internet video most people have seen which had some viable points, then they released a second followup video expousing hardcore socialism as the solution to everything.  

Most people here are not socialists (definitely not me), but if you are one, proof of stake is the exact opposite of that.  It's more like a share cropper system where everyone else who isn't rich is your bitch.  It's the worst of capitalism and socialism combined.  People receive things for doing nothing, but the people who receive it are the ones at the top of the pyramid to strengthen their position of power even more.

Shows you don't do your research, I promote ZEIT and don't hide that from anyone.
Plus I own over 100 million and will until my death, so I am the ultimate bag holder and ultimate supporter.
What coin do you support with such intensity?

Zeitgeist have no ties with ZEIT, and if it shocks you , I am a Devout Believer in a Divine Creator.  :D
Also have no problem with Free Markets, it is when the Government interferes they remove the freedom from the markets.
ZEIT translated from German means Time.
So we are basically a coin to be Bartered for Time of service or goods.
We want the world to use our coin , not just some rich cat in the US.
The World , Poor, Middle class, & Rich, and we will make it happen.

 8)

FYI:
I prefer to think of ZEIT in agricultural terms.
1. ZEIT is a Virtual Resource , with ZEIT like a seed , and electricity and ISP Bandwidth, and Time to make more.
2. For us it is not interest , it is a Virtual Harvest.  :D
3. We always have and always will keep a FREE FAUCET funded with Millions of ZEIT available so people can get ZEIT for FREE at
http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?faucet=ZEIT    :)

Dude's a loon. He's arguing since basically everything could become permissioned in his imagination (you parents decided to keep you therefore your living is permissioned--at least this seems where his reductionism will get him), therefore a system that is a one-step permissioned system is as good a system as any other.

I imagine this is how he would defend a murder client. "You could die if a plane hits you, an ebola virus gets hold of you, a giraffe could stomp you to death, basically something will kill you, so what difference is that from what my client did? It was going to happen sooner or later anyway."  8)

Says the star wars reject, (Did I strike a nerve with the single comment)
you just PO, cause I proved your theory invalid and you need people to believe PoW is better , when it's not.

Would not defend a murder client , if I knew he was guilty, morals would prevent that in my case, but since you see the world that way , it tells me money is too much in your motivation.

 8)

FYI:
What you fail to understand is it is not a could become permissioned, but most everything is already permissioned due to requiring FIAT for the service.
Generalized Permission or Specific Permission is still Permission.
Your Payment of FIAT to your Electricity , ISP , ASICS Reseller Provider, is why they granted you Permission to use their Services or buy their goods.
Don't send them their FIAT and watch how quickly they revoke their permission to use their systems, which you need to mine BTC.
Your Permission Less MYTH is Busted!

So your MO is jumping to wrong conclusions based on little to no information--makes perfect sense now.

Accurate Conclusions, and that is why it takes 3 or more of you to try and cover it up.  ;)


 8)

FYI:
My MO is shining Logic on that Lying Theory you guys keep putting out to try and create good PR for a failing PoW system.

So you wanna buy some IOTA?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gfntBEI3Aw

Classic :)

I was thinking extortion is when someone forces you to do something. Nobody forced me to buy tokens, I took the risk myself.

1. Take a general very weak "argument" against ico coins
2. Use it against IOTA only

genious

50 BTC bet - and I'll show you how to interact with Iota on a "permissionless" level in a meaningful way without spending native tokens.

PS: Someone quote this, please, I feel he will make appearance that he hasn't noticed this post.

"permissionless" is a fantasy in the real world for any coin.
Yours included.,

By the way , exactly how does your coin propagate?


 8)


FYI:
Looked at your Thread , you seem to be having issues meeting a release date.
Creepy Feature setting in?

I assume you are an expert in cryptocoins so I don't ask for a proof.

If you ask, you'll get an awful smelling bowl of reductionism . "Mmmmm, stupidity!"

Hello everyone!

I would like to understand from what side is smelling like a SCAM!!!

Please, do me a favour - make your vote here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1415320.msg14339471#msg14339471

and here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1415313.msg14339500#msg14339500


Thank you for support.

Special Poll:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1415614.0

How can I vote for IOTA - this is the biggest ICO scam.... way worse than the two above.

Also can you stop spamming this on every thread ?

I just want to understand opinion of people, I am not a spammer

You are spamming this on every thread. You are a spammer.

cryptohunter only you are the spammer. You spaming with your Lisk every thread and propagating your lies about IOTA everywhere, because are you afraid of Iota? You deleted my post in the self-moderated topic. Read it again:


By the way

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rogeraitken/2016/03/14/can-bitteasers-blockchain-ad-network-disrupt-pay-per-click-market/#78b8ef064e22


Now also Forbes writes about IOTA. Revolutionary ideas of the Iota project becomes known everywhere.

I hope this fact will not make some envious of the IOTA project persons even more sad and serious?  ::)

+1

Agreed! That's the truth. Therefore he wrote massive amounts of bullshit here.

cryptogay!

I put links of that poll in different threat to find people and opinion!

But you? you are exactly spammer.

cryptohunter(gay) is big spammer.

You waste your time trying to prove anything to cryptohunter. His opinion is completely irrelevant. He runs no a startup, he has no connections in IT business, he has no non-trivial amount of money. His deeds won't affect Iota future, so it's better to let him believe in what he currently believes. People face hard reality too often, no need to pull them out of their comfortable shells without a serious reason.

I am asking you to explain how ethereum and lisks ICO were scams but not IOTA?

shall I open a thread so you can debate this with me? come on we can analyse all 3 ICO's?

You are spamming the same copy and paste on every thread. This is spamming and mods will see that.

You are the most damaging member of the iota scam community - you are making that token look dreadful.

You simply do not have the intelligence to mask your true motive for creating these polls, and copy and pasting roach's posts 3x.

The mods will see you have done that too. I hope to see your account banned shortly.

Wise move - try to reel in these foolish pumpers and spammers.

Keep the dull of mind in your thread. You need to release only the subtle and cunning out into the wild of the main board.

Their methods must be different to the swearing, copy and pasting and blatant spamming and unrealistic diversionary tactics of these types of shills. They are too obvious and their arsenal is all too easy to take and turn on themselves. It is almost unpleasant to have to do it to them.

Release your token to the public, put it on exchanges. Then come pumping a while later when you have some real solid good news that can not easily be written off as pathetic and meaningless pump tactics for your captive insta ico tokens you are trying to ransom off for 3000% profits.

But I would  piss on your grave )))

and BTW I'm very happy that you love me so much!!!

So no debate then comparing ICO's - as I thought.
Iota are praying you stop posting I'm sure.

@cryptogay : Who in the hell gave you any rights to ASK???

Let's ask: Why you have so big ass and so small brain? And why are you smelling so bad...Huh

Would you like to have special thread with me about your bad smelling body?

Why you think I'm from iota? your brain is really very small... it's pity

Yes please make one. That would not offend me at all. It would greatly please me to demonstrate your childish behaviour.

So yes or no ???

You want to debate the ICO styles and initial distribution of


1. Ethereum
2. Lisk
3. Iota
4. Nem
5. NXT

any other large ICO

Please keep in mind I care for no single coin. I have always been more of a collector. I have perhaps 200 different coins of which I have mined and collected.

We are debating only from an objective stand point the ICO styles and initial distribution of there tokens/coins.

YES or NO do you wish to debate this and demonstrate to me WHY you are calling other ICO a scam but defending IOTA?

YES or NO??
any other big ICO on the board??

YES or NO?

HAHA so that's a NO then you will not debate this with me.

No iota is just using DAG - it's not a huge deal. YOU will see plenty of coins using DAG shortly I'm sure IF IT EVEN WORKS.

Do you really think cfb is the only programmer that can create a token using DAG? haha okay.

so your answer is NO I DON'T DARE DEBATE THIS WITH YOU BECAUSE I KNOW IOTA ICO LOOKS WAY MORE LIKE A SCAM!!

Exactly I thought so :) :)


The FACT you refuse to debate this we me shows that YOU KNOW IOTA ICO looks much more scammy and yet you try to call other coins some of which even have POW and are on exchange scams.

Omg.... My god! you are Nemster???
Another thought! Why not to discuss any ICO of any factory in US for example?
P.s. Do you have wife? probably no... it is as well very pity
Just take back pin from your ass about any ICO and go and relax

No we only need to discuss like for like ICO you are calling scams compared to ICO you support.

Will you debate and compare these with me YES OR NO?

BTW
According to my poll,https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1415614.0
                          

ETHEREUM AND LISK ARE SCAM...

This is opinion of many people... This is not only my opinion... and we are already talking about this.


what a bullshit like YES or NO?

This is not only me...

Okay but you have not added iota as options on your poll.

Some people think all ico are scams. That could be true.

I try to put this simply for you to understand.


You want to know which is the great scams right ??? Ethereum, LISK or IoTA.

Come debate with me now and I will help you learn the truth that IOTA is the biggest scam of them all.

Do you want to debate it with me using facts only??

YES OR NO?

Why do you not want to??

r0ach is the ultimate puppet master. The guy is a total BTC maximalist. He starts these threads, then sits back as you idiots rip each other apart. Classic!  ;D

@cryptogay may be latter, keep your poison!
 
I will much better spend time with my beautiful wife

But for you -Like usually- ENVY to the world)))

Do you remember in NEM? NO ENVY...

That's a no then. Thanks for admitting you dare not debate with me the ico scam of iota vs other big ico's.

So now you go from failing to pump something with a narrow distribution to failing to pump something  that displays a much broader distribution.
See you are improving already.

Don't be too long. I am interested in your side of the debate.

I hope he has 50 BTC...

Where did this permissions category come from?

Its pointless

Because, Spiccoli, to qualify as a decentralized currency, there's some problematic boxes one needs to check off in order to quantify the difference between whether MongoDB is a decentralized currency or whether Bitcoin is.

http://bone-in-the-throat.com/Blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/screen-shot-2014-04-20-at-5-42-09-pm.png

Oh, dude, you are crazy. Disregard my offer to bet on 50 BTC, betting against you is more evil than taking away a candy from a kid.

What's your grievance with that statement?  That you can create a federated coin with MongoDB, so in your mind, that qualifies as a "decentralized currency"?  Distributed sure, just like PoS and IOTA, but not decentralized because it's not a permissionless ledger.  You have to draw the line somewhere and everything can't just be vague distinctions of incremental decentralization.

Where's my 50 btc?

So you don't mind against that bet? Great, what escrow agents do you trust?

BTW

Qora = Java
Nxt = Java
IOTA = Java

Other cryptocurrencies in Java?

Hey smooth paranoid dude, you said it's only fuckstard are here. On the picture it's my text. Whose schizophrenic sock puppet are you? What are YOU pumping in your stupid brain??

BTW

Hey idiot, IOTA was not only written in Java, but in C# and other programming languages.

Other stupid question?

You know they are pulling out all the stops when they:

When they come up with some useless definitions, and say "Russian extortion" just to say it with nothing to tie such words to Iota

Are out in force 24 hours a day bashing Iota

Are not even attempting to make sense, just using all their effort to get as much negative crap spit out as fast as they can type



Then you know Iota is doing good!!

Does anyone else find it curious that nearly all the accounts posting in support of IOTA and that expressed interest on the IOTA crowdsale thread were created at the same time, shortly after the Nxt launch, and many of them show the same long period of inactivity from 2014 until IOTA ?

 
 
Wow, I'm hard to impress, but you just blew me away.  Thanks for writing all that and articulating exactly what I felt was wrong about IOTA this whole time.   :D

You presented terms that are too ambiguous for betting nomenclature.  Nobody would be able to decide the result.  Basically cherry picked the only somewhat ambiguous terminology out of my long post you could find and tried to turn that into a wager...

I don't know what your exact angle is.  I'm guessing you'll make a claim that the coin which hasn't been released yet supports atomic transactions across chains, then claim the outside entropy of other coins allows permissionless accumulation of coins in your network, but that's not how the game works.  You have to assume only your coin exists and you can't just borrow outside entropy from other coins that may or may not exist.

I don't really feel like guessing the other elusive but probably debunkable technicalities you might try to pull.  Did you really think it would be that easy to defeat Long r0ach silver of the high seas and Bitcoin?

Smooth shame on you for hiring Sherlock Holmes.

As expected.

Completely idiotic statement. Are you maybe sock puppet from our famous venerator altcoinUKwhore from IOTA community? I think so. This is irrelevant when you have registered. It's the same shit.

Here is something for you  ;)


Dude, you believe yourself not to your shit. Ask yourself why are you research on my account? I'm flattered.  ;D

WOW AHAHAHAHAHA  :D :D :D :D

But really... The exact reason that you all write this shit here is that YOU ARE SCARED. Think logically: would anyone care for one ShitCoin? NO. But you are scared, that all you crap that you have in KingCoin will be soon only little errant LoseCoin. Is that your fear? Yes, you know it. Only this is the reason.

Want the truth? The IOTA community is BIG. Really. It's truth. I have a lot to know in our forum. Also native english speaking peoples. I asked some of them why are you not go to bitcointalk?
They don't want. One sayd me, he don't want to waste time and touch piece of shit. That stinks. It's no reason.

You idiot don't want to know the truth, you know already everything, the thruth, that IOTA is the revolutionary platform, that can make your KingCoin to ShitCoin. That's why YOU ARE SCARED.

I do not live here 24/7 in this forum.  :D

If I'm interested I'm in in other forums. But only if it's something great like IOTA. So it is, dude  ;D

Hey cryptohunter Lisk scammer. This is especially for you. You spaming with your Lisk every thread and propagating your lies about IOTA everywhere, because are you afraid of Iota. You deleted my post in the self-moderated topic. Read it again:


By the way

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rogeraitken/2016/03/14/can-bitteasers-blockchain-ad-network-disrupt-pay-per-click-market/#78b8ef064e22


Now also Forbes writes about IOTA. Revolutionary ideas of the Iota project becomes known everywhere.

I hope this fact will not make some envious of the IOTA project persons even more sad and serious?  ::)

It's spotlight fallacy combined with incorrectly sampled data. Add the names to the list, please, otherwise we can't verify your data.

We will stick to your definitions quoted by me in my first post of this thread. So? You are about to lose your face if you keep making excuses. Just say that you are willing to accept the bet and we'll nail the details.

Funny, it was YOU who presented the terms:


In iota you can interact in a meaningful way (sending & receiving meaningful data) without aquiring tokens, so it's permissionless. period.
If you're sure about your statement above, put up that 50BTC.

And you know this how?


I don't have time to write up a detailed study. I made an observation and asked a question. Perhaps someone else would like to look more carefully.

It's only you and me who cares about this and I'm too lazy for this, so...

Yet, you stated that the data were incorrectly sampled and focused on a particular subset. I'm wondering how you know that.

For that matter, I'm also curious how you know what other people care about.

I looked at those dates, they cover 2 months period which is 1/6 of a year. Both, Nxt and Iota, are innovative projects, so it's not surprising that they attract people. Common sense says that finding 10 users that registered within 2 months and got attracted by Nxt and Iota is not so improbable as you want to say. Resume: look my posts above.

smooth if you have facts, present them.

I was in Qora, then NXT then iota but then i have been in BTC BTCD SC <insert Shitcoins> etc... Does this make me a sock puppet too?

Facts? this is a closed ICO with no transparency and no regulation. You don't get to look behind the curtain.

Ok, some people are going to be real investors. Looks to be a very high proportion of very new accounts and innactive accounts though.
That's the problem with unregulated ico with no transparency- Nobody can say.

Hence why the onus is on the ico to prove they are doing their best to distribute widely and not just share amongst a tiny percentage thus making it very easy to limit supply whilst pumping later on.

Coupled with the fact it's from the same people as nxt then you have to go that extra mile when running an ico not to be seen as doing the same thing as before.

This is why only POW with fair release is beyond question.

If you are going to have an ICO should be widely advertised as possible before and during the ICO and have a proportion of POW.

If it does not have those elements then it's wide open for manipulation and pumping.

What is your estimate of how many users I looked at to find those 10?

In the list of users sorted by the date of registration? The same order of magnitude. Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias and you'll get why your sampling was incorrect.

The sampling was not incorrect for what it was intended to accomplish. I looked at users active in promoting or expressing interest in IOTA to see if their backgrounds have surprising commonality.

Answer: I looked at 11 such accounts. The second or third I looked at was not an obvious hit, so I excluded it, but arguably it too could be included. They are all extremely similar relative to the population of currently-active forum users, and not just in terms of registration date, though certainly that.

Conclusion: The users expressing interest in IOTA are predominantly at best a narrow group with an unusually common background and forum activity history, and at worst a cheaply assembled group of sock puppets.

Looks like you haven't read survivorship bias article. Well, not many people care about posts in this thread, so we can stop here. This will save my time on explanation why survivorship bias is applicable in this case.

As usual Smooth the Monero/Aeon developer spamming other coins threads to prove that other coins are shit except the spam coins he supports; sock puppets accounts from Monero/Aeon party are different level in this forum.

My feeling is don't believe any POLL in this forum nor believe anything spammed by Monero people.

Pretty much like that. Also depicting PoW as a non permissioned ledger is theoretically right, but in reality no longer true. In these days obtaining PoS coins and staking is much more affordable than mining.

Which is what brings us to the point of this thread.  It's a wolf in sheep's clothing.  A coin pretending to be a permissionless decentralized currency but really isn't.  This system fooled many very smart people at first glance, we're talking many career mathematicians and PhDs, so don't feel bad whoever didn't figure it out till now.  For anyone who doesn't get it, "distributed" is not the same thing as "decentralized" and "permissionless".  Having said that, the distributed security part is also full of a lot of holes.  

If it was released today, it would just be another greater fool pump like NXT, then fade into obscurity never to be heard from again due to severe technical issues similar to Burstcoin or Cryptonite.  Attempting to improve on Bitcoin by a complete rewrite of the entire system is not a fly by night endeavor.  This thread will be extremely unpopular with all coins not utilizing standard PoW as Bitcoin does, because it also shows the terminal flaws of those other systems.

This is worth another 50 BTC bet which we'll do after sorting out the first one, right?

And I agree with rezilient

Well, if I can earn 100 BTC on his FUD - why not? If he has balls to accept the bets, of course.

I'll be happy to accept that bet.  Anything with a probabilistic security model is by definition "full of holes".  It's designed to fail in other words.  The only thing that gives it any usability is it's fault or state recovery.  You're inherently trying to create a perpetual motion machine based on human incentivized desirability to constantly reboot the system afterwards.

The 50 BTC payment by one of you or your associates can be sent here:

13Vec94iVPETRahJjf9zWwoyuJV6uh2o1e

"...which we'll do after sorting out the first one". One bet at a time. So, what about the first one? Do you accept it?

I did not receive payment for this one yet.

https://i.imgur.com/Rpj4HL7.png

How can obtaining coins at 3000% over ICO essentially be cheaper than mining fairly from the start? That does not have to be the case.

Yes of course it is cheaper if you are selling them to yourself for next to nothing then pumping them 3000% for others to buy. Of course that is far more affordable since you are getting paid a fortune just for having them.


It is impossible to get more than your fair share of the tokens/coins if you follow a fair release protocol on a POW launch. Please explain to me how it is at all possible.

ICO is a closed curtain behind which anything can be taking place.

POW is an open book you get to see exactly what is happening as it unfolds.

If someone can show me how you can gain unfair advantage on POW  with announced release, low initial block rewards, fast scaling dif, slow long mining period...  then go ahead and explain.

Playing stupid won't add credibility to your posts. You accept the bet or I add this thread into favorites and remind it every time I meet you in threads to show that your words are worth nothing. You have 24 hours to save your face.

Well, after you said of tptb's thread  that BTT does not matter and you will find others to sell iota to who are unaware of the sock puppet ICO ...then I guess whatever you show people on here will not hold much influence.

It makes you wonder if BTT "does not matter" why they are here at all. Or does BTT not matter only when people say things on BTT they don't like?

Well, I've heard nearly every dev who got caught out say exactly the same thing.

I might have someone at hand. Do you offer a bounty? Detailed studies need a lot of time. Guy would be willing to work for ETH or BTC (to get rid of your XMR I suggest shapeshift.io - that's a personal remark, btw.)

You're a known iota pumper. I don't think using your services to seek truth in this area would be suitable.

Better to have an objective person.

How can we really have a detailed study?? that's the problem with unregulated ico with no transparency.

I remember though NEM went through their ico list in public and vetted it for sock puppets.

Best in future to vanquish all ico or at the very least have open list of investers usernames.

Read again, it's a third party. A master student actually, I don't have a strong enough background in statistics.
And read the quoted statement again, you seem confused.

It would be best it was a third party entirely disconnected from a known iota supporter. It's okay i'm clear on what you were suggesting. I just don't think it appropriate.

It's good to see that you are pushing for an in depth investigation into the iota ico though. You know it makes sense to vindicate the project from here on out. All ico should post usernames of investors really. Many have in the past. It would not stop puppet accounts but would make it easier to find them and analyse.

Let this be the decision of the person who pays the bounty. (*)
And would you mind removing your signature? It's kind of bizarre if you dish out "pumper" and well behave like every other signature spammer.

(*) food for thought

Resorting to threats now?  Come on, you know I can just send Bidji the French connection on you.

Why are you beating around the bush? Just put your money where your mouth is, thats all. Escrow: OgNasty

Usernames? LOL. no. ICOs as they are currently understood are just unsalvageable in terms of non-transparency and susceptibility to abuse. All you accomplish with such easily-abused measures is to put a shinier veneer of legitimacy on them.

You could be right. I was just thinking that it would mean creating a lot of puppets and making them look convincing too.

I know I would 100% prefer POW as a distributional method. However, it seems nothing will ever stop ICO's.
The devs always claim they need funding for their ideas which they say they can not get immediately with pow.
Some people will not buy or rent hash and they will always have a crack at an ICO.

If it was the norm for ICO to publish usernames and do 50% or 75% POW then all other ICO that did not do this would immediately ring alarm bells.
There needs to be a away to please enough people for them to get behind it and support it.
The fair release protocol that many POW devs stuck to during wave 2 was actually quite good.
Miners all saw the rules were there to ensure everyone got a equal chance and actually united to demand devs released in that way.

Would be a great to see things swing back to POW although every big release of late has been ICO of some kind.

For Iota BTT doesn't matter. For me everyone of you matters. Partially because I like to troll back to improve my English, partially because I'm a soft-hearted person with developed empathy skill and I care about your well-being. Confess, when I reply to your posts you do feel yourself less useless, don't you?

No

Your English, by the way, is quite good, but I haven't noticed any improvement.

Wow smooth, so now people need to list usernames on a spam forum filled with monero shit so they can prove to YOU or that cryptohunter that their choice of coun is legit?
You think if he puts a random of like 50 accounts in THIS forum "lol" you would be believe he's credibility to you OMG this is hilarious.
Go back to your work in coding that's if you think you are a coder after all not sure if ur a crypto developer or a spammer; I am sure you're dream to have something like Fluffy pony aeodice maybe and giving your best buddy 21000 coins just like Othe did with Fluffy pony.
This only proves you're a shit developer and all about spamming this coin hating on other people choices, Web designer shit.

The time is going on, don't waste it if you care about your reputation. If you do NOT care, it's fine for me too.

We both know that deep inside your heart (maybe too deep for your conscious) you have answered "yes"... :)

Notwithstanding the bickering here which the users (and even most investors in a big success) of a CC are never going to read, the bottom line is which aspects are required for a CC to scale up and compete with or overrun Bitcoin?

I am of the opinion that there is really no benefit to exerting great effort to try to stop P&Ds of CCs which are going no where, e.g. Dash and Ethereum. My goal has been to primarily to make sure that the technological issues have been properly documented; and this was mostly for myself, to make sure I don't make the same technological mistakes on my coin. Notice I've given up trying to comment in every Ethereum thread, because I've realized that gamblers love P&Ds and there is nothing I can or should do to fix the Gambler's Fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy) psychosis/addiction.

I will posit that the breadth of the initial distribution of the coin is critical, because CC is not a widely used unit-of-account (i.e. chicken-or-egg dilemma) thus the HODLers are not going to be reinvesting their CC in new ventures and thus the CC won't redistribute out to employees of new ventures and thus the CC will become stagnant. With a great majority of the coins held and not recirculating, then the network effects will be limited to arbitrage opportunity cost, e.g. blowing bubbles in other altcoins. None of this will ignite a mass user ecosystem.

So it really doesn't matter if the lead developers find some way to mine 1% of the coins to reward themselves, if the other 99% of the coins are more widely distributed amongst those who will circulate them (and not just dump to HODLers as was the case for Auroracoin), than is the case for Bitcoin. Such an ideal distribution will run gangbusters over everything else. Of course if the insiders take double-digit percentages of the coins, then they have defeated their own long-term investment in network effects and thus should not be taken seriously. The problem with PoW coins distributed up to now, is they are not widely distributed amongst the ultimate users of a CC, which is why they haven't been able to gain sufficient network effects to challenge Bitcoin.

This will be the single most critical trait of a CC that will overtake Bitcoin, bar none.

I am literally opening my playbook for you.

Other than distribution, the other key aspect is whether the economic structure of the consensus algorithm can remain decentralized as the use of the currency scales up. So far, no CC has solved this dilemma.

And then I would posit that until you solve instant secure confirmations (which Iota doesn't have), you'll not be able to employ the CC in the markets where credit cards can't compete well.

Take all that together with the fact that Iota's consensus convergence depends either on all payees choosing to employ the same Monte Carlo judgement (which they are not required to do by the game theory) or on centralized servers with more PoW hashrate than the attackers, then for me Iota is doomed. But don't expect me to waste my time repeating it and trying to cure the Gambler's Fallacy. CfB and iotatoken have a right to extract from that phenomenon, but I just hope for their own sake they are aware of the laws that regulate them even though I'd prefer there are no such laws (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg14273014#msg14273014).

||

Take all that together with the fact that Bitcoin's consensus convergence depends either on all payees choosing to employ the same Longest Chain Wins judgement

This is great ;D

I would have paid money to see all you characters sparring with CFB. You're losing btw. But you should because you are all full of shit.

You guys are pretty scared of Iota I see. I wonder what a look up my ass would turn up? Smooth??

The distinction is that that there is no way to verify from the block chain whether every payee did employ the Monte Carlo judgement. Thus there is no Nash equilibrium.

Kaboom (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/kaboom#Etymology)!

You must have realized this AFTER iotatoken turned down your offer of collaboration, surely.

Hasn't Selfish Mining proved that Longest Chain Wins is not a Nash equilibrium?

Ah you are referring to when I first landed in Iota's ICO thread last year and I was initially interested in the technology, not having understood yet the insoluble flaws in it.

And a comment I made publicly asking if they (iotatoken and CfB) might want to collaborate, not yet knowing about the ICO/Jinn stuff and also not having any idea who David is or even CfB's background of creating Nxt.

Obviously I was eventually educated as to the relevant facts.

Is that the way you n00bs analyze by pulling some random post out-of-context of the entire story. Pitiful you.

Do you know that I shoot myself in the foot by criticizing Iota because one of my angel investors bought the Iota ICO and is looking to reinvest the profits with me, should I need more cash before completing my project. In fact, my angel investor is the one who asked me to go evaluate Iota.

Great. Take your angel investor dough and go work on your coin and we talk again after you fix all problems in BTC, Ethereum, Iota, etc... that is very likely to happen.  ::)

The delusion of (even very smart) humans is incredible to me. Best of luck, you will need it on your one-man mission.

No. Because anyone who has greater than 33% of the hashrate must employ the Selfish Mining as their optimum strategy and everyone else must mine on the visible longest chains as theirs.

The Nash equilibrium does have a long-term failure as economies-of-scale centralization, but that is an orthogonal issue.

The problem with a DAG is no one can know the optimum strategy of the other participants and even which strategy they employed. Or at least not until you can show mathematically that no other strategies than following the Monte Carlo is profitable. The Monte Carlo is only the most profitable IF everyone else is also following it. That conditional "IF" doesn't apply in the LCR. That is the key distinction that makes a DAG fatally flawed.

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1404

I've done my homework.

I'm sure you have, I know how smart you are... I also know that the likelihood of you pulling off what you want is 0.00001%. So, best of luck.

Again, you are either light years ahead of all human beings (and you would not be on this forum, as your time could be better spent taking over the world) or you are miscalculating how possible the task you have set for yourself is.

I'll let you figure out which category you fall under.

Seriously, you should probably spend more time trying to work with other teams directly - most of the time the things we think others are overlooking are there for a reason (either there is no current solution that works or we misunderstand the extent of the problem our concerns actually generate for the system).

I probably should ignore this, but one time I will respond...


I've documented how smart I am:

---

There is a reason I have interacted with the smartest developers on this forum, including Gmaxwell (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1378533.msg14035614#msg14035614).

Unfortunately the developers here are not the best. I would prefer to work with the best. They typically are not interested in working on crypto currency, but I will be able to motivate them because I have a project under way which can be a real software company startup.

Now I'm just honestly disappointed... 130's?!??!

I thought we had a GENIUS on our hands here... I'm surrounded by people with IQs in the 140-150 range all day long and now I have to come here and interact, NO, worse, WASTE TIME, with someone that is a mere 130? Guy, not even MENSA is interested! Jesus.

Please, let's just forget this ever happened, return to the job you were meant for - manager (at most) of your local KFC (or burger king if you think you can handle that).

ps. honestly, how old are you? Because maybe you still have some time to bump it up over 140.

 

You do. You seem to not read the links I provided:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7055#comment-1698745 (correcting a documented 155+ IQ genius)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1378533.msg14035614#msg14035614 (correcting the inventor of the Ogg orbis about the flaws in Ogg container, Gmaxwell our resident high IQ core dev)

http://unheresy.com/Essence%20of%20Genius.html (published my solution to a question on an IQ test that indicates I would score above 148 IQ on that test)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1219023.msg13938052#msg13938052 (correcting the entire W3C on correct design, see also: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1378533.msg14035614#msg14035614)


It is only 1-in-1000 rarity so that isn't such a miraculous feat if you work at a company with IQ selective hiring policies.

Needless to say, IQ is not the sole determinant of success and breadth of impact on society. Motivation, competitiveness, and tenacity are very important.

lol

I'm guessing you scored higher, but are scared to say it because you think people won't take you seriously. 140s is good, no question, but I have scored higher, and I bet you have too.

IQ doesn't measure functional intelligence, which is much more important.

Even greater an issue is mental health. This can make it all pointless. This pertains to you alittle. However, your social skills, or lack of them, is very well documented right here on this forum.

The point that you would bring up IQ scores is suspect to begin with, but not as suspect as acting like you didn't know the background of CFB. As much as you are on this forum, it would only take someone with an IQ of 70 to know you were lying about that.

And using big words, just to use them, when much simpler words would suffice, or do ha ha, is suspect of your confidence concerning your intelligence as well.

Einstein purportedly bought 7 pairs of the same clothing so he wasn't distracted thinking about extraneous issues such as deciding what to wear each morning.

I really didn't know CfB created Nxt. I've been and remain as ignorant about Nxt as I can manage to be, i.e. I don't go seeking information about Nxt. I had heard some name "Luc" or something like that. I have not even committed the Nxt developers names to memory. That exemplifies the importance I assign to knowing who the Nxt core developers are.

There are only so many hours in each day. If I waste them, I get no progress. This discussion is becoming wasteful and silly.


There are two factors in play here. First, I've been suffering a chronic infection which makes it nearly impossible to have normal energy for thinking. Until you've experienced this, you will not understand how it messes with your head because of frustration at feeling like shit every damn day for 4 years. And not being able to do the productivity or even just the basic daily activities such as take a shower and change your clothes (because it is too tiring to do so). I am proud that I was able to function to the level I did with this illness. And I am very encouraged with the new treatments I am experimenting with (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1219023.msg14353575#msg14353575).

The second factor is that I speak frankly. And I don't have much tolerance for trolls. So did other greats in the software industry such as Linus Torvalds, Bill Gates, Eric S. Raymond, and Steve Jobs. Little people have ego. Those at the top of their game are more concerned with accomplishing goals. If you think my frankness will prevent me from achieving a mass market success, then you have not studied my LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/shelby-moore-iii-b31488b0).

I don't need to convince you, because frankly I don't need any of you to take any interest in what I am working on.  :P  :P  :P

Hasn't Selfish Mining proved that Longest Chain Wins is not a Nash equilibrium?
[/quote]

No. Because anyone who has greater than 33% of the hashrate must employ the Selfish Mining as their optimum strategy and everyone else must mine on the visible longest chains as theirs.

The Nash equilibrium does have a long-term failure as economies-of-scale centralization, but that is an orthogonal issue.

The problem with a DAG is no one can know the optimum strategy of the other participants and even which strategy they employed. Or at least not until you can show mathematically that no other strategies than following the Monte Carlo is profitable. The Monte Carlo is only the most profitable IF everyone else is also following it. That conditional "IF" doesn't apply in the LCR. That is the key distinction that makes a DAG fatally flawed.
[/quote]

I was under the assumption that is miners had over 33% of the hashrate this would be the case.

I would also agree that DAG is flawed.

Lets say one was to mathematically work out the strategy even if they were deployed to what detriment would that pose to the rest of the miners?

You say that "white" is "black". It doesn't make sense to continue after this point.


PS: Those who are interested in the subject can check

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium#Informal_definition ("Informally, a set of strategies is a Nash equilibrium if no player can do better by unilaterally changing their strategy."),

https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~ie53/publications/btcProcFC.pdf ("We presented Selfish-Mine, a mining strategy that enables pools of colluding miners that adopt it to earn revenues in excess of their mining power.")

and https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf ("Nodes always consider the longest chain to be the correct one and will keep working on extending it.")

which clearly show that Bitcoin doesn't operate in a Nash equilibrium and still achieves consensus thus making TPTB's claim ("Thus there is no Nash equilibrium.") look out of place, because it shows/proves nothing.

TPTB, do you happen to also have Asperger's syndrome? Reading your responses makes me think of a less genius version of Von Neumann... some people can be so smart and fail to see very simple things right in front of them.

Best of luck on your project. I hope you are right about it.

Frankly saying, it's quite an achievement for this forum. For example, my last IQ score was 47.

Last time I took an IQ test I was immediately institutionalized upon results.

It exhibits a very low IQ to not even fathom that a developer who is focused on technological issues and is off in his programming cave focusing there, may not care about the useless shit you P&D gamblers waste your time on.

So not conceiving of that obvious scenario due to your low IQ, you would then propose the ludicrous idea that I have Asperger's syndrome, when in fact I have demonstrated in this forum and in my career the ability to communicate socially with a wide range of people.

Just because I smash trolls like yourself as I am doing in this post, doesn't mean I am anti-social. Illogical. Your low IQ is evident for everyone now.

What is this, fucking 1942 when being "gay" may have been an insult?

My guess is you're some poor fuck from a third world country sitting in some internet cafe jerking off while trolling on bitcointalk in piss poor English.

Grow up, dumbass troll.

Actually it's still an insult in a big part of the world that is behind your window.

*jots down medical notes*

Yes, yes... very good. You are showing yourself to be quite the social and focused developer you believe yourself to be. I'm glad you have "smashed" my trolling and have discovered my low IQ - also a vigilante and detective on top of world class programming skills. Bravo!

Your IQ is apparently insufficient to understand what I wrote. Your rebuttal is not a rebuttal but you don't understand why.

This folks is the difference between a genius level IQ and not. I'll leave it as a homework problem for CfB or anyone else who wants to demonstrate they have genius level understanding of the Nash equilibrium w.r.t. block chain consensus algorithms.

For me, the problem with this coin is it effectively throws away the benefits of proof of work while retaining it's drawbacks, thus not functioning as a decentralized, permissionless system as cited in the first post.  In that instance, you've created something that functionally falls into the same category as proof of stake, just with higher overhead and worse economic incentives.  The economic incentives are so misaligned, the coin doesn't even work at all at release.  The solution, CFB calls it, is "training wheels", or checkpoints.

The coin's value should theoretically increase as the security of the network does, at least that's how normal systems function.  A baseball player that hits 100 home runs a year usually makes more than one that hits 0 home runs.  With this coin, the security at release is 0, but we're supposed to believe the for-profit issuer of the coin that the price should be high when the network doesn't even work.  We're then supposed to all willingly join in on this extortion scheme and pay for security now which doesn't exist, with the naive dream it will some day in the future.  The way the coin is designed is not really conducive in creating a network effect for this to happen though.  You're buying something that needs to go from 0 to large tipping point instantly with nothing in between.  It's like hoping dogs will randomly begin walking on two feet and start talking out of nowhere.

Anyway, as I was saying, since the coin already functionally falls into the same category as proof of stake, and the outside entropy of the coin serves no real purpose, he may as well of just created a closed loop proof of stake derivative in the first place and attempted to scale via something like deterministic block production.  You'd end up recreating some system like Bitshares, which like all proof of stake systems, is also a permissioned ledger, not anti-fragile, horrific fault/state recovery, etc etc.  The point is, this coin is not a valid contendor or replacement to Bitcoin, neither are the proof of stake coins that share many of the same characteristics.

Real world example

Let's say North Korea is sanctioned by every nation on earth for smoking too much marijuana.  They're now cut off from all international trade and economically suffering.  If Bitcoin is the world reserve currency, they can use their technological know how to start mining Bitcoins because it's a permissionless system.  They now have a currency they can use to buy food and supplies from a semi-friendly but not complete ally proxy nation like China.

If IOTA was the world reserve currency, they do not have a permissionless entry point into the system at all because Bitcoin is a system of permanent coin turnover and IOTA isn't because it's a permissioned ledger.  They're now forced to attempt to trade something with China to acquire IOTAs, but maybe they don't have anything China wants so they can acquire no coins at all and they're completely locked out (obviously not a decentralized currency).  

Their best case scenario is, since China only sees them as useful idiots and not a real ally, they will then charge them with a markup for coins, along with another markup for whatever proxy goods they want through them.  Let's not forget the Come from Beyond day 0 extortion tax either since he cornered the market by design at release.  Thus, you have now been extorted three times in this chain of command due to it being a permissioned ledger and not a real decentralized currency.

But proof of work is old. Its washed out. Get with the times

It depends which problem one is trying to solve: a) something new to sell to speculators (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1417539.msg14358496#msg14358496), or b) a system that can scale decentralized because your plans for the use of the CC require that it does (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1219023.msg14346466#msg14346466).

Satoshi's proof-of-work design is flawed in that it falls to centralization due to economies-of-scale. But the interim Nash equilibrium does function until centralization is at 33% or above, as Bitcoin proved during its nascent period. (Hint: I just refuted CfB's prior post but there is a deeper refutation that I would like to see someone else articulate)

But note every known consensus system for a block chain fails to centralization due to economies-of-scale.

I think I know how to fix Satoshi's design. My future white paper will explain the threats that remain.

U are obviously very smart, and a very nice person to hang out with.
Who doesnt dig guys like this.

~CfA~

Unfortunately, your posted answer of 59 lines is wrong:-(

Please elaborate.

The general approach you take is correct of course, but you get several details wrong.
I'll give you some time to identify them yourself...

I see I did take that in account in my solution. Thus I don't see the error you allege. Please elaborate on the error you claim.

The russian needs more caviar

It's never enough

After 5 projects he launch a new one and noobs will give him food for one more year

What is the maximum number of areas created with L lines?

You are counting infinite regions which are not bounded:

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/55008.html

Those have no definable "area" as the question pertains. Thus I claim you are wrong and even the designers of the question are wrong if they expected your answer.

This isn't the first time I corrected the answer on an IQ test.  ;)


Edit: tromp has a high IQ. That is quite clear. And he is afaik more formally trained in math than I am. I am not going to claim I am smarter than him. IQ is overrated any way, as was explained upthread.

The question says "their intersecting lines form 1,597 areas".
That doesn't suggest finite areas to me, or to most mathematicians.
If finite areas were meant, it would have been made explicit in the question.

Your solution should start out by stating that you interpret area to mean finite areas.

Anyway, getting back to my question:

What is the maximum number of finite areas created with L lines?

POW is far from washed out, it's just not being used in the most efficient way in Bitcoin et al. at present.

It is still, by far, the best way to regulate participation in consensus, and whoever manages to utilize it to its full potential, while solving the current inherent problems, will be sitting on a nice gold chair with a heavy crown on their head for years to come.

IOTA is one of a small few that takes a different approach to its use.  Maybe it will catch on, maybe it will fall flat on its face, or perhaps even there will be a flaw, but at least someone is trying something new instead of the same old same old.

https://www.mathsisfun.com/definitions/area.html

The size of a surface.

The amount of space inside the boundary of a flat (2-dimensional) object such as a triangle or circle.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/area

2. the surface included within a set of lines

5. a particular extent of space or surface or one serving a special function


They didn't state the plane is finite, because the definition of a plane doesn't require it.


Mathematicians don't cite every trivial prior art detail when they write a white paper. We don't regurgitate the definitions of every word we use when we use it.


Why is this still relevant?

That one would be appropriate here, and would not imply finiteness.
I think a majority of people would answer 4 if you ask for
the number of areas formed by 2 intersecting lines on a plane surface.

You're right my question is no longer relevant...

Btw, the answers to the two questions differ by the number of unbounded areas,
which is easily seen to be 2*L; one for each line-end.

Ironically, the other NXT affiliates are doing the same thing.  Come from Beyond left NXT to try and create a cash grab with this coin, then the rest of them are creating some new PoS IPO coin called "Waves", which is probably mostly identical to NXT and has no real reason to exist.  It seems anyone who has ever touched NXT is a serial IPO launcher trying to get people to send them some cash.

From what I can see, Iota will be mighty profitable. For initial investors and those investing now

I think the correct term for the case you were solving would be 'partition'— not 'area' nor 'region'.

Thanks for pointing out the other possible interpretation.

pow is so 2010
game over

Yeah, that's it.  You caught me.  I'm so very upset that I didn't purchase any IOTAs from David Sonstebo, the international communist nutjob.  You guys will be lucky if you manage to salvage an iota of anything after that mindless nitwit gets done with you.

Hmm,

As far as Iota goes, personally indifferent to it since I now know it is a sterile token and of no use to me.

@TPTB saw your quote in the other locked forum,

But on other more important matters , I might have some ideas you can research to see if they will help your condition


IMO

This is mostly personal experience hope it helps,
Eat Brazil Nuts (contains Selenium) for the prostate and does decrease the size of a swollen prostate, so the urgency to urinate is diminished.
Things to watch out for If you take too much selenium, your finger nails will begin to ache, and selenium toxicity looks like radiation poisoning to the untrained eye.
(if the finger nails start to ache don't take any for a few weeks)

Green Tea kills E. coli
Ginger Root kills salmonella .
So people who get food poisoning from a under cooked burger, drink Green Tea,  
under cooked chicken, eat a little ginger,
If neither of those work, then a spoonful of apple cider vinegar to kill any other bad bacteria
And if all of that fails then take Cayenne, it will at least dull the pain until you can recover.

If when you wake up at night you have the night sweats ,  (Normally caused by candida)
this is because your body temp is dropping too low and your adrenal glands kick in to raise your temp , but they over raise your temp causing the sweating and over time adrenal fatigue, so you will be exhausted all of the time.  
eating Dried Coconut can kill the candida , as it is a powerful antifungal,
Warning: Never take coconut without having a soda like pepsi or coke available ( There are versions available without the High Fructose Corn Syrup if you look)
Reason : Coconut will cause a Herxheimer reaction (Candida Die-Off) , so once you feel the Stomach Bloat , immediately drink a Soda with Phosphoric Acid to release the gas that is building up. Most people actually think they are having a heart attack the 1st time they have a Herxheimer reaction
http://www.thecandidadiet.com/candida-die-off.htm
(Side Note: Zinc supplementation helps the immune system and helps Males produce more testosterone,
warning: it can also cause a Herxheimer reaction (Candida Die-Off, which only a pepsi style soda will release the pressure)    

Also try to eat or supplement with iodine, this will help your thyroid fight off the candida.
Kelp is a good natural source. (Also if you are experiencing cold hands (mostly misdiagnosed as raynaud's syndrome) , this will correct that.

Dry Skin is usually a lack of Biotin (one of the B vitamins).

Probiotics are always good.
Branch chain amino acids ( Found in Water Melon)

In Regards to sleep ,
eat Cherries before bedtime (the Natural Melatonin) will help your Sleep.
Also make sure no wireless devices are in the bedroom, as this will disturb sleep.
(Wifi decreases the melatonin in the brain) (If nothing else use an app to turn off the 4G on your Cellphone)
(Side Note: The New Smart Meters with Wifi in the US are causing massive health issues for people)
So if your bedroom has a smart meter next to your window , would move bedroom

Rebounding is very helpful
(only 3 minutes rebounding will make your immune system 3x as active for 1 hour)
https://www.wellbeingjournal.com/rebounding-good-for-the-lymph-system/

Other Things to watch out for
Any Dairy cow that was injected with RGHB will from that point on, produce a milk that contains a
insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) , that 90% of the human population can not digest .
This is the reason you see entire isles in the supermarket with Gasx and others, when 40 years ago,
it was only Tums & malox . Also the reason that 14 years girls look like they are closer to 18 in maturity.  
FYI: Organic milk is still contaminated , as the organic farmers are buying cows a few months old that were already injected RGBH instead of raising their own.

Humans need Vitamin C and can only get it from external sources, Natural Oranges or orange juice is great , however any OJ, that they added artificial calcium too is not a healthy source and will cause sinus congestion and not be absorbed well.  

Disclaimer:
I am not a doctor and I don't play one on TV and I did not even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
As with any information from any source , Research it for yourself and make your own informed decision.
No Warranty or Guarantee is implied for any of the information listed above.

 8)

Why centralization sucks and why we need permissionless systems else we are doomed.

Astroturf is their modus operandi. See the Tedx talk YouTube by Sharyl Attkisson:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-28/top-german-journalist-admits-mainstream-media-completely-fake-we-all-lie-cia

Thanks for the health tips (apologies for it occurring in this thread you could have PMed me).

While I was sleeping you transformed this thread into IQ measuring contest. It's common knowledge that men tend to exaggerate size of their IQs, so I suggest to post here pictures that could prove your words. Pic or it didn't happen.  :D

You are talking about a given coin, I'm talking generally about PoS coins. You also know that very well to build a mining farm what can mine a meaningful amount of coins can be expensive (depending on the chosen type of coins). Running such a farm cost a lot. Also such farms are not holding their value and going to be obsolete relative quickly. On the contrary if I pick a PoS coin, after my initial "investment" I do not need to spend too much more on it.

I have something better:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_versus_NP_problem

Claim the 1 million USD with a proper proof or it didn't happen :D

I think intelligence, at its core, is about having a process to become increasingly more efficient. Whether by acquiring knowledge, and using it, or observing and extracting lessons that can then be used, or by personal trial and error, or by not being complacent and trying to improve continuously, even when something is apparently "good enough".

As we are born, we don't really know much about anything. You could be digging dirt with your hands and then you see someone digging with a shovel. At that point you know that there is a superior way to do the same task. If you insist on doing it by hand => you are an idiot.

All skillsets are kind of learned from the environment or built with experience. Maths, which are often associated with intelligence, are no different.

AI will clearly redefine our concept of intelligence and what ..."smart" is. A neural network can do pattern recognition on seemingly unrelated data sets, finding connections that our mind has been trained to ignore. A neural network might find patterns in moon activity, the weather, bird movement, road traffic, stock market indexes etc etc in order to predict ...an athletes performance, for betting reasons.

A guy which our culture would deem "smart" would be quick to dismiss these connections, and fail miserably to predict the performance of the athlete based on the same data. Meaning that our "smart" guy has a socially conditioned intelligence on what he is even allowed to contemplate (before being criticized by others as being ridiculous).

This is normal, because the basic algorithm is that "Love feels good" => "I want love" => "I want social acceptance" (whether conventionally by aligning with social norms, or trying to prove your worth in society by demonstrating superior ways of thinking compared to normal people). Yet this chain leads one to the safe harbor of "love", which is equated with "acceptance", by ignoring all those aspects that could potentially ridicule him in the social arena.

When a human sees that a neural network can find the "recipe" for catchy melodies, by simply studying the pattern of famous songs, or that it can find the "recipe" for thousands of very highly sought-after hard alloys for the industry, by simply being fed the molecular bonds of a few hard alloys, or predict financial or sport performance, then there is a lamp going off in his head. He is like "what the fuck does a program that emulates neurons has over me, that I don't, and it gets the results when I can't? How can both of us see the same data and yet it clearly "sees" the connections that my mind doesn't even spot".

The answer is usually of the kind:

-social conditioning on how to think (or what is even allowed to cross our minds as "plausible")
-complacency on finding a sub-optimal model that works (and thinking its optimal) and staying with that (the mind does a L1 "caching" of the "prior known solution" and avoids finding better solutions)

Once this type of failure in human thinking is understood, intelligence can accelerate for a human being and new findings about how intelligence works will uncover intelligence-acceleration techniques. Eventually the smartest people are those who have dissected intelligence and understood what it is, how it can increase, what are the obstacles to this, how can one bypass the obstacles, and applied their method to become smarter. All this is not a formal process. It's more like a scientific approach to being, related to one's way of thinking. Monitoring one's though process for defective or suboptimal ways of thinking and replacing them with superior ones.

PMSL!

How old are you? This is just too funny!

140's, genius??? lol. Well I never knew I was a genius too (grabs champagne and brags to wife). I always just thought I was quite clever but as subject to the limits of my insight and experience as everyone else is?!

Dude, I think most people here have IQs between 130-150s. I'd be surprised if you're much above average for this space, but honestly, who gives a crap about IQ?! You are a human being and apparently you have a fragile ego and are very insecure; instead of allowing your arguments to stand on their own weight you've tried to use authority-of-intellect to validate your opinion. This demonstrates that you still have a lot of ego to overcome if you ever hope to turn being 'moderately bright' into being a 'happy and secure' adult.

Obviously NVC says you will now react defensively because you'll feel attacked and belittled. That's your ego rising with rage at feeling so patronised. It does you no favours. Meditate, don't rise to it!

Dr Jabba prescribes a week long ayahuasca session in peru... you'll be a new man!

;)

EDIT: My other half is laughing waaay too hard at the idea that I could be a genius :(. Now my ego is bruised too lol!

If you have IQ - you have money cause only stupid will spend his/her lifetime on full-time job for small salary.

Ok, it looks like CFB is online again since he said Vitalik looks like an alien.  In the Austrian school of money, "money" is required to have scarcity, but because money is a unitary instrument, it's also required to have accessibility.  Gold accomplishes this permissionless and unitary system because most any nation can acquire it, even if they have to go straight down a few miles.

When I say, "unitary instrument", it's because you have to have a price peg in which all other objects are pegged to so that you can say "one chicken = 1/10th a hat".  Bitcoin follows and actually improves upon gold in this case of accessibility.  It can be acquired wherever you want, and the accessibility never stops due to permanent coin turnover via transaction fee block reward.  If there is no accessibility, there can be no unitary price peg, and the entire thing just turns into an extortion scheme, so here we are in this thread.

The way Bitcoin is designed is honestly somewhat of a work of art by someone with the understanding of a renaissance man.  CFB either did not understand why that coin turnover was required or did not care because he wanted to issue an IPO at all costs.

Aye, I'm waiting for you accepting the bet or 24 hour deadline.

What about the fact that cryptocurrency is an engineering task to create a decentralized price peg, so that if you remove the accessibility aspect, you have created in this case, both a permissioned ledger and extortion scheme?

One bet at a time.

Meaningful? The fair amount of coins you should have compared to others having the same machine and using the same energy to mine?

Yes that's how it should be.

I agree buying coins and holding for POS only is easier to accumulate big chunks of the minting. However, the source you are buying them from is able to manipulate the entire market from behind an ICO. This is where the scams set it.

With POW you can mine and use the same energy and invest the same as others in machinery or you can buy from exchanges after the coins have been mined and distributed at the market rate set by all miners selling and all those willing to buy.

So you're a multi millionaire. Congrats.

Btw iota uses PoW, not PoS

You are in the wrong forum.

r0ach hasn't accepted the bet showing that his words are worth nothing. So be it.

You never gave descriptive enough betting nomenclature for the first bet for anyone to accept.  For the second one I said sure, still awaiting payment:

I used negation of your own definition. But now it doesn't matter anymore.

I may be very close to doing that (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1284083.msg13253924#msg13253924). I haven't had free time to pursue what I laid out already (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1284083.msg13253924#msg13253924).

Genius is a lot about being able to look problems in ways and detect features that most others miss. I been doing that habitually throughout my life. Again a 150 IQ is only one-in-a-thousand rarity, so it isn't like every genius becomes the next Bill Gates. Michael Jordan, or Steve Jobs. That requires functional intelligence and also other attributes such as extreme competitiveness, intense focus and discipline, etc.. IQ tests can't measure all these attributes. At the far right of the bell curve, IQ tests may have very little predictive power and be essentially the same as a random number. So my thought is an IQ test has exponentially less and less predictive power above a 'g' of roughly 130 or so.

---

Make it clear who the "you" is you are referring to, i.e. the one who responded to my factual argumentation about Iota by making ad hominem attacks on my capabilities on my own projects (as if that is at all relevant to the facts of Iota):



I explained this to MadCow yesterday:

Let's assume that P = NP. Does it mean that it's possible to revert any hashing function?

Sorry I am not going down the complexity class rabbit hole today. I have other work I need to do.

Hm, the answer is pretty obvious, but ok.

This is what a person with a low IQ and/or incomplete understanding of the holistic analysis of block chain consensus would conclude.

Rather Iota actually devolves to either a proof-of-reputation or centralized proof-of-work because of the loss of the Nash equilibrium which I explained upthread, thus forces centralization in order to force convergence over choices of conflicting DAG branches. How this centralization is maintained will determine whether it is via reputation of which servers payers and payees trust (if these servers can sign these transactions somehow perhaps) else devolves to who has the most efficient ASIC mining farms same as for Bitcoin.

Ok IOTa is permissioned ledger. So what? Why does it matter?

Is permissioned ledger same thing as private blockchain?

It matters because any system that isn't a permissionless ledger is a system of extortion by default.  Somewhat explained in the following quote, then real world example after:

What about company shares which are freely traded on exchanges. System of extortion by default?

The network effect is a double edged sword that causes this extortion/coercion in a system that isn't permissionless.  In Bitcoin, you can go straight to the system itself and pluck the money off the tree.  It never ends, you can always do this.  It has removed friction from the economic system by removing the ability of the middle men to insert themselves and extort you.  The fact that it has permanent coin turnover means Bitcoin is essentially always running a decentralized exchange in the background to allow you to always bypass humans and you will always be paying fair market price.  In permissioned systems, that's not the case.  Most people don't even realize Bitcoin has it's own decentralized exchange, but it does.

Since, like I said, money is a unitary instrument, an engineering problem to create a decentralized price peg so that you can say 1 hat = 1/10th a chicken, the entire purpose of money's existence is to become a monopoly.  If the money is built by design as a permissioned ledger, it's usefulness to any person or nation on earth will be minimal and negative if it was to become a monopoly because it's too wide open to abuse.  It will either not be adopted at all, or scammers will try to force it onto people to extort them.  A permissionless system would have mutual value for all parties involved.

As for the company stock example, there are few companies that make things all humans are required to have.  When they arise, they're usually referred to as "monopolies" and broken up by laws, pitchforks, whatever.  The company isn't exactly the same category as "permissionless currency".  The main reason a country would want to resist a real permissionless currency, is so they can do things like devalue it to raise their exports, thus cheating other nations via currency wars.  There is a Nash equilibrium in every country adopting the permissionless currency to prevent each other from doing this.

This is bullshit and you know it.
A bet is not a bet if you just demand payment without putting your own money on the line.
Get escrow and lets do this already.

How about actually try to address the last post I made.  Removing permanent coin turnover from Bitcoin is obviously a fatal flaw.

Which only 0.001% of the population can participate in profitably. And it ceases roughly 2033 or unless transaction fees scale up but there is a Tragedy of the Commons dilemma there as well.

It doesn't really even matter if it's profitable or not.  You can define Bitcoin in one sentence:

The purpose of mining is to create a permanent two way peg, decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissionless system.

The economic incentives are a side issue, but seem to work thus far.  It's designed to bounce back and forth between profitable and unprofitable.  The fact that it's deflationary creates a time opportunity cost reward to generally remain profitable over the long haul.

But as it pertains to this thread, we are obviously missing those elements here, and Come from Beyond, who is supposed to have a 4000 IQ, is unable to come up with any sort of argument whatsoever.

never have I seen so many sock puppets and posting ninjas promoting one scheme.

why hide... be yourself. Only shame can explain this stealth posting.

I feel like that Bluemeanie guy is bound to show up any second.  It will probably turn out he invested in IOTA and him and CFB are on the same team again.

Im right here. No hiding. Guess what? No one cares about all your trolling, crybaby.

For those just tuning in...

Cryptohunter knew about this "stealth" ICO. The PROOF is the fact that he actually posted in more than one Iota thread prior and during the ICO.

As we can all plainly see, he's not too bright. He didn't invest.

Then, he begged incessantly for a 2nd ICO. When he didn't get his way, he tried to convince the Iota devs to change their mind by creating a poll. When that didn't work, that's when he started trolling, making silly topics, and becoming an all out pest.

Regardless of proven facts, he continues to push the theory that the ICO was "hidden" from the public.

He talks about how there were no Iota threads on the "main board" even when his posts are in them.

He seems to think a story in CoinTelegraph is non-existent.

The ICO wasn't long enough even though it lasted a MONTH.

He says it has poor distribution while it had over 300 investors and raised over $500,000 dollars.

He refers to a poll that has an imaginary 50% of the voters saying that Iota is a scam. And...you guessed it... there isn't one.

All of this while Iota has been mentioned by Forbes magazine, has received a grant, and was added to Microsoft Azure before it even launched. And there is more.

 If he would just spend his energy doing some chores around the house and cleaning his room in the basement, maybe his mother would give him some money so he could invest in his prized Iota.

He could still make a killing.

Instead he rants and raves about its value being 30x the ICO price. If he would spend some time learning more about the potential of IOT and how Iota will play a big part in it, he would still be able to make 100 times his investment by the end of the year.

But no, he will stick his fingers in his ears and yell, nah nah stealth scam NXT2 - NXT3 etc etc and then bitch that Iota stole his Xmas!!

So now you're up to date on the Cryptohunter debacle!!

I will reply to each of your points one at a time.

1. Cryptohunter knew about this "stealth" ICO. The PROOF is the fact that he actually posted in more than one Iota thread prior and during the ICO.

No the ICO was not mentioned at the time I commented in the thread. At that time people were being told not to ask about how to go about buying them....By the time I checked back it was over.
Also the fact the ICO was under advertised and attracted 20 X less than other big ICO is not dependent only myself. What does it matter about 1 person. I am stating a fact that it was under advertised in general and on purpose. So that it could be pumped after and ransomed of for 3000% more than it was sold for first time around. The price being demanded is a testament to this fact. How else can you pumpers and scammers be demanding 3000+ sats for 130sats coins? that is as great a price rise as ethereums ico tokens?? your only claim to fame is using dag? that has not even been proven a viable concept for basing a token??

2. Then, he begged incessantly for a 2nd ICO. When he didn't get his way, he tried to convince the Iota devs to change their mind by creating a poll. When that didn't work, that's when he started trolling, making silly topics, and becoming an all out pest.

I stated it was only the right thing to do and give the other forum members that never heard about the ico because the advertising on this board was so terrible and stealthy UNTIL AFTER THE ICO WHEN ALL THE PUMPERS STARTED TO ADVERTISE IT HOURLY ON THE MAIN BOARD. I suggested give the other members of the forum that were interested a chance to invest at 130sats or even 100% higher prices like 260 sats. It would broaden distribution and raise more funds for the project. NO NO NO they all scream? why?? because we don't want a broader distribution and larger community and more dev funds??? why you may ask I mean it wasn't released? the reason is simple they want to dump it on everyone else for 3000% profits or now they are talking about mugging everyone else for 200000% profits.

3.He says it has poor distribution while it had over 300 investors and raised over $500,000 dollars.

WOW - all other ICO have raised MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of dollars. That is a tiny amount now you are all dreaming of billion dollar coins LOL
Maid raised millions, ethereum raised millions, lisk raised millions. 20x, 30x more than you stealth ico.

On top of this I would doubt even 300 people invested. In fact I may start a POLL.   If you invested in IOTA post your username. I would wager most will be sock puppets or those with long periods of inactivity since they are older sock puppets used for a previous scam probably nxt. I bet we could hardly get 200 real users on this board that invested.

4. All of this while Iota has been mentioned by Forbes magazine, has received a grant, and was added to Microsoft Azure before it even launched. And there is more.

Oh dear the azure project. Wow that old chestnut is getting old now I think we established it means little. Forbes article? the one bitshares was mentioned in too along with a few other coins?? I think forbes has mentioned a few coins in its time.

5.He refers to a poll that has an imaginary 50% of the voters saying that Iota is a scam. And...you guessed it... there isn't one.

This part is critical and proves the extent to which Iota pumper accounts are worried about this.  The poll existed at at the time As soon as I brought attention to this fact the votes for all other coins (because you could vote for multiple coins) started growing and growing and soon iota was only like at 30%. Strange thing that all of a sudden lots of people went to the polll and voted for all other coins with very few now voting for iota?

What follows now though shows even more how serious the pumping issue is on the main board.

I started a poll. The original options were

a - iota should have a 2nd ico for fair opportunity for those that didn't hear about the ico due to poor advertising.
b - no i think paying 3000% mark up already is okay
c - no iota is a scam from the next people.

I then asked if people could leave their username if they voted b so I could see if these were iota people voting or others.

it was like

a - 11 votes
b - 23 votes
c-  15 votes

but you guessed it....nobody left a post to say they voted b??  So I suspected all iota voters right?

So I change the poll to more accurately represent what people are actually voting for. It is now obvious that only iota people were voting on option b before but neglecting to leave their names.

Polls on this board have to run a very long time and I would love to see a feature for displaying usernames next to votes.

I remember when I and then a few others joined in and started a campaign against dark coins instamining and minting slashing   and Evans  put a poll about air dropping 3M tokens for free to all board members that were here on this board at the start of the launch. Can you believe it was an open poll that ran for a few hours and somehow dark scammers managed to vote not in favour?? they put up more votes that the entire board could even though they would have got free airdropped coins for nothing. I actually think Evans would have honestly done it if he wasn't bullied by the other dash whales. The dark market crashed hard that day he gave in and said he would.

6. Yes it is run by the original NXT people ....they should have gone that extra mile to make sure it was given a broader distribution this time. Instead they made it one of the smallest ico's of recent times.

As I told your sock puppet pals. There is no point trying to discredit me. It makes no difference if I am the devil. It will not change the facts that the ICO was not advertised as other big ICO's have been. It also does not even afford a POW period of distribution as ethereum does. This is ethereum that people are calling one of the biggest pumps of all time?? you scam coin has already pumped as much as ethereum has over ICO price and still you believe it is not a scam? it offers what except using DAG as the concept for the token?? it's not even on exchange or proven to function as yet and you think the pump should be = to ethereum already? and you are telling people it can go up another 30x. So it will apparently be a pump 3000% greater than ethereums pump?   wow ethereum ico investors will look like paupers time you scammers take you scam profits.

I hope someone makes a different DAG token and does a proper advertised ICO and I Own Tons Assholes led by the Criminal From Belarus will not get to scam the board and small investors out of even more BTC than they did with NXT1. NXT2 (iota) can be a lesson to future insta ico scammers.

Unless you believe that David Sonstebo was BCNext (which is totally implausible), he had nothing to do with NXT.  Please stop comparing this IOTA garbage to NXT.  Don't drag NXT into this ridiculous charade.  CfB might have been hired by BCNext, but according to his own statements, he wasn't BCNext either.

CFB would have been BCNext. If he is not BCNext he was still core to the start of NXT. According to his own statements? okay.

I am not picking on NXT any more than I am picking on Bitbay. The people left in these projects are  not the scammers. The people who made the huge money are long gone from both. I probably have more NXT than you so I am not saying that project currently is a scam. However a project where the entire minting is given to 21 people is not ideal.

Right now the pumpers and scammers are locked into this iota project. They should not exit with the huge returns whilst others hold the bags this time.

I wouldn't worry too much about that one.

You missed the point entirely. Only 0.001% have the economies-of-scale to mine Bitcoin profitably. Sorry your argument fails on the economics of proof-of-work hash functions, unless you can argue there is one that can't be significantly optimized for an ASIC and economies-of-scale for cheaper electricity located next to utility scale hydropower (even free electricity perhaps if you do a handshake and wink in China with a Communist Party official).

Whoa... Hold on!  Are you telling us that it is entirely possible, if not extremely likely, that the Chinese Communists are in fact subsidizing PoW mining in an effort to undermine the decentralization of Bitcoin and control the currency in the hopes of applying capital controls to the digital economy through underhanded tactics which will further solidify their hegemony?

I've been hinting at that for months and finally an astute reader articulates it.

If you are wondering who created Bitcoin though, I think more likely the globalist DEEP STATE (http://billmoyers.com/episode/the-deep-state-hiding-in-plain-sight/) funded by the $trillions Black Budget (http://www.documentarytube.com/articles/the-black-budget--a-conspiracy-theory-turned-out-to-be-true) and knowing full well they could hide their capture of Bitcoin blaming it on the "enemy". Nick Rockefeller (the one who warned Aaron Russo about 9/11 before it happened (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9Wsb4qBckU)) has been spending most of his time in China.

It's just an externality that can change at any given time.  I guess it's only a problem if you for some reason believe sha256 will not be commoditized.  The fact that energy costs keep becoming an ever higher percentage of the price per Bitcoin instead of hardware seems like it won't be a problem.

If Bitcoin is the world reserve currency, the rest of the world has way more hash power than North Korea and can reject their blocks.  ???

Perhaps IOTA is not trying to be Bitcoin. And why should it as Bitcoin already exists.

looks like your poll is gone :(

I think he got banned for copy and pasting my entire posts, rearranging the words around with different coin names, then spamming new threads everywhere.

I see no evidence of that. In the GPU mining era, there was no extraordinarily efficient mining as there is now with the most efficient ASICs.  All Bitcoins had approximately the same energy input. Now there a steep curve between the least efficient but still-viable ASICs and the most efficient. The area above that curve is missing energy. As far as I can tell the energy density of Bitcoin has decreased.

R0ach's argument is valid, to a point. Even if only 0.001% can mine (hypothetical number of course) then 70000 can mine (importantly, as independent entities), enough to create a competitive market. If you believe the number is even much smaller than that, as I suggest has been the case with ASIC mining, then there may not be a competitive market and his argument fails (with respect to Bitcoin at least).

Satoshi's design makes the marginal miner lose relative share of the hashrate over time due to reinvestment of profits, because they are less profitable, so the ultimate end game is only the miners with the lowest costs.

In a normal market, the marginal producers are more nimble and can respond to changes in the market more quickly and thus they are always regenerated.

But Satoshi's design is static and the marginal miners have no competitive advantage in order to sustain their existence.

QED.

As r0ach correctly pointed out, it is dynamic and there is always give and take. A particular marginal miner my drop out but another will take his place. Costs are always changing. Even political connections with a corrupt local official in China can disappear at a moments notice with one bullet. Nor does China have a monopoly on corruption, so cheap electricity appears elsewhere. The cycle continues.

This belies understanding that costs can't exceed income.

As the lowest cost producers scale up, they drive income to the level of their costs (thus no profit for any marginal miners). Otherwise they form an oligarchy to raise income (e.g. transaction fees), but then they can exclude the other miners.

The coinbase along with the price being driven by speculation is a short-term mitigating factor but that diminishes as the coin matures and becomes widely used. Then transaction fees dominate and coin exchange price becomes stable.

Sorry my QED was a strong one.

Also I think we were originally talking about the breadth of distribution of the coinbase, and 0.001% is even worse than a typical power law distribution of wealth. (Note Monero apparently has a CPU friendly hash and thus probably had better distribution percentage participation, but limited to those who know about mining it, which is unfortunately a very small number of people)

As you know, I am adamant about this, because I am intending to create a token that I believe can have very broad distribution and also defend against long-term centralization.

They have a right to do that within the confines of the law. We have a right to analyze their technology and their distribution methodology.

Some investors/speculators may prefer an ICO. Apparently society has some laws about not fooling lunch money investors (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg14405364#msg14405364), but other than adhering to law then I would have no qualms with anyone experimenting with other methods of distribution. I am of the opinion for example that Ethereum specifically located in Switzerland in order to escape SEC regulation, but my IANAL understanding is that is not sufficient and thus they have broken the law by issuing and selling unregistered investment securities to non-accredited USA investors. But again, IANAL, so readers consult your own attorney.

So what I am saying is that I was fairly open minded about Iota. I don't think the technology will solve the centralization issue though. And I don't think a limited distribution ICO can scale persmissionless, decentralized, network effects and thus adoption. But it is not my role to decide for them. I shared my opinion.

The greater proportion of mining costs that are due to electricity, then the more exclusive mining becomes. Because there are a finite number of slots next to hydropower plants. Not to mention, that the powers-that-be in government can probably provide the electricity for free and charge it to the collective. Utilities are one of the highest regulated, collectivist corruptions on earth.

Edit: even heating your home with the miners is not profitable because heat generated from electricity is much more expensive than from carbon fuels. And even micro-hydropower won't reach the 2 - 4 cents cost of large scale hydropower unless you can amortize the construction and capital cost over several years:

http://www.rockyhydro.com/Generators.php

And that doesn't even include the cost of the land and the rarer locations where there is enough flow and head drop to make it worth while.

Just, for those interested in other ideas by thread starter ROACH:

It's always fun listening to your diversity nonsense when you don't seem to know anything about human sociology.  There's no such thing as a "majority" and "minority" within a nation.  Nations are always based on ethnocentric majorities.  Either the minority group integrates and essentially ceases to exist, one group is eliminated through war, or the nation splits and goes their separate ways.  Even with all the insane Marxist propaganda you and your people try to push on "the goy", the intermarriage rates between Caucasians and Africans is so miniscule, that integration is clearly a failure and not going to ever happen, even with coercion.  And why would the two groups integrate?  White genes are recessive, so by integrating, you would essentially be committing suicide on purpose.

But there's not a whole lot of benefit in Africans being unwilling participants in this forced collectivism either.  Since not all blacks are entirely puppets of Jewish, Marxist propaganda, used as tools to try and further different motives, they realized these facts as well.  Rather than being cattled into forced collectivism, which will obviously never work, people like Marcus Garvey wanted a "pans-africa" movement, or simply going back to Africa instead to live as the majority there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Garvey

Instead, what we really have going on today, is Jewish terrorists like George Soros funding "black lives matter" to use them as pawns.  When the majority of America notices the financial system imploding, George Soros knows exactly who we're going to come looking for.  He funds black lives matter with millions of dollars to try and create a buffer, or more immediate, tangible problem in front of you so you're too busy to go after people like him.  That's all "black lives matter" is, a buffer, a group being used as pawns.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/14/george-soros-funds-ferguson-protests-hopes-to-spur/?page=all

More on the life of people like George Soros:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2626002/posts

Good job "buffer" idiots!:

I suppose we should all buy more IOTA. Or, further, just do everything the OPPOSITE of what he suggests.

Why not link to the entire post without parts selectively removed?  Since I'm probably the only honest man in crypto, you may as well see the whole thing it's glory:

Sorry, you only added that end after the twitter after I quoted you - "honest" indeed.

Your "side channel" attack trying to villify the famous long r0ach silver of the high seas and Bitcoin with implications he can't be trusted due to not being politically correct (i.e. cultural marxism), probably doesn't work worth a flying shit in a thread inhabited almost entirely by Russians.

I suppose that comment speaks for itself, lol.

I calculated the upfront hardware costs vs energy costs as a percentage of 1 Bitcoin between when that big Spoondoolies unit was originally released and also around a year or so before it.  The hardware cost as a percentage of coin cost is going down while the energy cost goes up.  This would lead me to believe that SHA256 is in fact being commoditized.

Which I would expect to be the case. Improvements should stabilize at rate of Moore's law at best.

You are citing as a data source a vaporware miner that was never shipped to customers and may not even exist.

With better analysis you will find that I am correct.

I do agree this it may happen at some time in the future. When I don't know, but not yet.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1390781.0

Does either of your analysis, include the additional electricity costs of cooling the environment the ASICS are housed in?
As that will ad overhead especially when the outside temps are warmer.


 8)

I wasn't aware that spoondoolies thing never shipped.  Regardless, there wasn't much difference in it and other top units at the time.

An example of what happens with permissioned ledger, closed entropy systems in the market.  This NEM coin (standard PoS with some rube goldberg mechanisms on top of it) was pumped to a huge market cap.  Just like what happened with NXT, it now just kind of sits there with nobody really wanting to do anything with it.  This is crazy low volume compared to the 400-500 volume most altcoins have on the Bologniex casino nowadays:

https://i.imgur.com/TaRdR7r.jpg

These closed entropy systems where the entire coin supply was issued at genesis had their brief time in the sun because people were fascinated by the idea of not having their shares temporarily diluted through mining, but now there are so many of them, the novelty is gone and people are forced to re-examine what actually constitutes a decentralized currency in the first place.  It will be just like NXT.  The market cap will remain high, but the buy side will constantly wither away until the sum of the buy side is only 15 BTC (like NXT was a few months ago).  This makes them "roach motels" where you're theoretically wealthy, but nobody can actually exit the coin at all.

r0ach, I quoted (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1428126.msg14449799#msg14449799) your post about NEM.

Was looking at google search results.  It's hilarious how many bogus threads with similar names these Russians created to try and distract people from this thread.

I think you created them to make it hard to google for that case where you lost the face.

Those good old soviet tactics:

"One of two major Soviet counteroffensives which followed Stalingrad, Operation Mars was such an incredible disaster that the Soviet Union simply omitted it from subsequent histories."

Just more bullshit. Noone expected anything different from you.

New post to better articulate why permissioned ledger, closed entopy systems likely have no value:

You are really hooked on the word permissioned to the point of a useless obsession.  ;)

Example:
The US dollar could be considered a permissioned system , since the Government Prints it and then disburses it thru the banking system to the consumer.
If your above statement in red was accurate, then it would have 0 value and be ignored.
But in the Real World , Value is agreed upon by both parties during the exchange of goods & services.
If I don't feel the US $ value is high enough , I raise my rates or request payment from another system such as Gold, Yuan, or others.
So your statement likely have no value is false & misleading.
Every System is permissioned based, including your precious BTC.  :)

 8)

Please, this thread is not about some coin nobody has ever heard of called "Zeitcoin", as there are 5 million PoS coins exactly identical to it that everyone has already discussed millions of times before.  No more 4am infomercials from the Shamwow Zeit salesmen will be necessary.

Sad that you can't actually even try to debate, but with such a flawed argument , no wonder you have to resort to useless propaganda tactics.
Oh well.
Enjoy spreading your falsehoods.

Later,
 8)

There are zero falsehoods in this thread, I only asked you to stop spamming off-topic advertisements for your PoS clonecoin that has nothing to do with this thread.

The only one that mentioned the Zword in a post on this page was you.  :D

 8)

As I explained the key distinction upthread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1434851.msg14550517#msg14550517), those are free markets because they are decentralized and there is no significant asymmetry of information which makes it otherwise.

It pisses me off when readers waste my expensive time by ignoring what I already wrote twice in this thread. This makes three times. Please readers don't make me teach this again by writing another post which ignores my prior points.



1. I already provided the link to the thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg14546242#msg14546242) two or three times in this thread, which explains that ICOs sold to non-accredited USA investors are ostensibly illegal.

I hate ICOs by now for other reasons:

2. They contribute to the mainstream thinking that crypto-currency is a scam and thus we will have great difficulty getting CC widely adopted if don't put a stop to these scams.

3. They extract capital to a few scammers, which could be better used to build our real ecosystems which are not vaporware and have real decentralized designs, such as Bitcoin and Monero.

4. They prey on the ignorance of n00b speculators, thus can never be a free market (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1434851.msg14550517#msg14550517).

5. They can never attain adoption because they destroy the Nash equilibrium and decentralization of the ecosystem:




6. Because they are not decentralized and rely on expectation of profits based on the performance of a core group, ICOs turn what should be a competition for creating the best technology into a fist fucking fest of ad hominem and political games:


7. ICOs have less liquidity because they are not widely distributed and due to #5:

When will IOTA GUI be released?

All info is available in normal Iota threads.

There were some interesting criticisms about the evolution from JINN to IOTA in the "gadgetcoin" thread (some other IoT fantasy where the thread is now locked) that Come from Beyond didn't seem to have any rebuttal for:

You have run out of your own shit and now have to use others? Hahaha, looking forward to seeing your next move.

hahaha = very unhappy as you told me before. Please cheer up cfb :(

Not at all.  I just recently saw someone mention the word "gadgetcoin" claiming it wasn't a turdcoin (that's debatable) and I never heard of it before.  I went to their thread and it's full of people saying JINN and IOTA are scams, then the thread was locked...

Did the original r0ach sell his account?

Pseudo-r0ach what's your take on the thread-locking? Looks highly suspicious, maybe a Russian spin-off of the 'Ndrangheta?

Actually it was one person who posted under multiple accounts. I haven't read that thread, but I'm 99% sure my guess is right.

PS: I'm stil waiting for that move from you...

Ohhhh you piece of shit, low life belarusian scammer. It's not enough your fucking business partner, the chief wanker of Norway, David boy took the GDC developers and GDC supporters for a ride by pulling their time and misleading them about collaboration, but you keep accusing them again with scam? It's not enough your trolling was made them to close their thread, they wanted peace and moved away from here, but you can't stop talking about them? That small coin with their 10 supporters needed to close their thread because you trolled it in 24/7. You piece of shit scammer. You, Sergey from the shithole of Belarus, the most excessive sockpuppet and shill operator of Bitcointalk, you are saying that other projects use sockpuppets. TPTB_need_war was right about you, how low moral wanker you are.

Gadgetcoin had no more than 8 supporters. Lasting, chocobo, netzer, tojbear, myself plus the not supporter barabbas who posted in the GDC thread and criticised your blatant IOTA scam are not "one person", they are all (except barabbas) are in the GDC private forum. They have understood you know nothing about IoT, you have nothing in IoT, and therefore they have pointed it out. (Now as you understand there is a private GDC forum, change to your Edward something sockpuppet account and send mtomcdev the GDC dev a message from your Edward nick. OK?)

Percentage of strong words in your posts is increasing, I like it. Looks like you have finally realized that after I knew your other identity you got no a single chance to conduct your scam scheme without being prosecuted. I feel your despair...

Cryptocurrency would be pretty boring without the Russians.  Every pool I've ever seen where some clown is trying to fake shares to steal coins from miners, the IP addresses always trace back to Russia.

Is that a hidden confession?

You think I sold my account?  Somebody like Smooth, Fluffypony, Wolf, Anonymint, or Realsolid can probably verify I haven't.  Let's cut the bullshit.  You weren't actually serious and have money in IOTA ICO and are worried this thread will do damage.  If you think I typed something in this thread that conflicts with past views (like thinking PoS might have some merit), it's definitely possible because it takes a long time before people are fully able to comprehend what can and can't be done while still remaining a decentralized currency.  Even the Gavinator speculated a long time ago that Bitcoin might turn into PoS someday, but he would likely want to erase or deny that comment now.

I'm sure someday Come from Beyond will look back and say, "Wow...NXT...what was I thinking...".  I'm sure he knows this IOTA coin is pretty flaky too, and the fact that it requires checkpoints out of the gate creates a chicken and egg scenario where no business would actually adopt it until the checkpoints are gone, but you can't remove checkpoints until businesses adopt it, so it turns into just some bizarre long con.  Issues like that are just in addition to the ones already posted in this thread.

Yes.
Looking at the lineup, I would like to call RealSolid to the stand.

I was. Yes, but very little and I always prefer the red pill.
No, quite the contrary, I believe that the more exposure any kind of project gets the value of the coin tends to increase. Especially if "shady" characters and known trolls fill a thread at full speed. (It's known marketing tactics)

Maybe...

::) There we have it again - not the original r0ach!

That phrase sounds familiar for some reason.

(Use Google, maybe you find the source)

But let's not leave our path, where is the person who could "verify"?

Yes, I am in charge of all account selling around here, and if I say it didn't happen, it didn't happen.

Did it happen?

Yup, it's been stolen, that is way to weak for roach

Russian extortion scheme lol

Hey, it's not just me that has figured it out:

My post addressed to roach has been deleted. I bet in childhood you liked to call your elder brother often, roach?

Wasn't me, but someone also deleted my post with a picture of Tom Cruise bombing Russia.

Oh, sorry then, wrong guess.

mods have been catching up today. They nuked two of mine (and those of the antagonist) in the IOHK thread that I flagged for deletion on the racist allegation argument.

Russian and Florida scum worked together to steal from ShapeShift:

http://moneyandstate.com/looting-of-the-fox/

Although this implicates also an American (with a prior police record), the second and third attacks would not have likely been possible without the cooperation of a hacker ethos in Russia and ostensibly the attitude that they are immune from Western laws.

Sounds like Americans are not immune to Russian laws...

Somehow related: https://www.rt.com/news/261385-us-hunts-russian-citizens/

When I start Bitcoin island, I will probably still allow Russians even though every incident I've ever seen of someone attempting to fake shares to steal coins from miners on pools originated from there.

I'm not Russian, but am still from Eastern Europe and can tell a counter-example:

Long time ago I found a way to easily steal shares from Litecoin pool run by pooler (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=43931). The problem was in coblee's code used by the pool. Instead of stealing I reported the bug to pooler, he probably will recall that (it was 3 years ago) if you ask him. This fact contradict to your guesses showing how far you are from the reality.

Ah the ole' magic trick, "lookie over here at my pinky finger waging the dog, come out of your seats for closer view", while his accomplice is rummaging through all the purses left behind on the chairs which is legally and jurisdictionally justified because there is a sign on the wall, "We are not liable for belongings left unattended".

Sorry, I know this doesn't fit into your racist ideology...

I think TPTB_need_war meant to use the idiom "wagging the dog" but I immediately thought of this:

https://i.imgur.com/54QVVnY.jpg

That's myself on the far left, rpietila is to my immediate left, smooth is smoking the pipe with ArticMine to his left. The little chap sneaking the card under the table is David, and CfB is trying to maintain his non-culpability by not actually reaching out for it.

"Racism Makes you Look UGLY" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE3gpiPPtfc

Lighten up man, the prior two posts of mine were jokes.

Google search engine doesn't get these nuances. When someone googles for your name he will see it together with "racist".

Sorry, but "Belarus" isn't a race, and there are only three main haplogroups of humans, of which, likely most posting in this thread are haplogroup N.  Don't try to pull some SJW routine (who the fuck pulls an SJW routine while living in Eastern Europe???) against an audience that didn't just fall off a turnip truck.

Haha r0ach!

Here is the racism (against the human race) we are really fighting (make sure you watch until the video of Dick Gregory ensues):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UkSIcm_y7Y#t=68

Damn, Prince died  :'(

Prince - Dreamer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htq1UZGSDEc)

Was Prince an Illuminati sacrifice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=FGXIKBeDp_k#t=67)?

If this knobhead (tptb) hates it. Invest with both fists and dick.  Only way to not end up poor. 

What happened when you were saying that when I called the exact top of ETH at $15 and warned a month in advance it would bounce off $7.

Come from Beyond was trying to pump Eth too.  He will not admit if it's because he was invested or due to his fellow Russian running the scheme (maybe both).

I see you have finally given up and now are posting bullshit just to pretend you don't care about the recent hit on your reputation. Looks like you are the only person who doesn't see how pathetic you look.

Someone has accused me of being Anonymint 3 times, Fontas twice, and Come from Beyond once.  So I guess I should stop calling this coin a scam if some random guy from Africa thinks I made it.  But at the end of the day, both you and I know what I say is right.  This is not an actual decentralized currency due to the facts stated in this thread, the world would be better off if it did not exist, and the only purpose of this coin is:

https://i.imgur.com/bWL1jfM.jpg

If this information was not released before the coin is, it would be just like NXT where it gets some brief rise then collapses to nothing, drawing money away from legit coins, of which, there's only like three of them total and that's if you include BTC (no, eth is not one).  So if coins that are fundamentally broken or just outright extortion schemes are allowed to exist, you're trying to force people into playing greater fool games when they could be making something rise that's not an actual pump and dump and will still exist a year from now.  Even pump and dumpers don't want to buy coins with no intrinsic value.  Nobody wins when coins like this exist (except maybe you).

r0ach don't be shy to share your portrait, lol:

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=157039

I can make an exception for you and repeat my offer of that bet. But it will be 100 BTC this time. Do you accept this or it's just yet another bullshit? You have 24 hours to decide.

You want to bet what?  That IOTA is not a permissioned ledger in the way I have defined what a permissioned ledger is?  Who is supposed to be the judge of that?  Your English is not quite up to par to articulate viable betting nomenclature...

Clearly wrong. It is entirely feasible to pass on investment opportunities, even if they are reasonably good ones (and I'm not saying this is), pursue others, and not end up poor.

I'm reasonably certain that you are more likely to end up poor if you overinvest in this than if you ignore it.

Valid point about English... Well, look at this:

Iota can be usable even having 0 iotas. The main purpose is messaging in IoT. There is a problem in all mesh networks now (and in Bitcoin network too) - absence of incentive to broadcast someone's data packets. In Iota if you retransmit my packets you get benefit of increased security and faster confirmation of your own transactions. So, does ability to use Iota messaging make it permissioned or permissionless Russian extortion scheme?

Well, blockchains are useless without a native token of value that supports a Nash Equilibrium.  This is why GoldmanSachs can't create a federated chain, closed entropy system, permissioned ledger called "SachCoin" and bypass us all in Bitcoin.  It seems like you're talking about using some type of SMS-like system in order to prop up the native token.  This is kind of backwards game theory that seems like you're relying on something akin to spam of no value, or "proof of propagation" at best to try and find convergence.  I'm aware you believe people attempting to double spend increases the security of tangle, but this is more equivalent to mindlessly widening the DAG.  Anyway, that's entirely an unrelated issue to this thread!

IOTA is supposed to be a currency, not a spam network for teenage girls.  You're basically claiming that since I can spam your network for free (you can spam attack anything for free), that this somehow makes it not a permissioned ledger.  Spamming your network does not allow someone to acquire native tokens, so that is a bet I would win.  IOTA is still in the same permissioned ledger category without a Nash equilibrium that any banker might produce.

As for the SMS spam providing any value to security, I'm not seeing it.  Maybe Fuserleer or Anonymint can comment further since it's probably something they've stumbled over in the design process.  (Although I believe everything I have described as a negative for IOTA also applies to Emunie)

Looks like you are a trader and don't know current challenges of cryptocurrencies. Let's stop there.

Yea right.  You're trying to leverage spam for security/convergence.  The spam also does not allow you to acquire native tokens, so that bet was won by me.  IOTA is the functional equivalent of a closed entropy system.  Anyone who has followed this thread and read my points can figure it out.

No, you lost but I'm not in a mood to explain you basic things of mesh networking. Try Bing.

You will eat your words.  Did you see how me + Anonymint posted against Ethereum and then it took weeks later until people like Maxwell came out of the closet against it?  (while you were still hyping the Eth scam I might add)  I have already run these issues by many people after I made this thread, and they all see similar problems with the tangle/braid/DAG, whatever word you want to call it for the day.  The problem is that it's difficult for these people to relate how the technical, computer science problems relate to the somewhat arbitrary concept of money being "legit", "a scam", or other words.  The only real metric one can apply is if it fulfills any sort of Nash equilirbium in both economics and technical merit, since they are both intertwined, and IOTA clearly does not do so.

When I defined what Bitcoin is in one single sentence, which most people seem to be unable to do, you skipped over that fact because you completely removed what gives Bitcoin value in the first place.  The fact that you don't understand what Bitcoin actually is or why it has value, means anything you create as a supposed improvement is obviously going to be ridiculous (unless IOTA was designed entirely as a scam to make money, then bravo).

The purpose of mining is to create a permanent decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissoinless system.  This is where the Nash equilibrium originates from, not just the consensus mechanism.  It is a currency above all else.  You have to fulfill both economic and technical merits at the same time.  You have created a permissioned ledger extortion scheme, equivalent to a closed entropy, recursive system, or federated chain named "GoldmanSachsCoin".  There is no functional difference.

And even better than Bitcoin will be the coin where those newly mined coins are mined by the millions and billions of users, not by few 100s of professional miners (which is where Bitcoin is rapidly centralizing to). The only way to achieve this is to make mining unprofitable. I've explained this design, yet so many people remain skeptical. I'll finish the 'plaining in a white paper after it is too late to copy the design.

Absent an automatic means in the economy where money naturally moves from the power law distribution wealthy back to the masses, then Socialism erects to do the job, which is then captured by the same power law which ends up in periodic 600 year Dark Ages.

It is time for something better. Even better than Bitcoin. At least we have a somewhat decentralized Bitcoin in the meantime.

I have work to do.

You should probably clarify your statement with some kind of exception because you've said you don't think IOTA is a functional system, but that quote in the context of this thread gives the appearance that you endorse it when you obviously don't.

Could you stop "raping" the term "Nash equilibrium"?
Thanks.

Well I didn't mean to remove the tail reward, i.e. retain ongoing issuance of coins in exchange for mining even though mining is unprofitable. Btw, Bitcoin has no tail reward but that isn't a problem for another 10 years or so.

Well, stop making coins and removing the elements that give them any value whatsoever.

That's easy, I never even started. Now, be true to your word.

My word is that I will not buy this coin.  

I did find it amusing that Come from Beyond is attempting to position the launch right after Bitcoin halving with his "not until 1 million transactions" (which is an arbitrary thing he's just going to spam down with a script when he thinks it's most profitable) in order to try and attract the maximum number of greater fools post Bitcoin halving bubble.  You have to give credit where credit is due.  Those Eastern Euros are used to not having things, so when they see a glimmer of hope in clawing their way out of the gutter, they really know how to attempt to make the stars align in their favor.  

I don't even dislike the guy.  He speaks in riddles like a freaking fortune cookie.  What's not to love?  It's just bad for people who operate in crypto to have a constant stream of hyped up greater fool coins with no fundamentals everywhere destroying the market.  If we don't self-police, everyone who holds any type of coins will eventually go broke from all the bad actors except the most prolific of scammers who cash out $1 million of Ethereum and ride off into the sunset not caring what happens to Bitcoin ever again.

So you decided not to follow my advice and prefer to die in ignorance? Sad, but what could I do. Happy trading!

Haha, that term became his favorite one, like "holistically" for TPTB.

My new favorite word will be - anonymous dev issuing illegal security from 3rd world country and using some random guy he found in Norway as the fall guy.

hahaha good one. No need to search for facts when you can make them up yourself.

I don't keep up with the "Come from Beyond blog".  He was anonymous the last time I looked in the NXT IPO scam days.

NXT was kind of the prime mover of the cambrian explosion of IPO scams. - this will likely be the etching on Come from Beyond's tombstone someday.

Which one of you dirty eastern Euros knows who has been putting up these enormous walls on the sell side of BTCE recently?  Seeing 500+ BTC walls on sell side of that exchange is kind of unheard of.  First time I saw them, all I could think of was "there's Vitalik/Come from Beyond dumping their IPOs..."  The walls don't care if you buy into them, but they've also been strategically placed to try and prevent a BTC rise as well.  I'm not sure if the Russian altcoiners want to stop a BTC rise for some reason, or if there's actual central bankers playing the market.

Add another refutation concerning the validity of IOTA to the thread:

<bsm117532> r0ach: I wouldn't worry about permissioning, Iota doesn't have any kind of consensus or UTXO set...it's entirely unworkable.

http://bob.mcelrath.org/

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1468465.msg14817465#msg14817465:


Bob could put his money into your claim if they both align. Tell him that, please.

Since you require checkpoints to even launch the coin at all, wouldn't we win any type of bet by default?

Ask yourself, if 100% Bitcoin clone was launched today, would it require checkpoints? Would this mean that Bitcoin can't achieve consensus?

PS: No need to post answers. The others know them already.

Of course it doesn't *require* checkpoints unless you count the genesis block itself as a checkpoint.  Your example would be the same thing as Bitcoin hard forking to a new PoW algo.  Everyone knows it's possible to do such a thing, and it doesn't require the network being micro managed by some random guy like Roger Ver.

A new Bitcoin clone with no adoption and usage yet. No checkpointing. Any Bitcoin ASIC farm could take over the hashrate totally anytime they'd wish. It would absolutely require checkpoints until enough its own ecosystem with miners and security has been established.

The security in IOTA model comes with the adoption, from people and machines making transactions.

Wrong, it happens every day.  They're called altcoins.  Nobody wastes their time trying to brute force attack coins of no value.  There's millions of altcoins nobody bothers to attack.  The value of a currency is determined by it's network effect.  If the network effect is low, the coin has no value so nobody attacks it.  If the network effect is high, the coin value is high and thus the PoW network is sufficient to prevent attacks.

The IPO scamcoins on the other hand have a whole new approach.  They have 0 network effect, and thus no value, but that doesn't stop the Eastern Euro scammers (Vitalik, Come from Beyond) from trying to sell them to people for outrageous prices!  Who cares if they have no network effect, the coins aren't even technically viable in the first place!  BUY BUY BUY.

Willing to bet on that? Prepare wording and I'll prepare examples from the history that will prove you wrong. Just need to google for "Luke Jr".

And again you try to backpedal. I'm still waiting for your wording for that 100 BTC bet. Let's finish that small business first, unless you want to lose your face for the second time...

what? only the second time?

That extensive flow of bullshit was caused by the first time. He tried to distract all us from his failure and went complete crazy for several days. So I count this as a single time.

r0ach, if you don't have 100 BTC we could do, for example, 14. There is nothing bad in admitting that you are not as rich as other Bitcoin Maximalists, who use all dirty tricks in their repertoires to save Bitcoin from total collapse.

As if something happening to Bitcoin is going to cause people to flock to a permissioned ledger coin that isn't even technically viable.  Nobody would touch any of this stuff again and go straight to gold.  The value of IOTA would probably be -99999999999.

Just because you have a ton of BTC from the first big ICO scam NXT1 that you've now fully exited from there is no need to try and sound impressive by throwing your weight around.

IOTA (nxt2) is your second attempt at a large ICO scam - get back to working on that latest scam so it can get to an exchange some time this year.

Rather than you and 20 pals hoarding it all telling us how great it is and we must buy some privately for 50x ICO stealth scam prices put it out to exchanges asap. Let's see how it fairs on the free market.

If you used your talents to produce something decent and fair perhaps you would make more returns than from these constant ico scams you can't pull yourself away from.

Stop trying to ransom off iota whilst holding back supply. Get the gui out and get it on exchange. Let's see all the great and must have benefits of this new token in real world usage.

I missed this "a handful guys own all tokens" conspiracy very much!

How exactly would this be carried out?

He's trying to position exchange launch at a time period to maximize parasitic benefit of post-BTC halving bubble.  If he released it one month before BTC halving, nobody would touch it.  At least Come from Beyond hasn't sunk to the level of Ethereum scammers by claiming the BTC halving won't cause the price to go up (LOL).  He knows damn well the BTC halving is an asymmetric bet.  Come from Beyond is kind of a stereotypical Eastern European cat burglar, snatching silverware to pawn it for vodka and Adidas track suits, but he's not stupid.

So you don't have even 14 BTC, I see...

Agreed.

This is so funny to see that few nobody like you, roach and cryptohunter, trying to say anything about great things like IOTA and ETH.

Come from Beyond and Vitalik are very smart and clever guys.

But who are you???  just losers which whining like a ill sheeps.

Everybody already fed up of you.

I can imagine why looking at your signature.  Are you a door to door shamwow IOTA salesman?

http://www.bemediasavvy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/SlapChop.jpg

I think they are more fed up with you and the other IOTA scammers/pumpers sock puppet accounts pushing your scam on to them at 3000% what you sold them to yourself for.

The last con from belarus was enough. We don't need another one.

Stay on your iota thread and stop spamming the main board. Get it on exchange but now it has 239734594375934759347593745934759 zillion tokens I mean what sort of market will it be listed on ?? even a dogoshi is too valuable.

Just same words: just losers which whining like a ill sheeps.

WE-you mean cryptohunter/roach? BTW This is sock puppets each other?
in this case-you! go away with your shit

CH you can't keep saying the same things over and over all over the place Im mean all over the place. you have the same story and it's not real.

I see some of others here are full of shit too but not all the time, they are intelligent. They don't just say lies over and over and their only move. These guys are at least very smart.

You coming on threads with pasting this secret IPO thing of yours. No where is the place but definitely this is not the place this is a thread for intelligent people. Even if they bullcrap sometimes its at least based on something smart. An idea, or different way of looking at things.

you tell lies over and over, when proof is ask = nothing

I hear you say it was secret ipo and it s an advertised one. It had some threads you were in and made PRE ANN, an ann, a website. more than month of pre ipo threads and news and threads in altcoin discussion area of threads. Then a month of the real ann, and the ann thread got activity so it was almost always on the first announcemnt page. Then there was a few MORE altcoin discussion area threads that were created by the community member.

YOU EVEN TALKED IN SOME SO COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER NUTCASE

after all of that there was also an interview in multiple cryptocurrency news websites.

told you everybody a thousand times maybe more and you just keep saying it was a secret ico while many many people demonstrate to you that these words you continue paste and paste eveerywhere makes it you look crazy. now there are two altcoin dissision area threads about how crasyness you are.

when does this delusion stop?

I adore cryptohunter and his insane integrity. The guy is on ignore but if I see "This user is currently ignored" post of him I know that it's again about the "secret ICO" and the request to sell him bitcoins for 2$. In our windy times this integrity is a calm cozy corner where I rest time to time. Don't take this away from me, please...

CH, from your signature it looks like you put money into Waves.
Did you check the team? Sasha Ivanov, Ivan Shcheglov, Yuri Gagarin,...
How did you get involved in this Russian scam?

Uh oh

https://i.imgur.com/pUCQqXh.png

Poor CIYAM, I didn't expect plain lie from him, but I don't blame him, it's all alcohol...

Discuss: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1492837.0

Come-From-Beyond did some work for me in 2013 -- I never had any problems and he was generally quite helpful and easy going.

And then Come from Beyond's sidekick (Sergio of IOTA) attempted to get pull requests done to make it easier for him to patent troll Bitcoin:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5102

https://github.com/BlockheaderNonce2/bitcoin/wiki

After patent trolling Bitcoin, they team up to release an IPO scamcoin named IOTA.  People like Come from Turkmenistan and Sergio have spent a lot of time in Bitcoin with no payday, so they get desperate looking for some kind of cash grab to monetize their time spent and come up with these scams.

Sure you got the right Sergio?

He's listed in the pull request.  Two guys seem to have been attempting to modify Bitcoin to make ASIC boost more effective so they can attempt to patent troll Bitcoin to death afterwards.  And hilariously, one of these guys seems to be affiliated with IOTA.  They had to know full well nobody is going to stand for that shit.  The Chinese aren't paying any royalties.  

The only possible outcome of their actions would be mining wouldn't occur in any first world nation that respects patents, or Bitcoin developers shut down the boost making his patent useless.  The result of his actions can be considered nothing besides patent trolling to waste everyone's time while he has no chance of success anyway.

What exactly is the role of CfB in the above mentioned pull request?
Are you implying that CfB is Timo Hanke?