|
Title: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 07:13:59 PM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6117
"Who else is doing real-life, production utilization of smart contracts right now? Nobody! ... Learned some hard lessons ... enormous funding ... will come back ... the experiment is awesome ... I'm looking forward to DAOv2.0" Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: JohnnyBTCSeed on June 19, 2016, 07:17:46 PM Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 07:30:17 PM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6495
"What is the difference between a government or bank which decides to override the free market, and a block chain that does the same?" Attorney Brian Klein: "People will pick block chains so to speak based on do they want whether someone can intercede or do they want it more autonomous. Bitcoin seems to be more hands off right, and if Ethereum gets more hands on, that is going to change the perception of the people who are investing and building it. So I think maybe there will be a third block chain (that sort of a third ledger or whatever you want to call it) that rises because it offers a different variable. People will pick what they want." Who will produce that block chain that offers what the market wants from smart contracts and DAOs, yet which is hands off and has better safer technology? (I think I know who will) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15273183#msg15273183 Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: bitcoinlitcoinbtcltc on June 19, 2016, 07:38:55 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D
ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 07:41:18 PM Only valuable among IDIOTS There is a huge market of n00bs apparently. Let's go build something better to show them how it should be done. If we don't have something better to offer for smart contracts, then Vitalik et al will continue to addict more of the youth on mETH. Competition is good. While we are at it, let's fix the scaling problem and avoid the clusterfuck Troika of SegWit, Side-chains, and Lightning Networks. There is a better technological solution. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Minecache on June 19, 2016, 07:44:44 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D You have ZERO idea what his investment portfolio or purchase history is so quit trying to FUD the facts. AA has more knowledge and intelligence and humility in his left testicle than you have in your whole miserable bitter body. Read and learn from AA. He's genius. ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS PS Ethereum wasnt hacked you tard. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 07:49:57 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D You have ZERO idea what his investment portfolio or purchase history is so quit trying to FUD the facts. AA has more knowledge and intelligence and humility in his left testicle than you have in your whole miserable bitter body. Read and learn from AA. He's genius. ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS PS Ethereum wasnt hacked you tard. The crypto-currency ecospace is bifurcating. On one side are the mETH addicts who support forking and moral hazard. That is good. Now our side needs a smart contract offering to kick Ethereum's delusional butt with. It is time to show these script kiddies how to do this in a more professional way. Who is with me? You are welcome to wait until code is announced. I wouldn't support vaporware either. It goes against our creed. Vitalik will not change. He will remain the person is his. Choose him if you like what he has done. Otherwise read this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15273183#msg15273183 Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: TravelsAsia on June 19, 2016, 08:02:11 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS If you spent more time attacking issues than people with rude comments, you might be taken more serious. I'm even willing to overlook the litecoin in your name. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: bitcoinlitcoinbtcltc on June 19, 2016, 08:31:48 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS If you spent more time attacking issues than people with rude comments, you might be taken more serious. I'm even willing to overlook the litecoin in your name. There is no ''litecoin'' in my name you tard :D Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Opquar on June 19, 2016, 08:37:32 PM Only valuable among IDIOTS There is a huge market of n00bs apparently. Let's go build something better to show them how it should be done. If we don't have something better to offer for smart contracts, then Vitalik et al will continue to addict more of the youth on mETH. Competition is good. While we are at it, let's fix the scaling problem and avoid the clusterfuck Troika of SegWit, Side-chains, and Lightning Networks. There is a better technological solution. I agree with that totally. After fixing that, bitcoin will be much better and more usable and become THE currency. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Minecache on June 19, 2016, 08:38:37 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS If you spent more time attacking issues than people with rude comments, you might be taken more serious. I'm even willing to overlook the litecoin in your name. There is no ''litecoin'' in my name you tard :D LTC denotes Litecoin as you well know. Enjoy your years of bag hodling. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 08:45:33 PM Only valuable among IDIOTS There is a huge market of n00bs apparently. Let's go build something better to show them how it should be done. If we don't have something better to offer for smart contracts, then Vitalik et al will continue to addict more of the youth on mETH. Competition is good. While we are at it, let's fix the scaling problem and avoid the clusterfuck Troika of SegWit, Side-chains, and Lightning Networks. There is a better technological solution. I agree with that totally. After fixing that, bitcoin will be much better and more usable and become THE currency. I can't fix Bitcoin, but I can try to supplement it with another block chain while Bitcoin might remain the reserve currency. Also I suggest watching this parody video because it hits on all the points about The DAO FAIL: Thanks - I had fun making it. Ethereum sounds promising but right now The DAO fiasco is a grave example of what happens when half baked code which attracted close to 250 million USD (value at one point) in investments got released without proper testing and/or clear goals. I hope the thieves are punished. Hopefully Ethereum will survive and thrive. You did a great job of hitting all the correct points in your parody video. Did you research a lot of posts here on BCT to gain that insight? My perspective is that Vitalik has a certain way of approaching computer science and reliable s/w development which is flawed. I don't expect them to improve. I expect them to go deeper into clusterfucks because one thing I learned in life is that WYSIWYG. So I have decided to take the bull by the horns. I am simply drawing attention to the absolute lack of logic and even responsibility. I hope good things come out of it. You did that very well. I don't want to expect, I want to make sure good comes from it. I know how to code. So I can do something rather than just hope. As a programmer I could see that The DAO was put together haphazardly expecting to be a quick and dirty funding vehicle for the Slock.it project. The Slock.it team felt that they should gift the DAO smart code to the community for bigger exposure. The project got too big as we all know but sadly it was the Slock.it team that asked to be paid to provide future security for their broken code. Someone somewhere figured out that this thing was full of holes and exploited it. The whole project handling was rather immature and unprofessional and many of us fell for it. I invested 100 ETH myself. The joke is on me too. :-) There are no safety mechanisms built into the SOLIDARITY. There was no attempt to do this incrementally. They released Turing-complete scripting into the wild knowing full well that it must blow up. Very, very unprofessional. We can't blame this just on The DAO. The root cause starts with Vitalik and his delusions. Casper was another delusion that we knew would fail. How many months did they waste on that. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: ArticMine on June 19, 2016, 08:48:33 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D You have ZERO idea what his investment portfolio or purchase history is so quit trying to FUD the facts. AA has more knowledge and intelligence and humility in his left testicle than you have in your whole miserable bitter body. Read and learn from AA. He's genius. ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS PS Ethereum wasnt hacked you tard. The crypto-currency ecospace is bifurcating. On one side are the mETH addicts who support forking and moral hazard. That is good. Now our side needs a smart contract offering to kick Ethereum's delusional butt with. It is time to show these script kiddies how to do this in a more professional way. Who is with me? You are welcome to wait until code is announced. I wouldn't support vaporware either. It goes against our creed. Vitalik will not change. He will remain the person is his. Choose him if you like what he has done. Otherwise read this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15273183#msg15273183 There is Counterparty https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/counterparty-brings-ethereum-smart-contracts-to-the-bitcoin-blockchain/ (https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/counterparty-brings-ethereum-smart-contracts-to-the-bitcoin-blockchain/). Does anyone thing that Bitcoin will hard fork to accommodate a failed Counterparty Ethereum smart contract? Of course one does not have even have to use Bitcoin as the base chain for Counterparty. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 08:50:46 PM There is Counterparty https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/counterparty-brings-ethereum-smart-contracts-to-the-bitcoin-blockchain/ (https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/counterparty-brings-ethereum-smart-contracts-to-the-bitcoin-blockchain/). Does anyone thing that Bitcoin will hard fork to accommodate a failed Counterparty Ethereum smart contract? Of course one does not have even have to use Bitcoin as the base chain for Counterparty. Bitcoin can't validate the Counterparty invariants, thus Counterparty can't have decentralized consensus. Sorry you can't put smart contracts on the Bitcoin block chain. Rootstock is making a side-chain instead. But the larger issue is scaling. And also of course the fact that Turing-complete scripts can blow up. To solve this, you need me. I've been working on the technological issues for 2 - 3 years. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: bitcoinlitcoinbtcltc on June 19, 2016, 08:55:17 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS If you spent more time attacking issues than people with rude comments, you might be taken more serious. I'm even willing to overlook the litecoin in your name. There is no ''litecoin'' in my name you tard :D LTC denotes Litecoin as you well know. Enjoy your years of bag hodling. What it denoates doesnt matter. You thought there was litecoin in my name, whereas in fact its litcoin . Which makes you a tard :D Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Wosterlee on June 19, 2016, 08:59:55 PM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6495 "What is the difference between a government or bank which decides to override the free market, and a block chain that does the same?" Attorney Brian Klein: "People will pick block chains so to speak based on do they want whether someone can intercede or do they want it more autonomous. Bitcoin seems to be more hands off right, and if Ethereum gets more hands on, that is going to change the perception of the people who are investing and building it. So I think maybe there will be a third block chain (that sort of a third ledger or whatever you want to call it) that rises because it offers a different variable. People will pick what they want." Who will produce that block chain that offers what the market wants from smart contracts and DAOs, yet which is hands off and has better safer technology? (I think I know who will) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15273183#msg15273183 BitBay? Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 09:02:51 PM BitBay? You can read my discussion with Zimbeck: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1416129.msg14358400#msg14358400 And my doubts about the technology: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1416129.msg14369688#msg14369688 And where I punted: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1416129.msg14406290#msg14406290 But Bitbay is for selling goods. Not for investing in projects. I was thinking about a competitor to the DAO, because surely they will relaunch that broken game theory DAO concept again. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Bit_Happy on June 19, 2016, 09:06:09 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS Sorry guys, I have no history of ever making this type of post: https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5218/5411730433_4a601cf910.jpg Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: ArticMine on June 19, 2016, 09:06:52 PM ... Bitcoin can't validate the Counterparty invariants, thus Counterparty can't have decentralized consensus. Sorry you can't put smart contracts on the Bitcoin block chain. Rootstock is making a side-chain instead. But the larger issue is scaling. And also of course the fact that Turing-complete scripts can blow up. To solve this, you need me. I've been working on the technological issues for 2 - 3 years. A side chain is the proper way to do this, and it can be merged mined with the main chain. Scaling as we both know is a very serious issue so one has to start with a base coin that can scale on the main chain properly even before adding smart contracts. Then address the scaling issues of the smart contracts themselves. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Minecache on June 19, 2016, 09:15:23 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS If you spent more time attacking issues than people with rude comments, you might be taken more serious. I'm even willing to overlook the litecoin in your name. There is no ''litecoin'' in my name you tard :D LTC denotes Litecoin as you well know. Enjoy your years of bag hodling. What it denoates doesnt matter. You thought there was litecoin in my name, whereas in fact its litcoin . Which makes you a tard :D Ps. It wasn't only me who thought this, as I wasn't the original person. So get a grip and stand up for your beliefs and currencies. FFS. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 09:16:24 PM I'm with you and thanks for putting it more eloquently than I ever could. I invested in DAO and agree that it should cut its loses for now. I still believe in a DAO and all that it will stand for, basically giving the little man the opportunity to invest whee only VC funds could in the past. Why others are so virulently against this right is beyond me. One day I expect after all this is blown over there will be a DAO2.0. Just with better coders. Also, I don't know if better coding is the answer ultimately. Things need to progress on the basis that smart contract code will fail, not that it won't. There are a huge amount of use cases where the value doesn't actually have to be held by the contract. toknormal, very astute. That is indeed part of the solution. Minecache, the problem with The DAO is not only bad code, but also the design was game theory broken as well. It's likely the DAO is currently too ahead of its time but I believe it will come. No there is a mass market for it right now, but those Ethereum guys (including Vitalik's blogs about it) have the design entirely wrong conceptually. They are off in the entirely wrong direction conceptually. And that includes Devest and any one else copying The DAO's conceptual design. And I am not going to tell you how to do correctly until I have some code ready to launch. It's likely the DAO is currently too ahead of its time but I believe it will come. No there is a mass market for it right now, but those guys have the design entirely wrong conceptually. They are off in the entirely wrong direction conceptually. And that includes Devest and any one else copying The DAO's conceptual design. And I am not going to tell you how to do correctly until I have some code ready to launch. The problem is the way of, and the design of what you are, marketing. I will show you how to do it. Specifically marketing a delusion broken design to n00bs, instead of marketing a seriously beneficial product to those who can use it for revolutionizing corporations. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 09:32:26 PM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6854
Andreas M. Antonopoulos: "Congrats to Vitalik for not removing the possibility for personality worship". WTF ??? Vitalik has a groupie followers that worship him. Andreas worships Vitalik otherwise he wouldn't make such comparisons to George Washington. If anyone ever compares me and idols me, I will puke on their lap. This isn't about babbling talking heads, it is about a job that needs to be done and who is going to get it done correctly. Accolades are not needed. Andreas makes the point that Ethereum can allow full exploration of the range of innovation because of the Turing-complete scripts, which Bitcoin can't do. So it seems he worships Ethereum because he thinks it is necessary for achieving maximum innovation. Well I am going to try to teach Andreas that only some contracts are killer apps and those are the highest priority. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 19, 2016, 10:43:05 PM ... Bitcoin can't validate the Counterparty invariants, thus Counterparty can't have decentralized consensus. Sorry you can't put smart contracts on the Bitcoin block chain. Rootstock is making a side-chain instead. But the larger issue is scaling. And also of course the fact that Turing-complete scripts can blow up. To solve this, you need me. I've been working on the technological issues for 2 - 3 years. A side chain is the proper way to do this, and it can be merged mined with the main chain. Scaling as we both know is a very serious issue so one has to start with a base coin that can scale on the main chain properly even before adding smart contracts. Then address the scaling issues of the smart contracts themselves. Side-chains are insecure: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/side-chains-challenges-potential-1397614121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7613520 http://www.rootstock.io/blog/sidechains-drivechains-and-rsk-2-way-peg-design My expectation is that Blockstream (+ the Chinese mining cartel) are going to either outright break or centralize the mining/control of Bitcoin. We need to be ready with something that works correctly for when they do. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 12:30:54 AM Smooth and I discussing (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516067.msg15285558#msg15285558) the optimum way of funding/launching development, and the Nash equilibrium of block chains.
Ethereum, Blockstream (Bitcoin core), BitShares, DASH all break Nash equilibrium. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: smooth on June 20, 2016, 02:10:16 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6495 "What is the difference between a government or bank which decides to override the free market, and a block chain that does the same?" Attorney Brian Klein: "People will pick block chains so to speak based on do they want whether someone can intercede or do they want it more autonomous. Bitcoin seems to be more hands off right, and if Ethereum gets more hands on, that is going to change the perception of the people who are investing and building it. So I think maybe there will be a third block chain (that sort of a third ledger or whatever you want to call it) that rises because it offers a different variable. People will pick what they want." Attorneys should stick to what they know, which is the law. In general (and it appears in this specific case) they know next to nothing or nothing at all about blockchain technology. A blockchain that is "hands on" accomplishes literally nothing useful. The concept is vacuous. It is like attorneys arguing over the title to an empty bank account. Quote So it seems he worships Ethereum because he thinks it is necessary for achieving maximum innovation. Maximum innovation of how many different ways you can title an empty bank account. It is clear from this episode that the entire project as constructed is pointless, fork or no fork. "The Attacker" was one clever dude, or lucky, to find this fatal vulnerability, not only in the coding of the DAO (which can be fixed in future contracts, maybe) but in the entire foundation and premise of the project (which can not), and I'm going to go with clever. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: ArticMine on June 20, 2016, 03:05:37 AM ... Bitcoin can't validate the Counterparty invariants, thus Counterparty can't have decentralized consensus. Sorry you can't put smart contracts on the Bitcoin block chain. Rootstock is making a side-chain instead. But the larger issue is scaling. And also of course the fact that Turing-complete scripts can blow up. To solve this, you need me. I've been working on the technological issues for 2 - 3 years. A side chain is the proper way to do this, and it can be merged mined with the main chain. Scaling as we both know is a very serious issue so one has to start with a base coin that can scale on the main chain properly even before adding smart contracts. Then address the scaling issues of the smart contracts themselves. Side-chains are insecure: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/side-chains-challenges-potential-1397614121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7613520 http://www.rootstock.io/blog/sidechains-drivechains-and-rsk-2-way-peg-design My expectation is that Blockstream (+ the Chinese mining cartel) are going to either outright break or centralize the mining/control of Bitcoin. We need to be ready with something that works correctly for when they do. It is not that simple. Namecoin has 35% of Bitcoin's hashrate and generates only 0.063% of the miner reward revenue. 1 NMC = 0.00063 XBT. This is actually comparable to 10% of the current Bitcoin fee revenue as a percentage of the overall miner reward. Furthermore, My take is that in the case of a pegged sidechain there is actually an even lower cost to merge mine because one does not have to sell a different coin in an exchange. For many miners the hassle of exchanging the NMC for XBT is likely not worth the trouble; however in the case of a sidechain with a two way peg this exchange issue is avoided. In the case of a pegged sidechain say generating the say even as low as 0.5% of the main chain revenue one could expect and even greater proportion of the main chain's hashrate. Yes one would need 17.5 of the Bitcoin hashrate to launch a 51% attack against Namecoin; however for a Bitcoin pool such an attack has potentially a much higher downside, in the negative public relation such an attack could generate alone, than the comparably minuscule reward such an attack could produce.. This issue of double spend attacks could for example be dealt with by treating transactions between chains as coinbase transactions (120 blocks rather than 6 blocks). I do agree that is requires a fair amount further research, but I am not prepared to simply dismiss it based on just the comments in the articles. Namecoin does provide some very compelling evidence over many years that merged mining can work even when there is a marked difference in the revenue generated by the main chain and the merged mined alt-coin or side chain. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 03:40:04 AM ArticMine, the merged mining for Namecoin with very minimal validation can't be compared to the extensive CPU resources required to verify smart contracts.
I have no confidence whatsoever in Rootstock being merge-mined by Bitcoin miners. Fuhgeddaboudit. Rube Goldberg machines suck. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: kennyP on June 20, 2016, 03:44:22 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6117 "Who else is doing real-life, production utilization of smart contracts right now? Nobody! ... Learned some hard lessons ... enormous funding ... will come back ... the experiment is awesome ... I'm looking forward to DAOv2.0" what a deja vu moment ... why is Andreas flushing his reputation down the toilet for The DAO? http://i66.tinypic.com/ornl8x.jpg Quote I'm Roger Ver, long time Bitcoin advocate and investor. Today I'm at the Mtgox world headquarters in Tokyo Japan. I had a nice chat with MTGOX CEO, Mark Karpeles, about their current situation. He showed me multiple bank statements, as well as letters from banks and lawyers. I'm sure that all the current withdrawal problems at MTGOX are being caused by the traditional banking system, not because of a lack of liquidity at MTGOX. The traditional banking partners that MTGOX needs to work with are not able to keep up with the demands of the growing Bitcoin economy. The dozens of people that make up the MTGOX team are hard at work establishing additional banking partners, that eventually will make dealing with MTGOX easier for all their customers around the world. For now, I hope that everyone will continue working on Bitcoin projects that will help make the world a better place. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: ArticMine on June 20, 2016, 03:52:31 AM ArticMine, the merged mining for Namecoin with very minimal validation can't be compared to the extensive CPU resources required to verify smart contracts. I have no confidence whatsoever in Rootstock being merge-mined by Bitcoin miners. Fuhgeddaboudit. Rube Goldberg machines suck. Time will tell, and I am also unsure if they will get the hashrate. They will need a percentage of the hashrate comparable to that of Namecoin in order to be secure. otherwise they could get attacked for the reasons you cited above. Of course if it fails or even if it works then one can learn from it and build something better. Edit: For starters they also need a coin that can scale as the main chain for this to work and Bitcoin does not meet this requirement. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 03:59:44 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6117 "Who else is doing real-life, production utilization of smart contracts right now? Nobody! ... Learned some hard lessons ... enormous funding ... will come back ... the experiment is awesome ... I'm looking forward to DAOv2.0" what a deja vu moment ... why is Andreas flushing his reputation down the toilet for The DAO? http://i66.tinypic.com/ornl8x.jpg Quote I'm Roger Ver, long time Bitcoin advocate and investor. Today I'm at the Mtgox world headquarters in Tokyo Japan. ... kiklo opined a reason: Attorneys comment on the likelihood of SEC or other regulation/action against DAOs or crypto-currency in general: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=7789 Side note, you see those dark circles under that guys eyes in the video. Symptoms of Liver Stress or Damage, not good. 8) But I also opined a reason upthread: ...Andreas makes the point that Ethereum can allow full exploration of the range of innovation because of the Turing-complete scripts, which Bitcoin can't do. So it seems he worships Ethereum because he thinks it is necessary for achieving maximum innovation. Well I am going to try to teach Andreas that only some contracts are killer apps and those are the highest priority. Hey I like Andreas. He is an inspiring speaker, articulate, and reasonably precise in his analysis of the details. I don't want to pick a fight with him. Perhaps he just needs some capable project other than Ethereum to "show me the code, talk is cheap". Since we are only talking, then I can't fault Andreas. It is better to get along with everybody, except I am not going to follow the path/fantasy of the script kiddies. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 04:07:10 AM Edit: For starters they also need a coin that can scale as the main chain for this to work and Bitcoin does not meet this requirement. Thanks. That was my conclusion also. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: TheMage on June 20, 2016, 04:09:11 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6117 "Who else is doing real-life, production utilization of smart contracts right now? Nobody! ... Learned some hard lessons ... enormous funding ... will come back ... the experiment is awesome ... I'm looking forward to DAOv2.0" what a deja vu moment ... why is Andreas flushing his reputation down the toilet for The DAO? http://i66.tinypic.com/ornl8x.jpg Quote I'm Roger Ver, long time Bitcoin advocate and investor. Today I'm at the Mtgox world headquarters in Tokyo Japan. I had a nice chat with MTGOX CEO, Mark Karpeles, about their current situation. He showed me multiple bank statements, as well as letters from banks and lawyers. I'm sure that all the current withdrawal problems at MTGOX are being caused by the traditional banking system, not because of a lack of liquidity at MTGOX. The traditional banking partners that MTGOX needs to work with are not able to keep up with the demands of the growing Bitcoin economy. The dozens of people that make up the MTGOX team are hard at work establishing additional banking partners, that eventually will make dealing with MTGOX easier for all their customers around the world. For now, I hope that everyone will continue working on Bitcoin projects that will help make the world a better place. Interesting perspective, do you believe Andres is flushing his reputation down the toilet because of this? You should be aware that he offered to help them when they were going down (out of good faith im sure). Not sure if he ever worked on their code. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: kennyP on June 20, 2016, 04:28:36 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6117 "Who else is doing real-life, production utilization of smart contracts right now? Nobody! ... Learned some hard lessons ... enormous funding ... will come back ... the experiment is awesome ... I'm looking forward to DAOv2.0" what a deja vu moment ... why is Andreas flushing his reputation down the toilet for The DAO? http://i66.tinypic.com/ornl8x.jpg Quote I'm Roger Ver, long time Bitcoin advocate and investor. Today I'm at the Mtgox world headquarters in Tokyo Japan. I had a nice chat with MTGOX CEO, Mark Karpeles, about their current situation. He showed me multiple bank statements, as well as letters from banks and lawyers. I'm sure that all the current withdrawal problems at MTGOX are being caused by the traditional banking system, not because of a lack of liquidity at MTGOX. The traditional banking partners that MTGOX needs to work with are not able to keep up with the demands of the growing Bitcoin economy. The dozens of people that make up the MTGOX team are hard at work establishing additional banking partners, that eventually will make dealing with MTGOX easier for all their customers around the world. For now, I hope that everyone will continue working on Bitcoin projects that will help make the world a better place. Interesting perspective, do you believe Andres is flushing his reputation down the toilet because of this? You should be aware that he offered to help them when they were going down (out of good faith im sure). Not sure if he ever worked on their code. Andreas saying "I'm bullish on Ethereum" is designed to prop up ETH, same as what Ver was trying to do when he made that infamous video in support of Mt Gox. He's trying to use his reputation as a crypto evangelist to encourage people to not dump ETH, despite the hard fork, knowing that's there's a good chance ethereum might be fatally wounded now that the project leaders have abandoned the ideals of decentralisation to save The DAO when we all know ethereum has no known bug itself. Why is AA doing this, is it because he owns a lot of ETH and/or DAO? I don't know, but after all he has said and done the last 3 years, his 'bullish' attitude towards ethereum looks on a par with Ver's support of Mt Gox i.e. very insincere Andreas offering support and tech assistance is one thing, but "bullish" .... I think he'll regret that video almost immediately. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 04:35:38 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcLKrkwPLQ#t=6495 "What is the difference between a government or bank which decides to override the free market, and a block chain that does the same?" Attorney Brian Klein: "People will pick block chains so to speak based on do they want whether someone can intercede or do they want it more autonomous. Bitcoin seems to be more hands off right, and if Ethereum gets more hands on, that is going to change the perception of the people who are investing and building it. So I think maybe there will be a third block chain (that sort of a third ledger or whatever you want to call it) that rises because it offers a different variable. People will pick what they want." Attorneys should stick to what they know, which is the law. In general (and it appears in this specific case) they know next to nothing or nothing at all about blockchain technology. A blockchain that is "hands on" accomplishes literally nothing useful. The concept is vacuous. It is like attorneys arguing over the title to an empty bank account. Smooth I know you were rushed when you wrote that (because he told me in PM that he didn't have time today), so I want to say I agree with that attorney's analysis. The people who want a hands-on block chain will get the clusterfuck they deserve and go down in flames with it. Those who want Blockstream's clusterfuck centralization Rube Goldberg "improvements" (which are almost as bad as Vitalik's but atleast they know how to code), will cling to Bitcoin as it becomes ever more centralized. And those that want something truly decentralized, with scaling for microtransactions onchain, and with secure killer app smart contracts, will need a third block chain. I am working on this project. Everyone should be free to choose. Who I am to tell them what to do. Free will. Free markets. Techno-Anarchism. Reap what you sow. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: parmatiya on June 20, 2016, 08:04:58 AM If the Ethereum recovers from the current crisis, it could be stronger than ever. There are many big investors in it.
Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Lauda on June 20, 2016, 08:56:57 AM If the Ethereum recovers from the current crisis, it could be stronger than ever. There are many big investors in it. "Recovers" how exactly? By becoming a centralized, alterable and non-censorship-resistant blockchain? Any kind of fork that controls coins is a huge mistake. They're even talking about forcing a HF by investing a lot of money to rent out mining power. ::)OP, no he's not bullish on ETH. He's just interested in the concept of experiment with smart contracts, not ETH specifically. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 12:30:32 PM OP, no he's not bullish on ETH. He's just interested in the concept of experiment with smart contracts, not ETH specifically. This is what I am thinking also, but kennyP does have a valid concern that maybe Andreas has sold out his reputation and will go down in flames as Roger Ver did with his endorsements of Mt. Gox near the end. In support of your and my thought, let me quote Andreas specifically from upthread as follows: "Who else is doing real-life, production utilization of smart contracts right now? Nobody! ... Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 12:55:21 PM Smooth and I discussing (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516067.msg15285558#msg15285558) the optimum way of funding/launching development, and the Nash equilibrium of block chains. Ethereum, Blockstream (Bitcoin core), BitShares, DASH all break Nash equilibrium. I agree with smooth, there should be no DAO nor governance (i.e. no voting, not even from miners) in control of forking the block chain. The DAOs should only be for decentralizing projects and organizations (including corporations). DASH and Bitshares have this incorrect PoS+governance (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516067.msg15285558#msg15285558) design and Ira Miller@DASH (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516058.msg15286476#msg15286476) is incorrect about automation being unrealistic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15273183#msg15273183) or evil: so how can you shut down a decentralized autonomous organization? Do you know any decentralized autonomous organization ? I don't .. Yes, DASH.org. The first DAO. The difference: Marketing that feature is taking a backseat to development. Doing it right I'd say. DASH does seem to be a functioning DAO where D is distributed but sure if it is decentralized control. The stakeholders apparently vote on the actions or management of the development of the open source. The stakeholders apparently approved to have % of the mining rewards paid to a foundation which then distributes the funds according to projects approved by votes of the stakeholders. However what is not clear to me is to what degree this is all enforced by smart contract protocol or done manually by the foundation. There are allegations however that the distribution of the DASH tokens were highly concentrated by an alleged instamine and subsequent masternode ROI scheme which may have further concentrated the tokens held by the core insiders. But I don't know if anyone has been able to prove conclusively that DASH is not really decentralized, although the suspicion is apparently strong amongst some especially Monero supporters. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 01:44:26 PM I hope Andreas is sober now:
It is getting worse. The DAOAttaker is playing with all the ethereum devs and staying one step ahead. http://pastebin.com/9MRVDC9h Quote -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Ladies and gentleman; We come to you with great pleasure to now offer 2000% or 20x return contracts. You have to notify us before hand of the amount of tokens you wish to be multiplied and we will send you back a customized bytecode with a SIMPLE guide on how to successfully execute the contract and get your 2000% return from the DAO. We accept payment in bitcoins or DAO tokens or ether; Price Breakdown: 1) DAO token balance to multiply = 1,000 or less = 1BTC or 5,000 DAO or 50ETH Potential Gain for Buyer - 200ETH 2) DAO token balance to multiply = 5,000 or less = 4BTC or 20k DAO, or 200 ETH Potential Gain - 1000ETH 3) DAO token balance to multiply = 10,000 or less = 6BTC or 30k DAO, or 300ETH Potential Gain for Buyer - 2000ETH 4) Anything above 10,000 will be considered by our team, and likely contain a decent premium or we may just likely reject it outright, this is aimed moreso at spreading the wealth to the smaller users, although it allows whales to do it as well, but in smaller increments. **Send us an e-mail if you wish to complete this transaction; goldyloxx@sigaint.org** **SERIOUS OFFER: TL;DR WE ARE SELLING CUSTOMIZED RECURSIVE CALL CONTRACTS OF THE DAO THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO MULTIPLY YOUR FUNDS BY 20X. DISCLOSURE: WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF OUR OWN CONTRACTS DEPLOYED WAITING TO COMPLETE A FULL HEIST OF THE DAO, WE NEED OTHER USERS TO PARTICIPATE SO IT WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE HARD FORK TO REDISTRIBUTE FUNDS BACK ** -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXZyLlAAoJEOr7aOGjIMncDsMH/ArUnU6GcAsVLkGBAduE08G+ AcKci986ehyzmC4XOPbhxtE2axxcOOQPjgeLgz6kfEHL1fiwfC5vQJZu3NQw2v/m QZpd57KKAxZ245oz4pzJdkhM+3rqnG+JV9zow0vzp8vGGLOCpPLPL09JdsFWeL/H qODyvPgj3TiKVpDZ9JhygrIBpOZbn3xi9j1yqEv/GDrB9wpDglz/L8egDOoQjLXB zFabHIaha/4POEz6EdUGjeU3cA3eJpUYkU51mIRBkLDtwWo0JPxfdcsL4zELC6Ix w4Bo3SjMJSqBDMZjC2HxXRm2VyC/iIfC4gSvmhDPq8sHm/Z8uQOt0sC01QMUXO4= =vFi+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- That is better, not worse (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1515550.msg15292305#msg15292305). What he has done is offered to drain the rest of the DAO into others' accounts for them in exchange for a fee. He is increasing his leverage over Vitalik. I expected him to do this, because he understands leverage as he had created MPeX. Vitalik is being revealed to be the ignorant/myopic fool he is. He will force Vitalik to plead with miners to do an emergency hard fork to stop the leverage, which will of course entirely destroy Vitalik's and Ethereum reputation. Checkmate! And I expected this, because I know who the I'm looking forward to the smart contract that guarantees a miner a million ETH for processing the "attacker" transactions. Someone will be bought. And I'll be ready with popped corn. I agree. I doubt the attacker is done. He has a counter move. I know the attacker from past debates with him. Those buying ETH at $12 are taking a risk. The carnage may not be over yet. He is probably letting more fools go long (to maximize the lesson he is trying to teach them) before he renews his 2000 BTC shorts and attacks anew. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 20, 2016, 04:52:40 PM Andreas is doubling-down on desperation?
If I am a miner, I will support the soft fork and freeze the stolen funds. If the DAO holders offer us 50% of the stolen funds, we will do a hard fork. If the miners can benefit from the hacking like this and the hacker does not benefit, he may think twice before his next hacking. Other miners will mine more profitably by accepting his offer and thus have a greater hashrate. Checkmate. Your vote has been economically overridden. Andreas and Emin getting frantic and grasping for straws: https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/744769932739624960 So 2 wrongs make a right? Nope. You all had a chance to only get a 30% haircut, but you were determined to vote, thus commit 2 wrongs and break Nash equilibrium and lose 100%: The "attacker" was very emphathetic. He offered a 30% haircut (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1515550.msg15292630#msg15292630), but you n00bs weren't contented and so you now you will lose everything. Stoopid. What are you taking about 30% haircut? In the attacker's original interview, he stated he stopped draining the DAO at 30% drained, as an olive branch of sorts. But this depends of course of you not stealing his rightfully gained tokens with your insecure 51% attack hard fork. Since you've all voted to steal his tokens, he is forced to drain the rest of your tokens and redistribute them to a new set of miners who will replace your existing miners. You guys passed up the best chance you had to not lose it all. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: TheMage on June 20, 2016, 11:37:19 PM Andreas is doubling-down on desperation? If I am a miner, I will support the soft fork and freeze the stolen funds. If the DAO holders offer us 50% of the stolen funds, we will do a hard fork. If the miners can benefit from the hacking like this and the hacker does not benefit, he may think twice before his next hacking. Other miners will mine more profitably by accepting his offer and thus have a greater hashrate. Checkmate. Your vote has been economically overridden. Andreas and Emin getting frantic and grasping for straws: https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/744769932739624960 So 2 wrongs make a right? Nope. You all had a chance to only get a 30% haircut, but you were determined to vote, thus commit 2 wrongs and break Nash equilibrium and lose 100%: The "attacker" was very emphathetic. He offered a 30% haircut (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1515550.msg15292630#msg15292630), but you n00bs weren't contented and so you now you will lose everything. Stoopid. What are you taking about 30% haircut? In the attacker's original interview, he stated he stopped draining the DAO at 30% drained, as an olive branch of sorts. But this depends of course of you not stealing his rightfully gained tokens with your insecure 51% attack hard fork. Since you've all voted to steal his tokens, he is forced to drain the rest of your tokens and redistribute them to a new set of miners who will replace your existing miners. You guys passed up the best chance you had to not lose it all. If this is certainty true, this "attacker" is pretty brilliant. Not that I encourage it, but he is playing game theory fairly well. Also do you know who he is? You stated in a previous post you know him. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: vapourminer on June 20, 2016, 11:54:48 PM gotta admit, even as one who holds some eth and dao tokens, the entertainment value of watching this guy toss daos around like popcorn is worth losing it all :)
of course when "investing" in any crypto i kiss it goodby. if it works great. if it goes down in flames one can only hope its as fun watching it crash and burn as this one is. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 01:12:13 AM If this is certainty true, this "attacker" is pretty brilliant. Not that I encourage it, but he is playing game theory fairly well. Also do you know who he is? You stated in a previous post you know him. Mircea Popescu (aka MPOE, MP, or MPeX) is brilliant: https://s32.postimg.org/wa7qdgoyd/Mircea_Popescu.jpgVShttps://s31.postimg.org/a2tw11rpn/Vitalik_Buterin.jpg Fight!!!! Judging by this, the maverick Mircea Popescu seems to be taking credit: http://trilema.com/2016/to-the-dao-and-the-ethereum-community-fuck-you/ Quoth MP: Quote Bitcoin is a sovereign. Accepting this matter of fact is a sine qua non prerequisite for playing. No exceptions (http://trilema.com/2014/interacting-with-fiat-institution-a-guide/). Please tell me why the next G20 meeting can't address this email exchange as a serious threat to their collective authority and resolve to make necessary decrees from the EU to provide the necessary legal authority to prosecute MPOE. Also MPOE you are taking a huge personal risk here. You better not have the slightest mistake as they might find it easier to take you down with a trumped up charge. If all else fails, a fiery car accident. I admire people with balls but combined with some basic common sense. It does me no good to associate with people who are so careless so as to actively seek their own destruction. You seem to feel very indignant about this and have the sort of Paul Revere attitude of "give me liberty or give me death". I just think there are much smarter ways of fighting than out in the open. The quality of ones weapons and strategy determines if they are the victor, not the quality of resolve alone. The Apaches were never defeated because they didn't fight in the open: http://www.starfishandspider.com/preview/02.html I think you would have been much better served to have replied that you need to be legally indemnified before releasing private data. That is all you needed to say. You talk too much. Although you are articulate, you are clearly not an attorney and you should hire one immediately and STFU. Note I was banned from tortilla's new forum cryptocrypt.org for essentially stating the prior paragraph. Edit: essentially you are doing political grandstanding. You can't beat society at its own game (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=518453.msg5775371#msg5775371). Politics is not the successful strategy. Above "tortilla" was rpietila. Below I found "MPeX" trying to prove P ≠ NP: I still believe there is some insight to gleem from the observation (conjecture or proven?) that converting deterministic intractable problems into tractable problems makes them nondeterministic and unbounded in entropy, but I am not seeing yet how to frame it in a way that proves anything. Perhaps proving that the conversion must be unbounded would prove P ≠ NP. I need to contemplate that. On proving P ≠ NP, I do not understand why it can't be proven that the algorithmic Kolmogorov complexity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolmogorov_complexity) of the "traveling salesman problem" is at least O(n2(2n-n-1)), i.e. an exponential lower bound, which is just below the O(n22n) of Held-Karp algorithm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_salesman_problem#Exact_algorithms) which is the best known algorithm ??? My logic is so simple, that I must be missing something. At best the algorithm can cache so optimal computation of each grouping of cities will only be computed once (i.e. the number of unique times), by Reed's law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed%27s_law) we get 2n-n-1 groupings of cities. And for the first leg of the path possibilities, Metcalf's law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe%27s_law) tells us there are n2 possible unique links between cities. Afaics, it is definitionally impossible to compute at fewer algorithmic steps than the Kolmogorov complexity, because that is the minimum information content of the algorithm, i.e. the entropy. Even if we applied some heuristic such as grouping cities in clusters, this would not be an absolute assurance of the optimum path. There is no way to get the assurance while reducing the deterministic algorithm complexity below the Kolmogorov complexity. Since this algorithm is NP-hard and the related NP-complete (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-completeness#NP-complete_problems) problem can be reduced to it, then every problem in NP has the same lower bound. The Independent Set on a planar graph is listed an exception (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-completeness#Common_misconceptions) of NP-complete problems being EXP, but this is for edges of the graph that can't intersect, which obviously the "traveling salesman problem" can't be reduced to without some exponential blowup remapping (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/002200009190024Y) because the links between cities can overlap. All the NP-hard (and NP-complete reduced on them) problems revolve around exhaustively searching an exponential set of unique possibilities for an optimum. The Kolmogorov complexity can't be reduced to polynomial, because there can't exist a short-cut that destroys information and still is optimum. Once the computation is below the threshold of the Kolmogorov complexity, the result can't be deterministically optimum. Here is a nearly duplicate proof (http://arxiv.org/pdf/cs/0611082v6.pdf), but he fails to multiply by n2. One of the similar attempts at a proof I've seen is this one (http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~wclark/NPvsP.pdf#page=6) which also attempts to prove a lower bound of the algorithmic complexity. And in his 2014 update (http://www.ijpam.eu/contents/2014-94-1/9/9.pdf#page=6), he mentions Kolmogorov complexity as the justification. Another paper (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.2218v1.pdf) on quick glance appears to try to prove all NP-complete problems are a clustering problem that can't be solved in polynomial time. This is very well written (http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1720). P.S. I was amazed to stumble (http://www.win.tue.nl/~gwoegi/P-versus-NP.htm) onto an attempted proof (http://arxiv.org/pdf/cs/0411033v1.pdf) by our very own cohort MPex (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/MPEx). Edit: A possible reason my idea about doesn't work in a proof, from the researcher who discovered the NP complexity class: ... If the "attacker" exposes him/herself and he/she is in the US as he said in the open letter, I think he could be sent to prison for the hacking with bad intent. MP is the person who drained the DAO. Did you read my post above where I wrote to verify the Keccak hash? MP is the antithesis of Craig Wright. He does not bullshit. MP is the one who did this. He is surely capable of it. Trivial factoid: MP and rpietila were enemies since before 2013. And in 2013, MP sent AnonyMint a private message offering collaboration. AnonyMint has grown to respect MP as a maverick peer, and in some respects in awe of MP. MP's support of Blockstream could end up causing a conflict between MP and AnonyMint at some point in the near future. ;D Titans will do battle. Prepare your cupboard supply of popcorn. I am confused by MP's support of Blockstream, because I thought he was for small blocks and was willing to kill XT to defend the status quo (i.e. Classic): Quote from: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/exclusive-full-interview-transcript-alleged-dao-attacker/ DA: The people behind ethereum are deceptive, for example everyone with a clue (Adam Back, Gregory Maxwell) knows that there is 0% chance for “CASPER” proof of stake to work, but yet they advertise it. Note TPTB_need_war was the first person pointing out that Casper wouldn't work in the Ethereum Paradox thread and also on Reddit. Yet MP gives Blockstream credit for TPTB's research. >:( Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 02:43:25 AM Somebody please message Andreas and tell him to pick up the damn phone because he is veering off course.
And I guess it is lost cause to try to inform Gregory Maxwell that my username is not (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1378533.msg14044024#msg14044024) 'iamnotblack'. Mircea Popescu, the pragmatic genius hacker (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15299827#msg15299827) who drained the DAO in order to defend crypto-currency against retards who want to centralize crypto-currency, has written something about contracts which I entirely agree with. In fact, my conceptualization of the way a DAO should be constructed is based on the similar insight, and I arrived at my insight independently and before reading the following epistle. Let's not forget the Spaniards traded to the native a mirror for his acreage, then employed the force of contracts to enforce the absurdity. Quote from: http://trilema.com/2012/gpg-contracts/ Traditionally, contracts are instruments of torture. People agree to be married (thus entering into, of course, a Marriage Contract) and then have to suffer their spouse whether they'd like to or not. ... The problem with this holy institution that has carried us so very far and fed us so very well is that it has costs, and those costs have the unfortunate property that they mount with use. ... Why would the cost of enforcing a contract increase with the amount of contracts already entered into ? Well, because as people use them people also look for ways to abuse them. As these ways are found they have to be patched. As the patches are applied new holes are found, so new patches are issued. Sometimes the patches work better in some cases than others, in the end it's not even obvious which would be the proper case a contract falls into, the administration of all this has some costs and moreover due to the adversarial nature of contractsvii there's always someone with an incentive to argue absolutely anything, no matter how "insane". Besides, what's insane anymore once we have contracts ? ... I know plenty of people who have dispensed with even entering into contracts altogether, as a point of principle. Silicon Valley deals would be anywhere between one third and two thirds undocumented to any degree - only when companies are about to go public does a mad rush commence to retroactively document years' worth of... contracts, they would be, except they weren't. Why not ? Because contracts are just too damned expensive, both to enter into rationally and then to enforce against the other party. The attempts mostly end up as a competition of "who has the largest bank account" and therefore can afford the best lawyers, and since this is known at the outset the only real believers in the entire contract-with-enforcement construct are, predictably, the very large corporations. ... And so here we are today : contract litigation is a great way to earn a living as a lawyer, a premier way to generate that mostly fake "social mobility" and a great way for Apple, Samsung and obviously the US government to fill their otherwise idle time during board meetings. Most common claims are not pressed, and in the rare instance they are pressed would end up in something called "Small Claims", which is much akin to the lost and found box they used to keep in train stations and movie theatres. ... Who today would or will be able to set aside the perhaps justified objections of the disenfranchised parties (which would necessarily exist) to create a new code, and somewhat reset the clock ? Nobody, practically speaking, it'd have to be done by "consensus" and "negotiation" which is to say it'd be much better for it to not be done at all. In short, this great dragon called Contract has flown as far as he can. He is old now, and tired. His bones ache, his mood is sour, he will soon go below the ground. We will forever remember it, or at any rate I will, but for what he was in his youth, and that youth was much, much before your parents were being born I would think. So what now ? Well... I'm glad you asked. There's a spiffy young fellow I'm betting on : the GPG Contract. He's also a. an agreement b. reached by willing participants. But that's all. What do I mean "that's all" ? I literally mean, that's all. A contract which is entered into by willing participants and won't be enforced. Nonsense ? IKR! Except not really. Obviously entering into a GPG Contract thinking it's an Old Contract is nonsense, and will get you burned. In fact the history of "scams" in the Bitcoin space is pretty much this, people behaving with what should really be GPG Contracts as if they were Old Contracts, and then discovering midway through that... well... it doesn't really work that way. All this aside, non-enforced contracts, contracts which the participants uphold out of their own free will rather than at the behest of some third party or by the point of the sword of some blind demigoddess are a thoroughly fascinating turn of events. For one, they are fundamentally human, they're one step up on the stairwell of freedom. Do it if you think it's right is certainly a lot more empowering, civilised and overall good than "do it or else". For the other, they allow all the enforcing to happen before the actual contract is entered into. Old contracts contain unknown future costs, nobody can ever tell you exactly how much will you have to pay in legal fees to recoup this five hundred owed on whatever deal. GPG Contracts don't have any future costs at all. The cost of enforcing one after the fact is always going to be zero, pretty much because there's never going to be anything you need (or indeed can) do. And it doesn't stop here. I have always thought the principal utility of Bitcoin is that it renders any sort of mandatory taxation model unviable. I am firmly persuaded that as Bitcoin takes holdix taxes will have to return to what they were in ancient Greece : willing donations to the state treasury, and something people openly took pride in. This shift will bring about all the improvements we were vainly trying to achieve in the old money paradigm, such as public accountability and reasonable expenditure in one fell swoop : good luck getting people to donate to the police department if they don't like the police. And good luck with the welfare programs, for sure. Add to that a shift of contracts from the old model to the new and suddenly you have - and I mean this quite literally - a new Renaissance. Man at the center of all things. Man, the willing enforcer of his own promises. Man, the willing contributor to the wealth of an obviously much reduced, but by that fact probably much nicer, lovable and huggable cute little state. I'm crying with joy over here, my toes are curling in untold glee, I have little doubt that I shall live to see this, all of it. And for the first time in many, many years I feel again like the world is worth living in. Techno-anarchism. Amen! Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 01:33:12 PM I think the "hacker" or the DAO holders are trying their best to persuade the miners to work in their favour. Indeed . The Daoattacker is playing with ethereum devs and staying one step ahead- http://pastebin.com/9MRVDC9h That could be a scam. You send bitcoin, DAO or Etheruem to them, but they might not send the in contracts. Has anybody in the forum tried to contact the hacker and get 20x profit? It seems too good to be true. Why did not the hacker keep the 20x profit to themselves. The game theory point is to share 70% of the spoils with other mutineers in order to ensure a fork (which voids the contract) is impossible to achieve. Since the up to 15% of the money supply drained from the DAO is not sufficient to pay for mining hashrate forever, it is best to have others who have a vested interest in mining on the non-forked chain. It also appears to be a test of whether anyone in crypto-currency really gives a shit about decentralization. Because if Ethereum forks, then it means it has been 51% attacked with arbitrary politics. Thus crypto-currency as a defense against the evils of Corporatism and the State (http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984) is dead (if Ethereum's fork becomes the precedent for what people want). Smooth and I discussed this in more detail, which I linked to upthread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15285599#msg15285599). If Ethereum is able to fork and prosper after the fork, it is an sad outcome for those of us who wanted to change the world for the better. >:( The "attacker" wrote: @cryptodevil Vitalik Buterin is a an empty shithead. This literally means that where human beings normally carry gray matter, he instead used to carry brown matter, but it was taken out. So now his strangely shaped skull is just a foul smelling empty receptacle. He's not the only one in this situation... ...Groups of scammers use these idiots, exactly like you would use a table... ...In the case of Ripple, the group of scammers was just that, a criminal gang. In the case of Doge the group of scammers was just a bunch of marketing retards... Nevertheless, Bitcoin (no, not "cryptocurrencies", there is not nor can ever be such a thing as "cryptocurrencies" (http://trilema.com/2014/the-woes-of-altcoin-or-why-there-is-no-such-thing-as-cryptocurrencies/)) has put an end to all that. So it dun work no more. Does that answer your question ? His opinion of the merits of consensus voting (http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984): The point remains that there exist customers whose custom no one wants. They will gather together somewhere, like all mammals ever do. Just by the simple fact of aggregation they do not achieve notability, nor is the headcount a valid reason to consider any position. Democracy, much like socialism, much like any other utopia, makes for excellent books and movies about history, but for appalling actual history and even worse living conditions. Let's just consider it buried alongside communism and move on. ... I hope you get it, but in the end it makes absolutely no difference whether you get it or don't. The world is changing regardless. A side dish of the fallout from the Fetlife drama is probably also indicated, at the very least the part that goes IV. Frantic activity is not much of a cover-up for impotence. The true driver of all this "we protest Trilema for making a fool of Fetlife" is exactly the same mental process that drives "Dancing Man", and "kickstarter successes" where some randomly selected derp gets paid a chunk of change for inventing a can of Pepsi or whatever : the derps wish to convince the world, and in convincing the world convince themselves that their appreciation is valuable, and their displeasure dangerous. Because if it were the case that indeed their upvote was worth something, and their downvote had some sort of impact, then they themselves could be said to have value. Some, perhaps not much, but some. Some! Which some is a whole heck of a lot better than none whatsoever, which just so happens to be the case. TD;LR: You're nothing to nobody. Get your head out of your ass. He explains that the individualized perspective Web-of-Trust is the proper alternative to consensus, which is also my design for a decentralized social network and the correct design (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15273183#msg15273183) for a DAO-like disruption of consensus organizations: II. The WoT works by reducing the unknowns problem.i It allows the user - any user - to confidently identify the sources of information, both in the negative and in the positive. That is to say, if sources of information exist, the user may by the WoT find them, and safely assume that should no sources of information be thus found, no sources of information in fact exist. It further allows the user to judge the quality, reliability and precision of said sources, and this independent both of the direct source and of the counterparty he's examining. His opinion on whether Ethereum will survive his "attack" (and remember he also did the Mt.Gox attack): Quote from: TheCon The whole of ETH and DAO was a con to start with. Bunch of rich btc invectors wanted a new play toy. Don't worry folks the price will shoot back up because no one cares if there is security risks or a Ponzi that will never be used by ordinary citizens DAO is a casino that just got robbed buy like all casinos they never fall because of human greed. That [bolded] part is right. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Minecache on June 21, 2016, 01:55:36 PM Gud to see AA backing ETH. He is a very eloquent, smart gentleman and one of the best brains in the crypto-lands. So very reassuring for all that he's an ETH hodler.
Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 02:09:03 PM Gud to see AA backing ETH. He is a very eloquent, smart inebriation and one of the best trips in the crypto-lands. So very reassuring for all that he's an ETH hodler. Alcoholics Anonymous is backing mETH? What a surprise (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmCYaZFjwtM#t=502). Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 02:14:06 PM The "attacker" wrote: ... Nevertheless, Bitcoin (no, not "cryptocurrencies", there is not nor can ever be such a thing as "cryptocurrencies" (http://trilema.com/2014/the-woes-of-altcoin-or-why-there-is-no-such-thing-as-cryptocurrencies/)) has put an end to all that. So it dun work no more. Regarding the linked blog article that the "attacker" provided in the quote in which he explains that altcoins which employ proof-of-work are impossible to secure, he is not aware of my solution to that dilemma. And that is unprofitable proof-of-work as a matter of protocol forced on payers and changing the proof-of-work algorithm such that (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1361602.msg15111595#msg15111595) ASICs can't obtain orders-of-magnitude improved efficiency over CPUs. There are other details and advantages over the centralized clusterfuck BitCON. If the "attacker" is really serious about changing the world, he should stop talking to Blockstream and start talking to me. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 04:16:35 PM If the "attacker" is successful at winning the majority hashrate to defeat the fork, I expect a dump down quickly to $7 out of the corner of currently closing wedge. Might get a bounce from there as many might perceive this as a victory for a decentralized Ethereum, although then potentially start the lawsuits from all the DAO losers. So a bounce could later be followed with a series of declines, eventually taking it down < $1. But as you say, this might take a while. There are other scenarios though. That could happen. So why would the miners accept the bribe and destroy a long term business. i hope the miners will make a wise decision. Forking Ethereum destroys their long-term prospects. The following linked poll only confirms 23% of the people here are retards (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15300322#msg15300322) (the other 77% might also be retarded but it isn't confirmed by the poll): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516799.0 The rest of us (those who aren't retards) will create a replacement for Ethereum which doesn't break the entire goal of crypto (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15306121#msg15306121). Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 05:35:42 PM Understand that all your altcoins are either centralized clusterfucks (like Ethereum and include all PoS block chains) or they can be destroyed by an attacker very easily:
r0ach is full of shit babbling on about how great Monero is. Monero is insecure. The following is from the attacker who is draining the DAO and who did the Mt.Gox attack: The "attacker" wrote: ... Nevertheless, Bitcoin (no, not "cryptocurrencies", there is not nor can ever be such a thing as "cryptocurrencies" (http://trilema.com/2014/the-woes-of-altcoin-or-why-there-is-no-such-thing-as-cryptocurrencies/)) has put an end to all that. So it dun work no more. Regarding the linked blog article that the "attacker" provided in the quote in which he explains that altcoins which employ proof-of-work are impossible to secure... This difficulty attack requires a much higher percentage of the hashpower than a 51% attack. The article does make a valid point. If a coin uses the same mining algorithm as an "ASIC Goliath coin" that has gone through more than one generation of ASICs, then it can be attacked using the now obsolete first generation ASICs from "ASIC Goliath coin" that would be otherwise worthless junk. The example of Dogecoin in the article would only work if Litecoin goes through more than one generation of ASICs and Dogecoin were not merged mined with Litecoin. Extrapolating this attack to Monero fails because: 1) Monero uses CryptoNight not SHA 256, Ethash, Scrypt etc. 3) CryptoNight is ASIC resistant. There are no ASICs for CryptoNight let alone multiple generations of ASICs 2) Monero has by far the greatest hashrate of all the CryptoNight coins. Incorrect. The point is that no matter what proof-of-work algorithm an altcoin employs, those who are protecting Bitcoin will rent enough mining hash rate to fuck your coin forever. They only have to rent it for a short period of time, and your difficulty will be so high that it will never produce a block again. And all the money in the chain will be unspendable for a very, very, very long time. The "attacker" has the resources to do that to any proof-of-work altcoin which doesn't have the level of hashrate of Bitcoin. Of course the altcoin can then manually reset the difficulty lower using a fork, but then the attacker can repeat again. It will quickly become clear that the altcoin is fucked. If Monero starts to approach $1 billion market cap (or perhaps much less if the liquidity is very high, which it is for Monero), this attacker will destroy Monero and profit by shorting. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: NattyLiteCoin on June 21, 2016, 06:11:24 PM If anyone that's computer savvy (looks at imnotback) wants to implement the code from goldyloxx and make some coin, ill fund the project😀 Hit me up on PM!
AA loves crypto, I listen to him a lot and have huge respect for him. He cemented my love for this thing years ago. I think he's internally mortified by this event as it's the second biggest black eye in the history of crypto. he's idyllic, so he needs to be bullish on the only other crypto that eclipsed a 1B dollar market cap. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 06:37:07 PM Incorrect. The point is that no matter what proof-of-work algorithm an altcoin employs, those who are protecting Bitcoin will rent enough mining hash rate to fuck your coin forever. They only have to rent it for a short period of time, and your difficulty will be so high that it will never produce a block again. And all the money in the chain will be unspendable for a very, very, very long time. If you are talking about Monero the difficulty retargets at every block, such attack is not possible. Cryptonight isn't very ASIC-friendly so you'll have to spend in real GPUs and CPUs to attack. Incorrect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15308897#msg15308897). If Monero starts to approach $1 billion market cap (or perhaps much less if the liquidity is very high, which it is for Monero), this attacker will destroy Monero and profit by shorting. Same logic could be applied at Bitcoin if the bankers decide to kill it as they are the "threatened group" and the only ones with enough resources to mount any kind of network attack. Incorrect again. Try again to read the "attacker's" blog article. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 06:49:22 PM You are not showing me how someone attacking will make impossible to produce Monero blocks again, also did you just quoted yourself as the true? lol The "attacker's" blog is interesting but he is not god nor the bankers. It is futile to repeat the logic I already linked you to. I can't argue with someone who doesn't comprehend math. Sorry. You'll just have to live in your fantasy world where you think you are correct. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 06:56:30 PM The DAO "attacker" has responded to me:
http://trilema.com/2014/the-woes-of-altcoin-or-why-there-is-no-such-thing-as-cryptocurrencies/#comment-117673 It seems 20% of the miners in the ethpool.org do not agree with that. They do not think taking 4% etherum out of circulation is a good idea. http://ethpool.org/stats/votes The "attacker" is winning. That was much less than 20% when I looked it a few hours ago. Nobody in the DAO will ever get their tokens back. Checkmate. The "attacker" (aka noble crypto baron) has gained another 15% of support, now at 35% who won't vote for the fork. The baron will win. It is an economic certainty. Money talks, BS walks. This bullshit about Ethereum will die if The DAO holders lose their funds is FUD. Ethereum will die if you fork it. Don't make the mistake of investing with retarded crowds, as you'll end up bankrupt and retarded. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Minecache on June 21, 2016, 08:43:02 PM If the "attacker" is successful at winning the majority hashrate to defeat the fork, I expect a dump down quickly to $7 out of the corner of currently closing wedge. Might get a bounce from there as many might perceive this as a victory for a decentralized Ethereum, although then potentially start the lawsuits from all the DAO losers. So a bounce could later be followed with a series of declines, eventually taking it down < $1. But as you say, this might take a while. There are other scenarios though. That could happen. So why would the miners accept the bribe and destroy a long term business. i hope the miners will make a wise decision. Forking Ethereum destroys their long-term prospects. The following linked poll only confirms 23% of the people here are retards (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15300322#msg15300322) (the other 77% might also be retarded but it isn't confirmed by the poll): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516799.0 The rest of us (those who aren't retards) will create a replacement for Ethereum which doesn't break the entire goal of crypto (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15306121#msg15306121). Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 21, 2016, 10:02:39 PM I'll be going quiet.
I just have one more thing to say at this time. No forks! Charles, I don't think you sufficiently emphasized Bruce Fenton's points (https://medium.com/@brucefenton/its-better-to-lose-your-investment-than-lose-your-blockchain-2907a59d5a40). You provided a link that seems lost in a sea of the mix of historical storytelling with a smidgen of your self-aggrandizing verbiage, so I doubt most readers even read what Bruce wrote. Crypto is Not Politics I keep reading arguments about how The Will of The People (http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984) should decide. And how this is the only fair and equitable way. And I am here to say this is 100% retarded bullshit and any one who repeats it (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzCGRtGyxvY#t=536) (and nonchalantly dismisses this! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbT-mKBU6bo#t=444)), is retarded. What distinguishes the intention of Satoshi's block chain invention from the world we had before it, is that it eliminates politics. The technical reason is because due to the Nash equilibrium, then no one (not even mining nodes) have any fucking control. If we destroy the Nash equilibrium with a 51% attack (aka fork) by not honoring the decentralized protocol, then we fall into a no-man's land of ambiguous interpretation and the brutality of the majority (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15300305#msg15300305). It is as simple as that. Either we choose to honor the code and protocol, or we go back to the depressing clusterfucked world we have before Satoshi. Now the other problem is that BitCON is also becoming centralized because of economies-of-scale in mining. We haven't yet perfected Satoshi's invention. But that should not deter us from our ideals. If you support forks, you violate everything Satoshi tried to do for the world. No forks! No Blockstream forks either! Offer proof-of-burn if you want to propose new features on a new block chain, so that people are autonomous with their money. And any arguments about empathy and intent in contract law are up against moral hazard which leads to the aforementioned clusterfuck of brutality. Don't reward retarded speculators for not doing due diligence and their derelict incapable developer idols, because they carry the mental affliction of those who want the clusterfucked world that existed prior to Satoshi's invention. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: AlexGR on June 22, 2016, 01:28:42 AM If you are talking about Monero the difficulty retargets at every block, such attack is not possible. Cryptonight isn't very ASIC-friendly so you'll have to spend in real GPUs and CPUs to attack. Renting cpu power shouldn't be a problem. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: smooth on June 22, 2016, 01:45:37 AM If you are talking about Monero the difficulty retargets at every block, such attack is not possible. Cryptonight isn't very ASIC-friendly so you'll have to spend in real GPUs and CPUs to attack. Renting cpu power shouldn't be a problem. It enormous quantities it is. I did some estimates here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15312985#msg15312985 Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 22, 2016, 01:47:15 AM The reason the ETH price rose is because the attacker fucked up by not entirely draining the DAO when he had the chance, and a white hat attack has instead drained the remaining tokens of the DAO into child split contracts which are controlled by whales who promise to not only perform a refund to DAO investors, but also try to infiltrate the attacker's child split contracts to disrupt his ability to cash out: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4p7mhc/update_on_the_white_hat_attack/ So we can see on the chart in my prior post that the price was about to drop like a rock as expected, but the white attack had started just in time to prevent the price drop. I support the white hat attack, as it adheres to the code. This is a much better solution than forking. Unfortunately this incident revealed the true attitudes of Vitalik and Gavid Wood, in that they don't respect decentralization. For Ethereum to be respected again, those two need to be banished from any leadership roles. Edit: the attacker's website appears to be under attack by someone. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 22, 2016, 03:21:44 AM The question in my mind is will this prevent the fork proposed by the devs of Ethereum? They may still need a soft fork to steal the attacker's 3.5M ETH: Quote from: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4p7mhc/update_on_the_white_hat_attack/d4iplv9 This is being heavily debated, so keep in mind this is my opinion only. Roughly speaking, yes. A soft fork with a clever one way whitelisting mechanism + a draconian accounting system (which the Robin group has already mostly done) could recover nearly or up to 100% of the DAO funds (over many, many months of course). That said, a hard fork still stays (IMHO) the simplest, fastest , safest way forward, in the sense that both the soft and hard fork share many of the same attributes (they both require a code upgrade, and the 'hard fork' only affects the relevant transactions). So one wonders the utility of going through all the trouble and risk when the application is nearly identical and it could be all over in the course of a couple of weeks. I reserve the right to change my opinion on this of course, as I said, many different approaches are being debated at the moment ;) Thus they establish the precedent of whitelists, blacklists and 666 brutality of the majority consensus (which we know is always ultimately a power vacuum controlled by TPTB). Vitalik and Wood both showed their true colors as being against the ideals of decentralization and trustless block chain. Did you see this slide Wood put up denying the importance of decentralization: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbT-mKBU6bo#t=444 http://oi65.tinypic.com/25i7za0.jpg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbT-mKBU6bo#t=444) Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 22, 2016, 11:04:28 AM Since the start of this thread, my stance remains that Ethereum has its market and if their market wants forks, then so it is.
And that we who disagree with that, and disagree with the hype marketing, then we should compete, not complain. I wrote that "Crypto is Not Politics" post not to tell them what to do, but to tell people what I would do and to give others the opportunity to consider my logic. It should not be construed as an attempt to try to force Ethereum and its supporters to change their minds. My point about Vitalk and Wood is not that I expect the Ethereum community to demote them (and I expect possibly the opposite post-DAO with them being lifted on even higher pedestals), rather to say that we should want to create a competitor which doesn't have personalities that serve as idols and CEOs of the ecosystem. And of course we hopefully also want to create a competitor with technology that isn't FAIL. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: btcxyzzz on June 22, 2016, 11:12:31 AM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS Someday... you will realize how pathetic you are. Please don't kill yourself then, everybody's got the right to second chance. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: funkenstein on June 22, 2016, 01:14:46 PM Incorrect. The point is that no matter what proof-of-work algorithm an altcoin employs, those who are protecting Bitcoin will rent enough mining hash rate to fuck your coin forever. They only have to rent it for a short period of time, and your difficulty will be so high that it will never produce a block again. And all the money in the chain will be unspendable for a very, very, very long time. The "attacker" has the resources to do that to any proof-of-work altcoin which doesn't have the level of hashrate of Bitcoin. Of course the altcoin can then manually reset the difficulty lower using a fork, but then the attacker can repeat again. It will quickly become clear that the altcoin is fucked. If Monero starts to approach $1 billion market cap (or perhaps much less if the liquidity is very high, which it is for Monero), this attacker will destroy Monero and profit by shorting. Dude you need to read tardlema a little longer before reposting the derpage here. (I've been reading for years as you can tell by my fluent orcish). Otherwise, go ahead and rent some SHA256 asics and attack litecoin and monero with them. I'll wait. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 22, 2016, 02:50:54 PM Readers please note that I don't have anything against Monero as an open source experiment in crypto-currency. I support their experimentation. I don't like (bordering on hate although I don't allow myself be consumed by hate) the community of Monero. And I don't support when someone writes that Monero is the only altcoin that is serious or worthy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520564.msg15298455#msg15298455). They have not yet earned that, and if ever they do earn that, they won't need to state it because such truths are self-evident. There is something foul smell in the community of Monero. I'd rather not try to explain what that smell is, as others have already explored that. Ethereum has its idolizing fanboiz and Monero has its delusion-of-superiority, pack-dog-attacking bagboiz. Something like that. ... Incorrect. The point is that no matter what proof-of-work algorithm an altcoin employs, those who are protecting Bitcoin will rent enough mining hash rate to fuck your coin forever. They only have to rent it for a short period of time, and your difficulty will be so high that it will never produce a block again. And all the money in the chain will be unspendable for a very, very, very long time. The "attacker" has the resources to do that to any proof-of-work altcoin which doesn't have the level of hashrate of Bitcoin. Of course the altcoin can then manually reset the difficulty lower using a fork, but then the attacker can repeat again. It will quickly become clear that the altcoin is fucked. If Monero starts to approach $1 billion market cap (or perhaps much less if the liquidity is very high, which it is for Monero), this attacker will destroy Monero and profit by shorting. Dude you need to read tardlema a little longer before reposting the derpage here. (I've been reading for years as you can tell by my fluent orcish). Otherwise, go ahead and rent some SHA256 asics and attack litecoin and monero with them. I'll wait. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15316487#msg15316487 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15316642#msg15316642 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15314867#msg15314867 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15313262#msg15313262 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15313922#msg15313922 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15313993#msg15313993 Four pages of shred, just to come to the conclusion that yes indeed altcoins with $million mcaps and declining block rewards, are probably insecure against an adversary with the resources of a billionaire, or more so when their hashrate has so declined already. It shouldn't require 4 pages of bagging, to be intellectually honest and cordial and arrive at an amicable understanding that yes indeed altcoins need to be able to gain millions of users as Bitcoin has, so they become secure against all hashrate attacks. Then again Bitcoin has the subsequent problem which is then how do you stop the mining from becoming centralized control as the adoption scales up. No non-vaporware block chain has yet solved this conundrum. So again instead of attacking me (which is not an accomplishment), how about you just get in touch with reality, roll up your sleeves, get to work, and stop pumping your shitcoin down everyone's throat. I realize you Munderotards are jealous with Ethereum and others making 100X gains, and you need to find some bagholders to dump your bags on, but taking your frustration out on me is not an accomplishment. Really, slaying AnonyMint is not worth even a single fuck. Find a more productive vocation. (in short, STFU Munderotard*) *Munderotard noun Often confused with a decentralized crypto-currency, it rather refers to a constituent in the community of bagholders and bagboiz whose sole vocation in life is to Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 22, 2016, 04:48:38 PM Readers please note that I don't have anything against Monero as an open source experiment in crypto-currency. I support their experimentation. I don't like (bordering on hate although I don't allow myself be consumed by hate) the community of Monero. And I don't support when someone writes that Monero is the only altcoin that is serious or worthy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520564.msg15298455#msg15298455). They have not yet earned that, and if ever they do earn that, they won't need to state it because such truths are self-evident. There is something foul smell in the community of Monero. I'd rather not try to explain what that smell is, as others have already explored that. Ethereum has its idolizing fanboiz and Monero has its delusion-of-superiority, pack-dog-attacking bagboiz. Something like that. I am dreaming of a community that are idealistic and imaginative as are the supporters of Ethereum. I'm wishing for a community that is well grounded in realism and does their due diligence and asks challenging questions. Yet who are not rude, disrespectful, flippant, nor wasting their time fighting back those who attack our project in other threads. I am dreaming of a community that does not idolize any of its developers. I am dreaming of a community that is all about production and helping to get things done. And not talking about (nor even looking at!) the price or the market cap. I am dreaming of solving the problems of Bitcoin and Ethereum. I am dreaming of doing this without hype, and instead methodical development. I am dreaming of a meritocracy and an enjoyable work environment. I am dreaming of success. I think you guys are lurking out there. I hope I will not be wrong in my assumption. Some munderotard will quote me: Quote I am dreaming... I am dreaming... I am dreaming... I am dreaming... Edit: this post was not intended to pretend there might not already be communities in the altcoin ecosystem that have the above qualities. They may already exist. Some would probably "offer" (I accidentally wrote "throw up" but caught my Freudian slip) the names, DASH, VCASH, NEM, SHADOWCASH, etc.. Maybe so, although I might have a quibble on a few points for each of those. Any way, I am writing above about the community I would want. I also want to offer my realization that it is highly discombobulating to ponder the level of conspiracy, fraud, hate, manipulation, etc.. in our CC ecosystems (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1413819.msg15314020#msg15314020). I can't even wrap my mind around what the reality really is. There are so many competing interests and there is no way to discern what/which people are hiding and what they pretending. I've decided to stop even trying to comprehend it. I think all we can do is create something and enjoy our work. The rest will work itself out. Some here have the vocation of speculator and all they typically care about is a good pump or dump. That is not my vocation. I can't relate to them. Some of them apparently earn a lot of $, but that isn't a sufficient motivation for me to change my vocation. I am creator. A programmer. A technologist. Etc.. I am not an arbitrage seeker. I'll leave that vocation to others and not dilute my capabilities by trying to understand them. OP may actually be onto something: http://btcbase.org/log/2016-06-22#1486943 I found some interesting musing on Ethereum vulnerabilities at that link but no mention of Monero or XMR. What did I miss? Nothing, ETH is garbage. I can't say Monero doesn't have vulnerabilities but they are not in the same fashion as ETH obscurity-by-complexity model. Do you believe in conspiracies? I'll tell what I think about Ethereum since I watched it from the beginning, its a plot from part of the Bitcoin elite, the same that funded and nurtured with their owned outlets, that dominates the mainstream and directs the narrative naming the "villains" and whom the sheep should listen to and that promotes that bootleg of fungible currency named Zcash. Ethereum was created to slaughter as many idiot sheeps as they can, it may look like it has a purpose and utility but if you take enough time to examine it you'll find its all smoke and mirrors, some day a bitcoin aristocrat will look at the pile of smoking ruins that was ethereum and at the hundreds of thousands of USD lost and say: "oh well it was a fun experiment", turn away and laugh, while hundreds of sheep will be look at their empty pockets and wondering what happened, because thats what they like to do and thats why true innovative currencies like Monero is being ignored by the same part of the Bitcoin elite. http://btcbase.org/log/2016-06-22#1486939 That has always been my assumption as well. I figured that is why some geekcool, technobabbling, spacedout WoW teenager running it was a perfect fit. And remember Peter Thiel awarded $100,000 scholarship to Vitalik, at the early juncture. Note the ideas from Ethereum may not be entirely garbage. I originally thought they were, but I'm leaning otherwise now. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 22, 2016, 05:52:51 PM Yes the attacker is on the move again right now. He donated some ether into the DAO and joined both whitehat splits. We drained the ETH he donated as fast as we could but he got what he wanted. An attacker in now part of split 78 and he can now do the split attack again in that white hat DAOs. Analogous to the unbounded recursion of Turing-complete scripting, the splitting can be recursed. Are we surprised. Until it's fixed. Surprised this has to be repeated. Looks like the only fix is going to be a fork. If you fork it, some of us will no longer be willing to support Ethereum and we will actively develop a competing project. I don't want to get into a debate about first mover, size of market, etc.. I understand already the points you would make. I am just making you aware that forking, will also fork your supporters. Please be aware of the cost. Re: Why does no one use the BitShares Exchange DEX? MP nixes DEX for real-time trading: http://trilema.com/2013/why-i-nixed-p2p-colored-coins-and-all-that-jazz/ He implies that if we prove him wrong, then he can just take the value for himself. But if the system is truly decentralized, he can't take the value and no one can. Who is correct? MP or the future of DEX? I'll say something about this with code. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: funkenstein on June 22, 2016, 08:05:58 PM ... Incorrect. The point is that no matter what proof-of-work algorithm an altcoin employs, those who are protecting Bitcoin will rent enough mining hash rate to fuck your coin forever. They only have to rent it for a short period of time, and your difficulty will be so high that it will never produce a block again. And all the money in the chain will be unspendable for a very, very, very long time. The "attacker" has the resources to do that to any proof-of-work altcoin which doesn't have the level of hashrate of Bitcoin. Of course the altcoin can then manually reset the difficulty lower using a fork, but then the attacker can repeat again. It will quickly become clear that the altcoin is fucked. If Monero starts to approach $1 billion market cap (or perhaps much less if the liquidity is very high, which it is for Monero), this attacker will destroy Monero and profit by shorting. Dude you need to read tardlema a little longer before reposting the derpage here. (I've been reading for years as you can tell by my fluent orcish). Otherwise, go ahead and rent some SHA256 asics and attack litecoin and monero with them. I'll wait. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15316487#msg15316487 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15316642#msg15316642 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15314867#msg15314867 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15313262#msg15313262 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15313922#msg15313922 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520691.msg15313993#msg15313993 Hmm, i guess I didn't make my point clear, sorry. My point was that your previously linked article (why there are no such thing as cryptocurrenciies) assumed that hashpower is fungible across altcoin networks when in fact it isn't. I only listed the coins as examples of coins secured with different hash functions, which are not mineable with SHA256 hardware. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 22, 2016, 08:20:37 PM Hmm, i guess I didn't make my point clear, sorry. My point was that your previously linked article (why there are no such thing as cryptocurrenciies) assumed that hashpower is fungible across altcoin networks when in fact it isn't. I only listed the coins as examples of coins secured with different hash functions, which are not mineable with SHA256 hardware. I wasn't aware that the original source was making that presumption (well I vaguely remember an allusion to Bitcoin copy coins). It makes sense though, as it is a lot more practical to attack with ASICs you already have. But the reason I don't think the original source means what you think it means, is because the author linked to that article again in the recent discussion of his DAO hack. So it seems he thinks it is still applicable to relevant altcoins (i.e. worth even attacking), of which none that I know of use SHA256. Any way, it is sometimes difficult to know what that author thinks because he is cryptic. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 22, 2016, 09:14:11 PM How is Andreas fornicating with his "overtaking the world" memes the past few hours?
If they had only taken the -33% haircut instead of doubling-down on self-belief. But the class action lawsuits were likely perceived to be on the horizon. Or if they had never launched this delusional smart contakes in the first place. Aha, Ethereum core BCT promoter confirms the irrefutable power of unstoppable organization: Read an article today that said at the time of the MtGox BTC heist had the attackers been known or the address the millions in Bitcoin disappeared to a fork would have been considered. Apparently over 6 propel committed suicide over MtGox. Now imagine the blood on your BTC Spoetniktard goon shill hands if the ETH community doesn't do what it votes for. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 26, 2016, 05:01:59 PM Seems there is a lot of confusion about why Ethereum's price doesn't go down when in a free market it should:
To be honest here, I have no idea how ETH isn't collapsing as people move their ETH to BTC or fiat or gold or whatever. I mean, how come people has still thousands of BTC on the ETH market? I have no idea beyond thinking marketing is a very powerful thing to raise the price of an asset. I mean fuck, who believes in ETH long term after Vitalik Buterin told exchanges to stop trading to stop panic selling? I think this fact alone makes ETH something you can't trust. Im waiting for Rootstock to see if it can replace ETH, but for now I would stay cautious with smart contracts stuff. Even the DAO attacker explains ETH is not dropping because buying demand is printed out-of-thin-air by the insiders employing margin trading with the ETH they probably deceptively obtained by buying the ICO from themselves. Review the following linked posts for the details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1413819.msg15343686#msg15343686 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1413819.msg15363783#msg15363783 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1526067.msg15362605#msg15362605 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1413819.msg15364284#msg15364284 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1526614.msg15365639#msg15365639 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1526990.msg15364629#msg15364629 Im waiting for Rootstock to see if it can replace ETH, but for now I would stay cautious with smart contracts stuff. RootStock is technologically flawed, because Sidechains can't be secure. Review the following linked posts for the details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15284907#msg15284907 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15286570#msg15286570 CounterParty is technologically flawed, because Bitcoin's block chain can't secure what it doesn't validate. Review the following linked post for the details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1518508.msg15283868#msg15283868 Someone please ask Andreas if he wants to continue promoting scams: apparently this isn't something to argue. for if one of these token get to be on the market with high value. it wouldn't be scam anymore. You think ETH is not a scam any more as the insiders allegedly continue to pump it using margin traded creation of demand out-of-thin-air so that at the end bag holders will be holding empty bags worth 0 and the insiders will have siphoned off all the BTC you all invested. With sufficient ignorance of you speculators, our crypto ecosystem will become nothing but a criminal enterprise. Thank you. Edit: another confirmation of my stance on CounterParty and RootStock: Counterparty and RootStock are two smart-contract projects building on top of bitcoin this way. But, Counterparty bundles its state (how much the guest owes you, etc) into bitcoin transactions, which weren’t designed for this purpose. This also limits Counterparty transactions to bitcoin’s 10-minute block time, rather than ethereum’s 15-second one. Meanwhile, RootStock is far behind ethereum in development, arguably falling further behind every day, and involves some technical challenges (how to reliably transfer coins between the bitcoin blockchain and RootStock blockchain) that don’t appear to be fully worked out yet. In both cases, you’re now dependent on two separate networks and technologies: bitcoin, and Counterparty or RootStock. XCP is not the only smart contract for bitcoin rootstock and i think maidsafe I explained a few posts above that XCP is a flawed (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1504601.msg15143765#msg15143765). RootStock doesn't have that same flaw, because it is its own side-chain and can verify every transaction. But side-chains have other problems and I expect them to be a clusterfuck. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: funkenstein on June 27, 2016, 08:34:53 AM Any way, it is sometimes difficult to know what that author thinks because he is cryptic. The word you are looking for is "senile". Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Fasunathan on June 27, 2016, 09:54:59 AM iamnotback, do you mean all the smart contract platforms are flawed? Is there a way to rectify the problems?
Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: BTCwriter on June 27, 2016, 09:58:02 AM Ethereum is done.
Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 27, 2016, 07:20:51 PM iamnotback, do you mean all the smart contract platforms are flawed? Is there a way to rectify the problems? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15306066#msg15306066 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15273183#msg15273183 So I think some good can come out of doing more with block chains, but the exact form is going to require more careful work and research. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Bokelka on June 27, 2016, 07:26:05 PM iamnotback, do you mean all the smart contract platforms are flawed? Is there a way to rectify the problems? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15306066#msg15306066 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15273183#msg15273183 So I think some good can come out of doing more with block chains, but the exact form is going to require more careful work and research. I hope the Ethereum developers will notice your thoughts and give them a careful consideration to improve it. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 28, 2016, 12:13:06 AM Written just before The DAO attack:
So the new normal is write 2080 lines of code (less code than I write in a week) and raise $168 million or don't write any code and use someone else's code and raise $15 million: Just stay away if you're not invested or slowly sell them without upsetting the price if you're holding them. You are missing the opportunity to invest in other more profitable prospects. Looking at github they have been working on these projects but without any solid results yet. So it might better to wait until they have something to show for and check of their assets are worth to invest in. Such as Waves which apparently raised $15 million for vaporware and selling a crowdsale pitching IOHK's open source code (and which jl777 was said to be advisor): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1504381.msg15138357#msg15138357 And Lisk which raised $10 million apparently still has problems in the functioning of the wallet: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1504381.msg15139560#msg15139560 Or The DAO which raised $168 million with only 2080 lines of sol code: https://github.com/slockit/DAO Seems these days it is better to be good at marketing and selling ideas than actual code that is stable and ready for the launch. And another on this topic: Copy-cat ICO Schemes Unleashed: You call stayed silent on that and we seen an explosion of copy cat ICO schemes unleashed.. And we seen the greedy profiteer dregs go along with it all so they could profit off them all. When i asked the dev of BlockNET why he needed a million dollars in Bitcoin He told me word for word, "to ensure it's a success" Crypto-Minimum Wage Increase ? When i started this coin devs would work on projects for FREE.. mostly. Satoshi did not put his hand out and say i want a MILLION DOLLARS first before i release anything.. It is true that the ICOs aren't really providing any funding for development that matters. It is just the insiders cashing out. That being said, no top notch s/w developer will work on a risky project that might net him $0, if he can't at least generate $250,000 per year of effort. And that is really on the low end since most of them can make that much (and more with stock options) in a job in silicon valley. For example, I have been doing research and basically "working" in crypto since 2013. If I launched a project, I would expect to recover those years of investment. But I also wouldn't waste all the funds on nonsense development of pie-in-the-sky fantasies. But any way, I am not going to ask anyone to give me an ICO money. Mined distribution is clearly the fair way to launch a coin. But just keep in mind if the developer is receivng a $million for years of effort, it is really just about break even, if he is a top developer. Please be respectful of the opportunity cost of top developers. Also even the developers have a right to seek higher ROI. Speculators invest and risk to get a big payoff. When developers invest their time/effort and risk to get a big payoff, this is capitalism. Having said that, afaik most of the developers of altcoins are not top developers. Afaics, most of them have nearly no experience as employed software developers before their work in crypto. This is excluding the Bitcoin core devs of course. There are experienced developers in the Bitcoin ecosystem. The DAO is only 2080 lines of source code. And it can never be "fixed" or "finished" any more than it already is, because it is a flawed concept (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15150806#msg15150806) and I have difficulty believing Tual doesn't realize it.. It probably wasn't intended to grow into something great. It was probably a quickie rush to latch on to the euphoria about ETH and so those looking to cash out of ETH at the double-top at $15, had another option The DAO. It was probably a timing and marketing product decision and not an engineering or long-range focus. I could understand your criticism of something like that. But it is a free market and you can't stop them. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on June 28, 2016, 10:08:01 PM Lol, the Ethereum soft fork has a DoS attack vulnerability:
https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/06/28/security-alert-dos-vulnerability-in-the-soft-fork/ http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/06/28/ethereum-soft-fork-dos-vector/ This all-star programming team is proving to be not so worthy. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: parmatiya on July 01, 2016, 11:19:45 AM Lol, the Ethereum soft fork has a DoS attack vulnerability: https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/06/28/security-alert-dos-vulnerability-in-the-soft-fork/ http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/06/28/ethereum-soft-fork-dos-vector/ This all-star programming team is proving to be not so worthy. Are you interested in joining their team? Maybe you can make the team work better and produce better programs. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: a fool and his money ... on July 01, 2016, 12:18:18 PM Antonopulous has become a shitcoin pumper who abuses his reputation to pump various shitcoins. I have no idea why he would be relevant.
"Guineapigs will be millionaires" smh Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: iamnotback on July 02, 2016, 01:33:38 AM Antonopulous has become a shitcoin pumper who abuses his reputation to pump various shitcoins. I have no idea why he would be relevant. "Guineapigs will be millionaires" smh Interesting perspective. Thanks. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: BitUsher on July 02, 2016, 08:57:28 AM https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/the-dao-was-not-hacked-mt-gox-1466451376
Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Bokelka on July 02, 2016, 12:35:56 PM Antonopulous has become a shitcoin pumper who abuses his reputation to pump various shitcoins. I have no idea why he would be relevant. "Guineapigs will be millionaires" smh The bitcoin was "shitcoin" before, you have to use 10000 bitcoins to just buy one pizza. It is difficult to predict. Title: Re: Andreas M. Antonopoulos is "bullish on Ethereum" Post by: Diego24 on January 19, 2018, 04:16:42 PM Lol! He is one of the small dicked IDIOTS who bought Ethereum, and now he hopes people will buy his CRAP :D Today it is 19/01/2018. Ethereum is +1000$. You must feel like a complete retard now for being so completely wrong.ETHEREUM IS FINISHED Lost all of its credibility Only valuable among IDIOTS |
