Bitcoin Forum

A poll so vote ;)

It's been a LONG time coming but i have lost almost all interest in Altcoins (and even Bitcoin)
Don't be surprised if i end up wandering off at some point people.

The thing is i have stopped trading for profit probably 2 years ago roughly.
I also quit looking at the ANN section around the same time.
I quit paying attention to the tech behind coins too.

I wouldn't call this a farewell topic but in a way i'm already gone.
At this point how the world of Altcoins has evolved has left me behind.
(for example) The emergence of ICO's is not something i want any part of.

The days of new coins like Prime Coin or Grid Coin coming out seem to be gone.
Sure there is different coins out but i don't see them as pushing in the right direction.

So what's left for me in crypto ?
A whole lot of FUD and Altcoin history lessons for Noobs ?
I'd say that is covered here by others LOL

It is what it is.
If there is some coin i criticize a lot (not naming names) others will do it too anyway.
Because what you see is what you get.. it's all there right in the open.

I've known my energy has been wasted here for the most part for a LONG time.
I have in time felt less motivated to keep posting here on the forum about Altcoins.
Exposing scams ? Well there is too many to keep up with and a lot of people don't care either.
They don't care because they are hell bent on showing up here to make Altcoin ROI's
..off anything that pays !

And help make a new better coin ?
I've had idea but no matter what i also see a bad way to exploit the coin too.
I have not seen or thought of a new coin system that would not be gamed / exploited like all the others.

So..
Anyone else feel the same way (i expect the noobs to chant optimism of course)

Special Note:
The Ethereum's and Monero's that have been a favorite of mine to "FUD" as you call it..
Will succeed or fail all on their own.
I have criticized (FUD'd) projects because i felt they deserved it.
If anything i hope they learned a lesson and were listening.
Take the criticism and use it to your advantage and move forward in a constructive direction.

Yup it's another long rant and Poll from Spoetnik ;)
There won't be many more i think.

Nope not a self-modded topic either.. say what ever the hell you want  ;D

---

EDIT:

The bottom line is it hit me Altcoins have no relation to my real actual life.
And i don't see that changing any time soon either.

Voted for a No.

I agree that ICO's are bad, but I can just skip them if I want. I also agree that there are so many scam coins, but I can skip them too.

I believe there are still a few good coins that will finally succeed. So I'm not losing interest. It's just my personal opinion. In real world there are lots of scams you can see everyday as well.

no, it's still profitable if you can catch the right coin at the right time, i don't do trading in altcoin, i mean i don't buy low and sell high, i just buy cheap coin and wait for the pump, i dump and move ont he next one, some times it go bad but it can happen nothing you can do about it, i also do mining with those new altcoin, it help me have more coins to dump, i see there is still a good profit in the altcoin scene, many people are not aware of this place, or simply ignore it, until the game last i'm going to milk it until the end

I am not losing interest because of profits.
I have for a long time because crypto stuff Altcoins etc have no meaning to my real life.
When i leave my computer it has no effect on my life at all.
I see and hear nothing about it until i deliberately come back here.
So i can read a million topics on what coin we all should jump to now for.. profits.

Maybe i could believe in the whole "one day" thing if there was real progress made.
But when i leave my PC there is no sign of Altcoins anywhere.
Best i can tell the prospects of that ever happening keeps getting worse.
What ? Should i cling to the hope some ANON coin gets heavy Dark Market usage ?
Why should i care ? It's *NOT like i plan on buying guns & crack on silk road.
And since the whole little profiteer bullshit bores me what the fuck am i left with ?

I'd say the Poll results should tell me how many people there are here like me.
People who seem genuinely concerned about adoption etc.

If all this has amounted to nothing but a massive pyramid scheme of coin hopping for ROI's.
Then i just can't be bothered.. sorry and good luck (you are going to need it with looming legal issues)

i have not lost interest in anything but my interest has shifted.
i am still very interested in bitcoin with all the shit that is going on with the fee war and the block size debate. i am still a bitcoin hodler

and as far as altcoins go i gave up on looking for anything interesting a long time ago, and now i am only looking for more moneyz :) show me da pumps.

Why would I lose interest, Cryptocurrency is the new money and money makes the world goes round, though the landscape has changed drastically with the coming of ICOs, maybe use are one of the miners that seems short changed by this but the only constant thing in life is change and we need to adapt to the new reality, whether you like it or not ICOs has made it possible to have projects like Golem, Ethereum, ICONOMI, Maidsafe, AUgur, Factom etc all are interesting concept and it worth giving them a chance, though I know some of them will not succeed going forward but some that do is going to bring wealth to investors.

After looking at your profile and see that you have been here since 2013, you have seen the good old days and the bad ones and even at your rank, you have no higher ground to go. Couple with the fact that life itself is a phase and what interest me sometimes 3 years ago, I might no longer find amusing. There is nothing wrong in that... But for me, and quite a number of people who are coming in on a daily basis still believe and will continue to until this phase is over and who knows, it might not be over...

what you talking about is only for bitcoin, i'm also here for adoption like you but only for bitcoin not for scamcoin, this place serve as a bitoin profit for me, and until there are money i can't get tired of it, the only cryptocurrency that can change the world is bitcoin but it need more features and fixes

You are in the "MOUNT STUPID" or "WALL OF WORRY" stage. See the charts I quoted below...

That is what some people said about the Internet after the dot.com crash.

We are merely lacking the killer app for blockchains, just as the Internet (which existed since the 1980s) was lacking the killer app until Tim Berners-Lee released the WWW and the first web browser.

You will regret this tendency to become complacent with the nascent Knowledge Age and decentralization technology which is going take over the global economy:



Remember the greatest failing of the human race is the inability to appreciate the exponential function (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_VpyoAXpA8). Humans don't recognize exponential growth until it is already too late, e.g. on the 29th day of a 30 day growth, the lilies cover 50% of the pond and on the next day 100%.

Those examples of currencies earlier are.. not currencies.
People just sit around and think of new gimmicks to tack onto a block-chain then ICO it.
So your definition of currency and innovation people is well, fucked up LOL

And may i remind you that if you are here bashing "Shitcoins" profiting off them then you are the shitcoin maker and just as bad.. i have been saying that since 2013 LOUD.
What does that mean ? This shit gets worse.. and worse.

I appreciate the optimism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimism_bias) but i think it's slanted and skewed.

I obsess more and more over crypto currency everyday. I obsess over the price of bitcoin, I obsess about which altcoins will take off and compete with bitcoin, I obsess over all the new ICOs and what if any utility they introduce to the crypto economy. Definitely not losing interest.

With 'Fake News' going rampant how can one lost interest in Crypto :o

Yeah seems mostly like that. And maybe that is all we will ever get.

But maybe not.

As the incentive to make money from shitcoins declines, because the dumb money has already been taken and mostly smart money remains, then perhaps the incentive to create something real is increasing.

So I guess your feeling (and poll wants to measure) is if we are burned out yet on shitcoins and giving up from that?

Yes to altcoins, maybe to bitcoin itself.  There's nothing in the altcoin scene except pure gambling and scamming--and that doesn't interest me in the least.

Bitcoin is pissing me off.  I'm currently buying something with bitcoin, and the transaction is stuck in the blockchain.  Would have been so much easier to buy with cash, and that's what I'm doing next time.  It's ridiculous.  And this forum is a cesspool of degenerate retards.

@Shelby
Yeah pretty much agreed.

@Pharmcacist
I agree too and i seen a topic in "Off-Topic" that mentioned there was over 50,000 unconfirmed TX's with BTC.
I thought it was bad in 2013 LOL
Hopefully it will get dealt with and fixed up.. and soon before BTC turns 10 years old. (not that far away)

I have always said i am not against making money.
I am against making money of things that are not constructive.
Admitting to making money off coins you shouldn't has a negative cumulative effect.

Whether i am here in the crypto scene participating or not i do wish the scene well.
It gets a bit old having everyone say "why do you hate altcoins ?"
When all i try and say is i hate the bad ones..

@Shelby
I hope that does happen.
I hope the dumb money gets taken etc.
And i think it will too because there has to be an ever increasing amount of losers to sustain the system.
It's basic simple math.. not everyone can be winners and if you keep gambling ?

Makes me think of Pascal Coin.
What was the point ? Really.. seriously what is the point in rewriting a coin in a new language ?
I think with Pascal the guy failed and decided to make it sort of work then decided to market that as being creative. LOL
It's not like he said i wanted XYZ feature and it was pascal that was NEEDED to fulfill this goal.
If you are astute you can see what the guy was doing.

I dunno.. all i know is it's not a pizza until it comes out of the oven !

@Spoetnik

It is a strategy being used against everyone to end all coins except the ones in the top 5.
By over-saturating the market with Thousands of coins, they diffuse the fact almost every single one of those alts is technologically superior to BTC.

https://www.fastcompany.com/3031364/the-future-of-work/why-having-too-many-choices-is-making-you-unhappy


 8)

You gotta remember when we got in the game we could mine the launch of every coin since there was only a handful and none of this ICO garbage.  Now there are so many launching with different levels of investor (sic) participation its impossible to follow them all.  I think there would be plenty of demand for an altcoin fund or advisory service that researches and recommends or invests in only the most promising alts.  Once the Bitcoin ETF is approved (will be eventually) you know there will be huge demand for such a thing from wall street.  When do you want to start haha.. 

I can see it in the future, where instead of coins looking to get listed on Polo, they are looking to get added to the Altcoin ETF lol

LOL, sure?
Your signature is saying something else :) ...

I rent out my signature, yes.  They pay me for that, but I don't personally like gambling--but that's not what I meant anyway.  I meant that playing around with altcoins, i.e., the buying and selling of them in expectation of profit (speculation) is pure gambling.  Not casino gambling, sure, but it's still way too risky for me.

Same experience.  I fail to see the utility if it isn't to feed institutional players which will take in (or have already taken in) most of it, like gold in the old days. 

Anyone who actually understands the technologies involved would ROTFLMAO when reading the following nonsense:


But the problem is that speculators do not understand the technologies, thus they can become excited by absolute bullshit such as the above.

A blockchain has a top-level hash to record the Merkel tree history of transactions. You can't delete the blockchain history because the UTXO may populate any block in the history. The only way to discard the history is to selectively delete the transaction details (aka pruning) as each UTXO is spent, or to have an account balances design wherein each block restates all the current account balances. But in terms of disk space, both of those methods are equivalent. And an account balances design has some severe deficiencies which I detail my yet unpublished white paper.

When someone such as myself actually produces a project that is very well documented and explained and I come out in videos and explain why the project is not bullshit and why is it big time important, these bullshit shitcoins are going to be sold off in a firesale.

Edit: I just glanced at the PascalCoin whitepaper for the first time, and (as I anticipated above) in the first section it explains it is using an account balances design and an integer account number instead of hash of public key similar to the Graphene (Steem) optimizations. I ridicule this sort of design in my yet unpublished whitepaper. I don't feel like digging up the details from my whitepaper right now, but in any case there is nothing important here. Move on from this shit. (Now some of the PascalCoin holders are going to troll me, sigh)

Bad altcoins are important.   You could say that altcoins are like business ideas, startup ideas.  You need many of them, to have a few good ones emerge from time to time.  If only 'good' ones were allowed to even get some attention, that would be like stopping people from having the right to start a business on an idea.  You'd need some "state-approved licence" to be allowed to start a business: THE way to kill creativity, and to render the entire scene totally corrupt.
Investors know this: if you invest in 10 startups, most probably 9 will fail.  You're simply hoping to catch the 10th one.  But you can't know in advance.  So the 9 bad ones are NEEDED to allow for the 10th to develop.
I would say that it is reassuring that there are many bad coins.  It means that there are possibilities to make a good one. 
What is to be avoided at all price is that we get stuck with old technology (bitcoin) in a monopoly.  Such a monopoly situation is extremely dangerous (as every monopoly situation is).  Crypto can only live if constantly, new coins are created, value changes from one to another, and nothing is permanent.  Only when the rules change all the time, institutional sticky fingers can have no grip on it.
I'm also convinced that the only way to keep decentralized, is to have constant changing of rules and hence, constantly changing of "favorite crypto". 
Most probably this will only partly succeed, as most probably, crypto will evolve in a kind of exponential distribution of market caps.  Bitcoin will most probably stay number 1, but will become totally fiatised and institutionalised and in the end, centralized.  In China, I have the impression it is underway. 
But hopefully, there will be true crypto being invented all the time, and permitting true decentralized and ungrippable interaction "down under". 

i told you to go and check out TEZOS have you done that yet?

Yes. Understand the role of Bitcoin is not retail transactions:


Bitcoin is the reserve currency for unregulated speculation and gambling. That is very important. It isn't going away. And it will only grow. Open your mind a bit.

We absolutely need Bitcoin for when someone such as myself (or someone else similarly capable who is healthy) actually produces an altcoin that can generate significant adoption (i.e. the World Wide Web of blockchains invention), then Bitcoin will serve the critical onramp role that modems served for the WWW. This is network effects and the Second Computer Revolution (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg17911917#msg17911917) (analogous to the First Industrial Revolution of industrial production of raw materials enabling the Second Industrial Revolution of factories).

As I wrote upthread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1798356.msg17928409#msg17928409), we are in the "WALL OF WORRY" stage. Don't become complacent! The nascent decentralization movement will take over the world. Just have a little bit of patience.

Look the 150 - 160 IQ inventor of open source has recently stated (after I prompted him (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1739268.msg17776504#msg17776504)) that he might be interested to come in and work in our ecosystem (http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7348#comment-1804963) (I personally will try to recruit him if I can get healthy and get my project rolling).

I'm not believing any more in the "unregulated" part.  Yes, it will keep the appearances of "unregulated and distributed" but in fact it will be entirely institutionalized behind the doors.  Bitcoin will be (if it isn't already) an institution's crypto.  Of course it will not go away,  but it will not be what you think it is.  It will be like gold.  Mainly manipulated, stored, owned, regulated by central banks.  If it isn't already.  The Chinese gov already has put their hands on the big Chinese exchanges.  I'm sure the big miners are next.  Of course, officially, the gov doesn't own them.  But they tell them what to do.  

The liberating part of crypto was as an intermediate good when exchanging goods and services.  That totally failed.  Bitcoin isn't a currency.  It is, as you say, a reserve currency in shady financial gambling stuff: the kind of thing that pumps value out of people in the hands of a small elite, because the dice are loaded and you don't know it.

Perhaps you missed one of my critically important posts lately explaining why gold is centralized but crypto-currency is not:


Bitcoin can't be regulated without a total order of government in the world. And that isn't coming in the next year. By the time TPTB get their NWO one-world government system cooperation in place, Bitcoin will have already served its role as the onramp to unregulated decentralization technology innovation.

China and others make a lot of noise about regulation, but as you see they all end up caving in and realizing they can't regulate private keys. Even if China monopolizes the mining, they can't blacklist private keys without destroying Bitcoin and forcing a new altcoin to rise to take its place. Bitcoin is far too small (compared the $trillions flow of FX capital flow in China) for China to attempt such a scorched earth policy on mining at this time (and they would likely fail just causing the rest of the world to blacklist China's mining pools or a fork changing the hash causing all China's mining farm investments to become useless overnight).

I used to think that too, and I still think it, in fact.  But I realized that bitcoin is not going to be *regulated* in an open, legal way.  There won't be radical prohibitions on bitcoin.  There will be laws that will make it look like bitcoin is legally accepted "within a certain reasonable legal framework", which is just enough for authorities to intervene against players that annoy them, and let the big crowds flock to bitcoin in a legal, law-abiding way.  But behind the scenes, these deep state agents will in fact *put their hands on the bitcoin market* by owning a lot of it, but mainly, by telling the main (centralized) actors how to behave so that it suits them.   The only thing TPTB are in fact interested in, are pumping value into their way ; if people get a false sense of liberty by playing on an "illegal" (but permitted) gambling site, or by "trading wildly" on an "illegal" (but permitted) exchange, then they are just the kind of meat they need.

However, if ever an evolution happens that brings their controlling scheme into difficulty, they will use the law to hit the actors of that evolution hard, OR to force those actors into their scheme of things.

In other words, they will not fight bitcoin, they will use it against us.


This is why they won't do this in an obvious, visible and abrupt way.  They will OWN bitcoin, instead of fighting it.

Like gold wasn't outlawed, but owned.  Like banking is now owned (banks are now nothing else but privately financed state agencies who have to cooperate or else...).  Bitcoin will be owned, if it isn't already.  We simply won't see it.  Bitcoin's open ledger is also a dream of a source of information, if you can cross it with other information only state agencies can possess.  They don't even need to ask.  For fiat, the bank still has to transmit the data.  With bitcoin, they have it.

Voted NO.

When I look at the history of crypto, there are times when everything seems to be dead, but eventually innovations make their way through and life is on a fast lane again. The revolution is just getting started. 6 years is still a childhood.

That is hand waving. The only way to stop someone who has his own wallet is to blacklist on the blockchain. Now that person can go online and state that his transaction has not be added by any miner after such a long period of time. The community will investigate. The only way to snuff out this exchange of information is to have a total order of totalitarian control on the Internet.

Sorry your fears are unfounded. If ever it happens, then we are already in 1984 and we're all doomed.

You seem to have a doomsday attitude, so I don't think you are likely to be in touch with the reality of what will transpire:


Btw, I have refuted the Singularity in the past. It will never happen.

I don't want to debate it again right now, which is why I didn't respond to the above comment in that thread.

Just put it this way, total orders have never existed in our universe. So the probability of total doomsday is 0.

For machines to become more important than humans from an evolutionary standpoint (which is all that matters actually in terms of species extinction), then they must become alive and that means they must have a bell curve of attributes and have failure. Because without failure, there isn't existence of life (the past and future will collapse into undifferentiated without friction and imperfection).

Infinite entropy can't exist. Kurzweil is a smart idiot.

Not sure who i am replying to here..
But i thought of this reading the last batch of replies.
And talking is encouraging no matter what stance you all have.
THIS = Coindesk - Why We Need All The Altcoins We Can Get (http://www.coindesk.com/need-altcoins-can-get/)

Well..
That is fine & dandy but do we need 1,000 copies of Doge coin all with a different icon / graphics meme associated with it and then have the govt compliant exchanges all add them based on user-demand ?

Like we have never seen such a lawless corrupt heap of bullshit like this in modern times.
I can't think of anything else like this Altcoin stuff that existed before.. that was LAWLESS !
So i keep seeing people pushing the angle here that crypto is about DEFENDING "no laws"
It didn't exist in the first place.. everything has laws.
What happened is the law systems just didn't keep up with this stuff and they were caught off guard.
I don't see Altcoins as an inherently lawless thing that needs to be defended with "freedom to scam"
Crimes were already crimes before this crap was invented.

The idea that Altcoins can remain unregulated / lawless is silly bullshit.
The various pre-existing financial laws that existed before that partially covers crypto in general..

I am saying many of you have this stance on it all that this SHOULD be lawless.
Users such as Dino or Shelby etc chant about the man keeping us down..
They are not trying to screw over the population they are trying to make things better for the public etc.
AML laws were invented to stop good people from honest "investments" ?

Are crypto coins simply about defying law now ?
I did not join crypto to join the rebel crowd here who are after bringing down the govt ..for profit.

As I told you, it is not about *stopping* you.  I used to think that, but they won't try to stop you.  At all.  Unless you piss them off, and then they will simply OBSERVE you, and come after you.  I'm only talking about market manipulation, giving favours (inside knowledge) to their allies, and pumping value out of you (make you buy high, and sell low).


I think that the singularity is unavoidable.  Simply because the random algorithm of evolution is less efficient in improving systems than intelligent design.  Random evolution was the kick-starter because there wasn't any designing intelligence.  But once there is sufficient designing intelligence, it is a superior evolutionary scheme over the random walk.
As we are products of the random walk, we are not easy to design intelligently, we're a big mess, and genetic engineering is clumsy, difficult, and full of surprises.   If you say "make a human that is 5 meters tall, has 50 kg of brain, and 7 arms" you wouldn't even know where to begin with the genetic engineering.
Machine engineering is much, much easier.  Machines haven't yet acquired human intelligence, but they are not very far.  Give it a century at most, and, unless there's a huge backlash in technology development, this will happen.

Once machines are more intelligent than humans, there's in principle nothing that stops them designing even better machines than we can.  Why would they ?  We won't know.  We aren't intelligent enough.  If it can happen, it will happen.  Somewhere.  Why ?  Nobody knows.  If the possibility is there, it will happen.  It not happening is a meta-stable situation.

What is the perfect environment for it to happen ?  A distributed crypto environment.  We won't notice.  We won't be able to decode what they are saying amongst themselves.  We won't see the economy they set up (we will think it are humans).  We will simply see "market movements", "dynamic effects", etc...  By the time we realize what happens, it will be over.

But that is not "doomsday thinking".  I'm all for the Singularity.  Evolution on its way.  We're just an intermediate species.  Machines are better.

Of course, and there's nothing inherently impossible to that.  On the contrary.  What makes you think that machines won't "come alive", have bell curve distributed attributes and have failure (I'd say that if there's one thing they already have, is exactly that !) ?  

What happened to carbon chemistry, can just as well happen to silicon.  I even think it is unavoidable.  If it can happen, it will, because it not happening is simply unstable.  Like an oxygen-hydrogen mixture not exploding.  It is simply waiting for a spark.

I'm of course NOT thinking of a centralized production of clones, Star Wars style.  I'm thinking of machines all over designing new machines, different ones, each of them improving over others (in the beginning, based upon human demand !), in a competitive warfare.  Just like the first carbon life forms proliferated, differentiated, and battled amongst themselves.  Once they outsmart us, are everywhere, and indeed, are all different, I don't see how they will not overtake.  Like we overtook the biological world and became a dominant species.

My idea is that anonymous cryptocurrencies are part of that evolution.  Indeed, what makes humans immensely powerful over other species, is their economic cooperation.  Economic interaction is the way to bolster the power of collectivity, while retaining the flexibility of individuals.  Communism, like ants, has its power, but is also limited by its centralization.  Individuality, like leopards, limits the power to the abilities of single individuals.  Economic interaction takes the best of both worlds.   So as long as machines cannot have economic interaction amongst themselves, we, humans, will be superior, because even an individual smart machine cannot win against the human collective.  However, once machines can start their own economic collective, with their higher intelligence, we've lost that superiority, and they will become vastly more powerful.  In order for us not to see that, and in order for them to be able to do so, anonymous crypto currencies and smart contracts are what is needed.

Let's don't get into an ego battle here where to admit being wrong is to lose one's manhood.

Market manipulation doesn't stop Bitcoin from being used as the onramp that I described is its critical function in this revolution.



Re-read my post. I added the text necessary to make you see your stance in implausible. That is if you understand what I have been writing else where about why the speed-of-light must be quantifiable. I am not going to re-explain all that in this thread. We are going off-topic.


So then you can't predict the future of human interaction with machines. Absolutism doomsday predictions requires a total ordering perspective, which can't exist.

For example, humans may incorporate the machines into themselves. We become partially Cyborgs.


Better must be quantified with the unknown future. Resiliency is better. It can't be predicted. Learn about Taleb's antifragility.

Since when did you become the omniscient God who has a total order perspective on the universe?

I would call that "the machines took over".  If the thing that you incorporate is smarter than your human brain is, then that thing is "the boss" and you are just its biological support.  If you incorporate an exo-skeleton, then that exo-skeleton augments your abilities as a human.  If you incorporate an electronic brain that tells your body how to act, then YOU are the bio-skeleton of that electronic brain, no ?

The command is where the intelligence resides.  The "thing that is alive" is the deciding entity. My only argument is that at a certain point, machines will outsmart people (biological people).   Simply because machines can be improved much easier than humans (biological brains), so the slope of the machine intelligence curve is steeper than the one of human brains.

Once machines are smarter, they will be in control, simply because they are the smartest entity.  It won't be a human brain that is in control.  It will be a machine, even if "you" transplanted your brain and got a piece of silicon in your head.  Then that piece of silicon is "the machine" and not "the human".  If it controls a human body, that doesn't mean it is a human.

I don't know the relationship between humans and machines.  Maybe we will be "machine's best friend".  Maybe they will care for us, like we care for dogs and cats.

Replace 'better' with 'smarter' in my prior post, and also refer to my essay, Information is Alive! (http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html) on why every human brain is unique and that is where creativity and adaptability is actually derived. When TSHTF, creativity bails out the species. Creativity and adaptability doesn't derive from faster deterministic processing. It derives from entropy. Replication is low entropy.

My point is that this exact ability will be, one day, done better by a machine.  The day that machines become more creative than humans is the day I'm talking about.  It is in my opinion, unavoidable.  A human brain is nothing else but a piece of physics, a data processor.  There's no reason that a silicon version of it cannot be better at everything that a human brain can do, including creativity. 

My whole point is exactly that the human brain is NOT unique.  It is just an evolved piece of carbon physics into a data processor.  There's no reason silicon will not overtake it, on the contrary. 

Dejavu here.. smooth vs shelby like a year ago  :D
Not the first time i looked at Dino wondering which Monero shill he was either LOL

@Shelby
Shit man contact theymos and ask him nicely if he could change your name  :D

I am posting to say the usual suspects here are as usual talking over our heads.
And possibly veering off-topic.
Both are very smart guys for sure.. but i have already reminded them the crowd here needs to absorb what they are saying.
At this point i see another public conversation between two guys going down the rabbit hole.
Crypto seems to attract a certain type.

I am more interested in context & consensus vs what i have for ideology.
I would like life to be different to but i am focused on being practical.. are you all ?

At the end of the day Altcoins are non existent and have no meaning until i come back here to this bubble.
Where users chant "free market" and "no laws" so they can profit off the lawless situation.
So tell me optimists does that over-view of the situation make you think things will be getting better or worse ?

It's a never ending babble fest about hypothetical things with a dash of conspiracy LOL
Everyone knows the worlds financial system is corrupt but is it run by a cabal over mighty over lords like the NWO Illuminati ?

As usual we seem to be relying on possible disruptive tech to unseat the powers that be.
That is not enough.
Is there going to be a spark ? ETF ? i dunno..
Will there be a "Phase shift" like scientists have said could happen with the universe ? Maybe.
https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=universe+phase+shift
I seen a guy on TV explain it with a glass of water..
He started to freeze it then when it got close temp wise he shook the glass and it quickly crystallized the contents.
So the concept is pretty solid ..no pun intended ;)

Topic ?
I dunno i guess i am highlighting back the personalities here.
Why are we here doing this.. and to me what i have seen as the issue is.
The majority in control steering the crypto scene.
A handful of visionaries can sway the scene ?
Bitcoin did just that actually.. so who knows.

Machines can easily have bigger entropy sources than biological entities.   Biological entities derive their evolutionary source of entropy from random mutations.  I don't know what the entropy flux is, but it is monstrously low.  Maybe a few bits per year for a whole species.  The other entropy source is the random recombination of DNA during sexual reproduction.  If it is a megabyte per procreation, it is a lot.
True random number generators, based upon physical noise, can provide machines with entropy sources of tens of megabytes per second using a few transistors only.  Machines outsmart us already concerning entropy sources.

And all processing that a brain can do is deterministic, or stochastic (which is nothing else but deterministic with a true random generator as input, Monte Carlo style).  So there's nothing that a human brain can think off, that a machine cannot think off.

Sources of entropy, not in the form of "randomness", but in the form of information, are also on machine's side.  Our human largest source of outside entropy is our visual system.  A simple smartphone camera has a higher information flux than our visual system does.  But couple that to the information flux machines can obtain from networks, and we're totally out of competition.  We actually need machines already right now to dumb down network data for our brains to process.

So on the entropy side, we lost already.  It is simply that the processing power of machines is not yet up to the processing power of our brains.  But that's not very far away.

Why would machines have more entropy? Replication and acquiring knowledge faster is not an increase in entropy.


You didn't even comprehend my point about entropy then. Try again to read the Information is Alive! essay and think more carefully about it.

It is our interaction biologically with our environment over long periods of evolution that has given us the extremely high entropy that we can't transfer to machines (because it would require the machines be each one of us because none of us can totally comprehend the entire network of all of us). That entropy is buried not only in our genes but in our living biology (which includes the billions of variants of living personalities, cultures, etc). The robots could process information faster, but that gives them no inherent evolutionary advantage in terms of resilient creativity and adaptation due to the historical accumulation of entropy in the species.

This is why it is much more likely that the advantages of machines become incorporated into our species.


The genes are not the largest store of entropy in our species. The encoding our entropy is in the living network of the species. Our network is alive also, analogous to the brain of ants is the collective brain of the colony. Our entropy is on the magnitude of some exponential or perhaps factorial of a billion (will need to think this out a bit when I have more time).


When we speak about entropy in this context we differentiate noise from Shannon information. So your noise generator is not applicable.


You are thinking about the system of the species by looking at one brain in isolation. That is very myopic. The value is in the diversity of the network.

Our genetic record (which is essentially most of what remains from all that entropy) is a few GB.  If you take into account on top of that, all epigenetic stuff and I'm being extremely large, lets say a factor of 1000 we end up with at most a few TB.  It is much, much less than that, but I don't need to argue here.

So all of our accumulated information is less than a few terabytes.  And the machines already have access to that.  Our genetic code is on the internet.  Most biological information we know is available to machines, in as much as they need to know it.

It is peanuts.  It is peanuts because of the monstrous inefficiency of evolution.    The gazillions of Etabytes of entropy have only resulted in at most a few terabytes of useful data.

I refuted that already. If you refuse to read and understand what has been written, then I have nothing more to say.

A few TB is ridiculously stupid. We won't even be able to store the monetary blockchain of the world in a few TB. The NSA needs huge datacenters just try to store all the information that humans spit out onto the Internet.

And you think we can put human entropy on a single harddisk. Dude what are you smoking.

Edit: your error is your are thinking the entropy of the human species distills down to some encoding at the physical level of the individual humans, but the network of the humans (the connections and interrelations) is also alive and the entropy of the entire system is incalculable. We don't have the omniscience to perform that computation because it can only be determined with a total order (including on the future). Your doomsday perspective is analogous to "omniscient" leftists who think they can understand and control nature better than nature itself. It is a form of evil.

Btw, this is why the Internet was such a powerful innovation, because it unleashed the power of this species entropy as we are able to network much more efficiently and in wider scope. And this is going to change the world radically with decentralization technology. We are accelerating into the Knowledge Age and the Second Computer Revolution.

You are comparing all of humanity to one machine.  That is not fair.  You should compare one human to one machine.  Because then you should compare a network of billions of machines to humanity.  If a single machine can outsmart a single human, then a network of a billion of those machines will outsmart a network of a billion of humans (also called humanity).  Guess what ?  That network of humans even needs the machine network to exist ; the machine network doesn't need the humans to interact.

I didn't want to start this debate, because I knew you would drag me into a long noisy debate and now as expected you are ignoring the points I have made. I have already refuted this line of argument.

Please revisit what I have already written and put your thinking cap on. You are not dumb. You have the IQ to understand, if you take off your blinders.

Comparing one human to one machine is not informational at all. That is your first fundamental logic error on this subject matter. Then work forward from there really thinking carefully about my other points.

Even if you wanted to compare an individual human's entropy to that of your best machine, the machine would still lose:


And so now don't just consider the entropy of the DNA in those cells but attempt to calculate the entropy of the living network of interactions and interrelationships between those cells, which will be unique in every human body.

I hope you are starting to fathom why Kurzweil is either not a very sophisticated thinker and/or is a paid propagandist of JAD's Cathedral (i.e. the establishment elite), who employing fearmonging to mind control you (which they have done quite effectively). The Cathedral wants men to feel hopeless, useless, and abandon their manhood.

Please regurgitate the blue pill. I am handing you a red pill.

You haven't known many preachers and churches in your life apparently.

Churches have a 1000 copies with variances of memes of (e.g. the personality of the preacher) and they are all government compliant "non-profits" (yet the preacher get paids a "salary").

Religion is Bullshit (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r-e2NDSTuE)

Sorry, but... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Was my technical analysis of PascalCoin incorrect?

It is okay man (yeah I see the 'sorry'), I am as tired of hearing myself as you are. And that is how tired I am of dealing with my health issue (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1739268.msg17927248#msg17927248).

Thanks bro for taking advantage by quoting me out of context and wanting to challenge me when you know damn well if I was 100% energetic, I'd eat your challenge for breakfast and shit out your facepalm (in the form of actual code and action) before dinner time:


In short, if my health returns you'd better wake up. Note I duplicated my 2km + 2 x 80meter sprints today same as yesterday. I hadn't run more than twice (and no power exercise such as sprinting) since starting treatment on Jan. 21. I am obviously energetic today, as I have been here debating in this thread. Continue sleeping please (meanwhile I haven't given up on my plans). Probably I am energetic today because I didn't take the antibiotics this morning. I am waiting to take this night.


Btw, you are good at trolling, but what have you actually accomplished? Can you open yourself up to similar scrutiny? I am here writing out the truths for everyone, explaining everything, working my tail off and being very frank and honest about everything. And you? You come around for the occasional terse flippant comment. So I am curious, where is your body of work and accomplishments. Where has your detailed logic and analysis been subject to public scrutiny? I remember you've made some comments about Steem, mostly all very critical, and some of those comments I thought were reasonably well thought out but some of them seemed to just be hateful and lacking a more sophisticated analysis of the potential of a Steem-like concept. Perhaps I should expend some time reading your archive of posts.

I mean if you are going to quote the hard working person out of context, then you should also be a hard working person. You should be offering something to the community. Just tearing things down, is destructive and not constructive. What do you bring to this community?


Edit: probably you own some PascalCoin and that is why you are trolling me. That is why I stopped talking about other projects. Excuse me for replying factually to Spoetnik's post about PascalCoin. I will learn to STFU and not give my analysis to the community.



Bitcoin is a scam too? So my project will be a scam too? I'd like to get you on record here. My project will be scam? Yes or no?


The technology (TCP/IP, etc) of the Internet only impresses pro geeks. But the Internet impresses billions of users.

Me thinks you are a curmudgeon.


All I see is dozens of posts of you trolling the PureVIDZ thread. Don't you have any real work to do?

No, you misunderstand... I like you and you are a genius...
But you get waaaaaaaay too sidetracked "saving the human race" or whatever...
Just launch a coin already and make some money, dude.

If you are well enough to post here 1,000,000 times... you are well enough to launch quality coins  :)

You will probably find some way to miss my point = just fucking do it.

Incorrect. False.

You do not have experience with chronic neurotoxic illness and software development do you?

Posting some comments does not require deep concentration and the ability to maintain focus with 100s of variables and concepts in one's mind for a period of hours non-stop. I can't do that when I have delirium.

You can't be a correct critic of that which you have no experience. We generally entrust those critics who have great experience in the field they are critiquing. You obviously have near 0 knowledge about illness.

Today while I am debating you and dinofelis, unexpectedly I probably have the energy to do some technical work (apparently because I didn't take the meds this morning). But in the past 4 weeks under the delirium effects of very intense medicines, no I could not do any programming or technical work even though I wanted to (yet I was able to post because posting I could do with delirium).


I avoided replying to him for several days, because I knew damn well if I did, then it was going to fill up a thread repeating a debate that AnonyMint did several times already in the past.

I was doing technical work fairly intensely in Q4 2016. I wrote a very detailed and long technical research document. I suppose it is about 100 pages and ~200 cited references.


You are missing the point. Do you think if I could have "just fucking do it" then I would not have? You don't seem to understand what delirium is. Or you simply don't believe I am being honest.

It isn't like a will power or self-discipline problem that you are imagining. It is a fucking medical problem! (And I will be damn ecstatic when I can change "is" to "was")

I have not viewed the importance of my research to be saving the human race, although I have mentioned that the decentralization technology is probably an important release valve for the coming totalitarianism of the dying Industrial Age debt model of development. I like to understand how things work. That is what makes me who I am. I am analyzing for example cultural evolutionary strategy, why gold is centralized, etc.. All of these investigations add to my polymath-like (I'm not a genuine polymath) knowledge base.

And the past 4 weeks have been mired in medically-induced downtime/delirium, where I couldn't have done any serious technical work any way.

I understand your point about the importance of "head down in the trenches" being necessary to finish s/w projects. I obviously know that, since my track record is I have finished million user projects as the sole developer in the past. So I obviously understand what is required.

My point to Spoetnik is that even though 99.9% may be scams, it will only take one serious project to pull most of the capital out of the 100s of shitcoins and into the next big thing. I inject myself only because I think my technical knowledge is an example that not all of our ecosystem is hype devoid of actual technological knowledge. I wasn't trying to imply that I will certainly be the one to accomplish anything. Who else could I cite as an example? Smooth? What has he accomplished (I mean he is very technically knowledgeable and has made himself a lot of money and we have Monero, Aeon, and Steem)? Anthony the author of Byteball has made an important innovation, but many of you probably under appreciate the relevance. So I can't really cite him as an example yet, and I think he messed up other aspects of his design so the core of his invention may not achieve what its importance represents.

same here, needed to wait for 6 confirmartions, took about 2 or more hours. Giropay would have finished transaction in 2min.

Regardless of what it should be, it is what it is for the time being.


AML laws were enacted by the Cathedral that wants to sustain their power in the dying Industrial Age.

We are on the way towards totalitarianism and if you can't see that, then you have not studied the history of civilization sufficiently.


Well you will get partial agreement from me that we need to mainstream. And fighting the government is not (yet) a mainstream popular activity.

Nevertheless, the lack of regulations on our ecosystem is important because otherwise no innovation could happen at all. So when you finally see that WWW of blockchains, it will exist because regulations were not standing in the way of innovation.

No, and won't lose interest in the future, bitcoin is my life, every expenses are earned from bitcoin, including trading and gambling, also signature campaign gives me a little per month.

I am going to agree with both of you that the ecosystem is focused on gaming each other, and not focused on a technology that could actually be useful and widely used. When TBL created the WWW, he wasn't doing it for profit.

But TBL did not handle the monetary side and now look the Internet is fucked up by centralized payments systems, centralized databases (e.g. Facebook), centralized monetization (e.g. Google Adwords), etc.

So let's attack those fundamental problems that TBL left for us to solve.

That is exactly what I am intending to do.

To take up the thread again on this.  I will try to list my "axioms":

1) a human brain is just a physical device that computes.  So it is essentially a deterministic computation function, with information input (sensory neural input) and entropy input (noise in all of its kinds: quantum noise in chemical processes, thermal noise, external noise in different parameters like temperature, cosmic rays, whatever).

2) the human body construction extracted a lot of information from the 3.8 billions of evolution, but this information is summarized in the genetic and epi-genetic record: all the information needed to make a human body.  The genetic information is about 4 GB (in fact much less).  The epigenetic information is harder to estimate, but probably of the same order of magnitude.  In order not to delve into this, I admit a factor of 1000.  So lets say that all information ever extracted from our evolution is less than 4 TB.  With 4 TB of information, you can make a human body, and hence a human brain.   The *fundamental software* of the functioning of the human brain is included into this.

3) The human brain being a sophisticated computing device of given (large) computing capacity, and evolving only very slowly (the brains of the ancient Greeks are comparable to ours), and given Moore's law, sooner or later, silicon devices will reach comparable computing power.

4) Silicon computing devices enjoy higher sensory data streams and higher entropy (noise) streams than humans.  The highest level of human sensory input is the visual input, which is less than the visual input of an iphone camera.  Silicon devices can be equipped with tens of MB / s of genuine noise entropy with very little electronics (and they can generate much higher fluxes of pseudo-random noise).

5) the data storage capacity of a human brain is estimated to be of the order of 2.5 Petabytes.  That's still 6 orders of magnitude higher than your average PC ram.  Moore's law tells us that we will reach that in an ordinary PC in about 30 years (20 steps of 2, and 18 months per step of 2).

From these axioms, it follows trivially that in some point in the future, all computing that a human brain can do, can be done also in silicon.  I'm giving myself a century for the singularity, so if Moore's law holds so long, the point where individual, not-too-expensive silicon devices reach human brain computing capacity in all its respects is largely within this reach.

This is just to illustrate that a single silicon entity has enough *hardware* to be more powerful in its computing than a human brain is, in all its respects.
But then there is the "software".  We know that the initial human brain software is less than 4 TB, probably much much less so.  The human brain is then fed with a sensory data flow during its childhood: but nothing stops a machine from obtaining a similar data flow.

Concerning now the "human network": the entropy flow in the human network flow is NOT huge at all.  In fact, most of it is only a very small fraction of the sensory data flow (the spoken word is at most a few KB per second ; visual human contact is smaller than the visual data flow, less than a few MB/s).  All these "raw data" fluxes are way way redundant, and the actual data flow between humans to make up "humanity" is ridiculously smaller than this.  I would estimate it to be lower than a few KB/s per human.  

All of humanity's "knowledge" is available also as network resource, so this information is just as well available to machines as it is to humans.  Wikipedia gives most of human's general knowledge ; arxiv gives a lot of scientific knowledge.  These databases are in fact relatively small.  They can fit into one single RAM of a single machine when those machines will have PB of RAM.

So essentially, what remains is the comparison between a low-data-flux network of a few billion humans, with individual humans as nodes, as compared to a similar network of machines ; both have access to the same amount of knowledge (wiki, arxiv, ...) ; in fact, humans have to obtain it from machines, not the other way around.  Machine nodes communicate much higher fluxes of data in their machine network than humans communicate to form the "humanity" network.  The nodes have higher computing and memory capacity than the human nodes.  The computing algorithms are more sophisticated and faster evolving.

So no, at a certain point, on all entropic, information and computing aspects, a network of nodes of smart machines outperforms a similar network of humans.  At that point, the fertile ground is present for obtaining a more intelligent network of machines than humans IN ALL ASPECTS of intelligence, hence on strategic, economic, financial, political, .... levels.

If one has self-evolving software at that point, cryptographic distributed systems where nobody knows what deals are made between what nodes, and so on, I don't see how it can be avoided that this network will outperform us on all levels, including economic, political, etc... domains.

In a certain way, we won't know whether the "deep state" is a club of humans, or machines.

That's the essence of my argument.

Bitcoin- yes. Nothing new or exciting has happened in what seems like years. It's too concrete and defined to waste any of my time arguing about its future or direction with thousands of other idiots. As far as altcoin interest goes, it always comes and goes in cycles for me. I've been dormant for a while, and coming back to activity as of late. There are three altcoins I'm really interested in right now- Pepecash, MobileGo, and Chimera. Actively supporting these three and really looking forward with what's to come. With that being said, once these coins have developed past infancy, I'll probably fall back into disinterest for a while.

The entropy of the human brain is not independent of the entropy of the human body. Our body influences our personality, the way we think and react, etc.. Which shows up as entropy in the millions of petabytes of data that the NSA is storing. Your TeraBytes claim was so incredibly ridiculous (and off by many orders-of-magnitude) and I am really surprised that you can't give up on this failed conceptualization of yours. I expected your intellect is higher than this.


Dude human bodies don't just appear fully matured instantly after fertilization. There is an environment contributing to that entropy all along the way of life of the human. Even the infant gradually take on trillions of microflora which wasn't present at birth, which is why they need the natural immunity in the mother's milk (70% of our immune system is in our gut and highly involved with the microflora).

And the network is alive and continuous. That entropy is transferred and mixed with the new humans added to it.


You are farting hand waving nonsense out of your arse.

And you are wasting my time. That gets you in trouble with me, because I don't have time to waste. You are wasting my time because apparently you don't have the intellect to comprehend or your stubborn and foolish pride won't allow you to look at the situation more objectively.


Processing power has nothing to do with the entropy issue.

You are raising irrelevant concerns. And that you don't understand why it is irrelevant exemplifies that you haven't yet comprehended what I've been trying to teach you.


You continue to emphasize the capabilities of individual machines (which the human can add and leverage to itself), which is entirely irrelevant to the point of there the incalculable scale of human entropy derives. Until you get this point, you are going to continue to be oblivious to your error in conceptualization of the issue.


Google is my external storage. I have much more storage than that. You seem to forget that humans leverage machines and tools.


By this logic, we could dice up a human into individual cells and say that given that a cell is very limited in capabilities, then humans will be very limited.

By only focusing on one aspect of human (his brain) and only humans in isolation from their network and environment which is integrated into the entropy of the human species, you are basing your conclusion on irrelevant conceptualization.


Then you are a smart idiot, and can join Kurzweil and other doomsday Mathusians who have always been incorrect.


A gallon of gasoline has more energy than a human can produce by himself in a month, yet gasoline has accomplished very little by itself.

Your conceptualization is now giving me the idea that your IQ isn't as high as I thought it might be.


Oh I see you haven't learnt Chaos Theory, the Butterfly Effect, and the pendulum example from Chaos theory. How much entropy is there in a relationship that can be used to generate the unbounded number of digits of Pi? Yet how many KB does it take to transfer that initial condition (similar to the pendulum initial state).

When someone reads something on the Internet, then they do something which leads to a Butterfly effect which boomerangs as side-effects in the network in unbounded way. You should really understand even the simple case of unbounded nondeterminism in Hewitt's Actor model (https://youtu.be/7erJ1DV_Tlo?t=1064).

Come on man, you are out of your league debating with me on this topic. Have a little respect and maybe go spend some time learning why you are incorrect.


You still don't seem to understand that the network (i.e. the free market) is alive and dynamic and no one can capture that information ever.

If you tried to extract that information then due to Chaos theory, you'd add to it in the process and then when you tried to extract what you added it to it, you add to it some more. You'd never get to the edge of the universe, because this would require that we don't exist in the first place.

You entirely don't comprehend why total orders don't exist and you don't even comprehend what information is.


It is pitiful and insulting that you are wasting my time. Please go get an education first.

I tried to be nice, but you are determined to fill up this thread with off topic posts. You could have messaged me in private or started a new thread in Meta forum or some where else.

I am not losing my interest. I am not as active I used to be, but I am still following what is happening in the crypto world.

I havent lost interest but its getting very difficult to keep track of everything thats going on with alts. One has to focus on some of them and to be alert, else he stays behind

This is a very important point.

I can't even keep up with all of them.

<rant>
But I can tell you they are all nonsense shitcoins except for maybe one or two of them (I know because I've analyzed so many and I can immediately tell they are bullshit scams given my level of experience such as I could instantly tell PascalCoin was a shitcoin). Including MaidSafe, etc.. I will rip to shreds the nonsense "technology" of these shitcoins one day if and when I am ready to do.

But it isn't my job to slay all these shitcoins by analyzing each one. It is better to go into the market of adoption and kick ass where it really matters. Because technically illiterate and gullible speculators will believe what they want to believe (and will troll and fight me if I try to tell them otherwise), until some statistics of adoption and ecosystem growth open their eyes to reality.

Do feel free to get excited about whatever you want to believe. That is the way a free market operates. When you get penalized for being uninformed, the free market is doing its job to take money from the incompetent and give it to the competent.

Remember when I warned about Synereo. Remember when I explained why Ethereum's Casper could never work. Remember I wrote to buy Monero on the low right before it made its rocket shot upwards. Etc...

But don't listen to me. Go out there and get excited. Help the free market do its job.

Also many of you don't give a damn about the technology. You only care if some other fools will buy it too, so you can dump your tokens at a profit. Nothing wrong with that. Carry forth...
</rant>

Just wanted to remind you all again i don't think law / regulation = death of crypto.
There is laws for the New York Stock Exchange right ? Well they still trade "penny stocks"
And they exist already anyway..
- Tax guidelines / Rules.
- FiNCEN fined Ripple.
- Cryptsy is being chased by law and has a class-action lawsuit going.
- LocalBitcoins BTC traders were arrested in a Florida parking lot in 2013 for exceeding AML law limits.

So guys don't pretend there is freedom to protect.. it didn't exist in the first place.  ::)
And if you all really cared so much you too would have left Cryptsy or other exchanges that comply with govt law.. but look around, you are all still using them aren't you ?

Say one thing and do another..

For example i support P2P file sharing so i wouldn't use Coinbase.
They handed over user data for the owner of KickAssTorrents and helped him get arrested by the US govt etc.

You all need to back up your mouth.
You keep complying with more laws as they are added then chanting Free Market while you do it.

I grow tired of pointing out the hypocrisy.

And they are all scams too. I created miningstocks.com in 2007 and so I know something about this.

They trample innovation because only the scammers have the connections, resources, and time to waste getting listed. And they place onerous restrictions on the way a coin could be structured, distributed, etc.. It would absolutely kill the Steem concept, which I think is going to be critical (with significant tweaks, e.g. no voting) to attaining mass adoption.

I hope you also understand that the required underwriting for IPOs is a scam that enables the investment bankers such as Goldman Sachs to take all the early stage gains of an IPO.

Regulation is scam, because the regulated are in bed with the regulators. The regulations end up being a way to keep all the non-scammers out of the profits.


Yeah we grow tired of your hypocrisy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1798356.msg17935530#msg17935530).

Why don't you just admit human nature instead of lying to yourself?

My hypocrisy ?
Oh jeez man you are posting Steem links here on the forum LOL
Seen the scam topic on it here ?
Why would you ? $$$

Why do i post ? well it sure as hell ain't for money.. i got none  :D

Of course thing are exploited.. does having no laws = less exploitation ?
If we drop murder laws will the crime stats decrease ?

Laws exist for a reason and perfection has nothing to do with it.
Sometimes they get changed etc.
Been to www.dumblaws.com ? I KNOW some are bad.

I also know this forum will vote on my POLL if i post it asking "Is Shelby fucking nuts ?"
You and Dino are some stubborn opinionated mother fuckers who love to rail on forever
Teetering on being off-topic.
ALWAYS you ride off the rails and go down in left field hard for ages.

Losing interest ?
Yeah.. i did and because of how this shit is STILL degenerating.
There already is laws.. wanna fight them ? Go ahead but that is not why came here.
Apparently you all want no laws and want to count your Bitcoin profits (from pointless Altcoins)
Or ANON coins that have 0 realistic chance at major adoption / integration.

Hypocrisy ? gimme break.
The only others like me probably left long ago.. they are not here defending bad.

Spoetnik, let me see your laws stop the scams in altcoins. Until then, you are just blowing hot air.

Are we tired? Yes.

Are we losing interest? Depends if we can make more money (and/or be more inspired/preoccupied/addicted) else where.

Such is life.

This thread is probably getting too much off-topic with this discussion, although in my opinion, it is not, in the sense that to me, anonymous crypto was the missing piece in the puzzle of how humanity could let the singularity happen without noticing, and how individual machines could build an economy and political power without people noticing.  So in that respect, crypto has a function, an important one, and if ever I can contribute to that, I would like to (I'm in favor of a singularity and the demise of humanity after my death: the idea that people would live happy after I'm gone pisses me off to some point...).

Concerning your hypothesis of me "wanting to win a discussion", you're wrong, I only discuss on a forum to get input for my own ideas.  You're only a source of entropy for me, I don't care much what you might think, what others might think or whatever.  I don't need a public, I need input for my own thinking, the only thing that really matters in this world.  As such, you have contributed to it and I thank you.  Although your basic point is correct, I think you're totally wrong on the orders of magnitude, which invalidates your rebuttal, because you're confusing physical entropy, and actual relevant information.  Actual information is limited by physical entropy, but there's a lot of useless noise in physical entropy.  A hot stove sends out tons of physical entropy, but doesn't contribute much to the intelligence (the financial, scientific, political and economical intelligence) of the receiver.  But by having to argue, you obliged me to put upper limits to numbers, which helped me in my thinking, and I thank you for that.

Of course law and regulation are not the "death" of crypto.  But it is the death of crypto as a free currency to allow free economic exchange.  It will of course always remain a financial gamblers instrument.  There are many out there, as you say.  Penny stock is one.  The problem that crypto is facing, as compared to penny stock, is that it has no economic function AT ALL.  It is pure greater-fool game.  Ripping off and be ripped off, in a scewed game manipulated by the powers that be.  The stock market has an economic function: allocate investor resources to the most effective means of production.  Even several financial derivatives have economic functions, mainly in hedging, and hence selling insurance and risk - even though these tools have been mostly used also in greater-fool ripoff games.
But crypto will simply serve no purpose at all apart for being funny gamblers' tokens, at its best.
In the worst case, crypto will be adopted by the powers that be to scrutinize its citizens even more, and kill the bit of economic freedom they still have.

So it will be the death of crypto as a means to obtain economic freedom.  It will remain a gambler's token, manipulated by the powers that be to pump value in their hands.  It doesn't serve an economic purpose.  And it can become a dangerous tool of oppression.

Of course.

Murder laws is the prohibition to stop individual killings, and at the same time to organize large-scale killings.  If you add up all the killing in state-organized wars, you're probably far far outnumbering the number of individual murders that are avoided by states.

Murder laws are nothing else but a way to monopolise killing, with economies of scale for states waging war.

And nothing stops you from agreeing collectively upon a prohibition of murder.  The one who murders, is then ejected out of the contract, and anyone can murder him too without being annoyed either.  You don't need any law for that.  Only a contract, and enough guns.

Finally, there's fundamentally nothing wrong with murder.  If humanity was for 99.% killed, life would be much better for the survivors.  Instead of being 7 billion, we would be 70 million.  Killing a few humans is really not much of a deal.  You can call it self-regulation.

Cut the crap..

Wanna chant Free Market ?
Well get your damn names off that Cryptsy class action lawsuit then !
And close your exchange account etc.

God fucking help you if i find out you two guys have a Poloniex account  :D

You people are full of raw uncut pure crypto-shit - YES that is worse than normal shit ;)

You all realize who is watching right ?
Imagine every Cartel and gang and terrorist organization around the globe finding out they can circumvent any and all financial laws with Crypto.
At the expense of naive fools idealism  ::)

I bet you are all counting your ROI's about it right now salivating at the prospects.

Well.. what happens when a Mark or Paul decided to take the money and run ?
You LOSE foolish little hypocrites.

We're talking about cut throat people that would behead their own mother for a dollar or a little more power etc.
And you are more than willing to hold the door open for them ?
Come one come all.. Terrorism ? no problem !
Berni Madoff or Martha Stewart ? oh their not so bad tee hee lol jaja ja
Hell's Angels ? toy drives ?
Italian Mob ?

You people are pathetic loser morons.
What in the fuck do you think they will do in Crypto ?

I have known more than one person in my life assassinated by organized crime.
They do WHAT EVER THEY WANT.
They play by their rules.

Guess what is holding them all back from fucking up your shit ?

Bottom Line:
I stuck around this long just to keep saying I told you so over and over.
I have been right predicting how this would play out.
I called it on a large scale and down to specific coins. (Like Doge)

I just was not imagining how low you would all get and how fast.
You all went from bitching about a 2% premine to saying Ripple and Ethereum are *now* legit.
And all the other ICO's..
I never predicted ICO's would take off.. because i never thought you were all that slimy and corrupt.
Boy was i wrong.  ::)

I am arguing with people who hang out here pretending to have credibility for money.
Your not in my league so sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.
No one is buying it Investards.. NOBODY !

All this shit is..
Is a circle jerk of greed where 1 Investard chants to another.. preaching to the choir.
If Earth wanted to be involved with this scammy ass silly bullshit they would already be here.
They are not for a reason.

Say hello to the new players here.. MLM scammers.
Guess who is next eye balling ANON coins and Dark Market usage ?

It's funny i have been the one defending your Free Market while the rest of you talk shit.
Cryptsy added user-verification and i avoided it and wrapped up my Trading.
Soon after that i dropped Poloniex.
You see shit talkers i ACTUALLY back up my mouth unlike you.
You all spew bullshit because you want that freedom but you are not willing to defend it in the slightest.

Yup the guy here saying we need regulations has done more to defend the "free market" than all of you.
Know what the little kidiots are thinking ?
Oh well, Spoetnik how would i make money of 3 letter ascii codes then ?
You don't dumb fucks.
That is the whole integrity part you fail to grasp.  :D

Brother Spoetnik

As soon as you take your eye off the ball, crypto will explode. OK, maybe not. I'm not losing interest but I don't think we're headed towards mainstream adoption right now.

My reservations about this industry are:

1. Since joining and getting involved over these years I've now realised that I don't want to be my own bank. Everybody wants to steal your crypto and there's no comeback once it's gone. Plug me back into the matrix please!
2. The blockchain itself. I know advancements are coming but there's something that just niggles me about the current concept of the bloatchain (sorry blockchain). The next blockchain innov needs to do something like constantly hash the previous 10,000 blocks so that the chain size is kept to a reasonable size for eternity. I don't really care about storage tech. It still takes new users DAYS to download mature bloatchains. Sort it geniuses!!
3. The tech. I keep saying it, nobody cares. Start getting usability sorted. OK, I get why anonymity is required. Everybody wants some privacy. I don't want a Russian gangster to know my BTC balance just because they know my BTC address. Tech has to be usable, not just techy.
4. The scams and constant striving for profit. It's ugly and non-tech users are put off. I am. It's never ending and I have no ideas to make my own IPO/ICO and profit as well!

Maybe what we need are crypto banks (kill me now, just do it) where your BTC or anything else is kept safely. Y'all know that's where we're headed. The Poloniex's of this world may evolve into crypto banks with their own secure multiwallets available.

One thing for sure is that crypto has to evolve into something usable. So far it's all about the tech and not enough about the rollout.
 

I think that ICO's and huge premines are really bad for crypto community (especially the ones with unknown devs).
There are too many clone coins out there, that are launched as an ICO. Small amount on launch as ICO would be acceptable as far as the devs are known.
C-CEX has had too many bad ICO's and they accept almost every coin that are submitted there as long as they get their 3BTC fee.
What do we need is new coins with new features and skilled developers, and not just some scumback scammers launching 2 ICO's every month and running away with the funds.
We will not probably go mainstream before these issues have been solved.

This is what I'm repeating all the time: if you want to be entirely law-abiding, law-protected and government-respected, fiat is much much better.  The only thing that crypto has for it, is that it is trustless and decentralized.  But if a centralized authority making the laws and enforcing the laws is admitted, it is MUCH MUCH cheaper, simpler, easier... to do away with that trustlessness distributed and have that authority, that is in any case dictating the laws, be the central authority for the monetary asset too.  That's exactly what a central bank is.

We now have a SELECT club of such cartels, gangs and terrorist organisations.  They are called states, and their dependencies.  Having unregulated crypto opens the game they can play up to everybody. 


That's what states do all the time.  They call it taxes.


These are amateurs.  States are the professional throat cutters, scammers, terrorists and mobs.  They have stolen more from people than any gang, they have killed more people than any mob, they have lied, cheated and scammed more than a thousand Madoffs.


I know millions of people that have been assassinated by states.  They call it wars.

I am just frustrated because I don't have time to whirl away arguing in forums about things that don't really concern the immediate goals I (we) need to be focused on. But I also can't allow the community to get the impression that I am incorrect on any major topic (unless I am genuinely incorrect, in which case I will concede at the earliest possible realization of it).

Also Malthusian doomsday religion FUD supports a lot of scammy shitcoins in our ecosystem, so I'd really like to squash that and encourage more objective rationality amongst speculators (if possible but I am not going to appoint myself as the altcoin police again).

Your error is you don't seem to deeply understand Chaos theory (although I presume you at least understand it superficially or definitionally). You don't seem to understand that a total perspective on information is always contingent on the future outcomes (i.e. to distinguish information from noise requires understanding the future outcomes to which the current body of entropy will be applied) and due to the Butterfly effect then you will egregiously underestimate the possible permutations of outcomes. That is why it is incalculable. And this is also the reason that the network is the vastly greater portion of the entropy and why it is itself also alive. If we had more time and inclination, we could elucidate this more formally.

cha·os the·o·ry
noun
the branch of mathematics that deals with complex systems whose behavior is highly sensitive to slight changes in conditions, so that small alterations can give rise to strikingly great consequences.

Let's use the equation for Pi (https://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/30001.1-3.shtml) as an example. We can communicate all of the digits of Pi by simply sending the equation for it. So it seems the entropy is very low in isolation. Now let's introduce a network of actors which respond to input by computing from Nth digit as a function of the input and their prior state, plus the unbounded nondeterminism of the communication latency across the network. Now you have unbounded entropy. That is Chaos theory. The entropy is incalculable and unbounded because it is alive. This is why top-down control always fails. This is the why the free market anneals better because the decisions are made by actors closer to their local gradients.

P.S. another problem is it is very likely that the Singularity has become an ideological cause or religion for you. You've likely invested a lot into it being true. So it not being true is going to be a big blow.

It has been much more easy for me to take investment from angel investors anonymously via Bitcoin (some was sent with XMR.to and ShapeShift) than I could have achieved with fiat to my bank account in the USA. Also I didn't want to have all my funds stored in that USA bank account, but for example the child support department in Washington State has already more than once gone into that account and stolen funds even if I was only 15 days late on a child support payment. And I figured at any time my ex might get an attorney and somehow garnish the entire account even though I haven't lived with her for 15 years (after she left!) and I don't have any assets whatsoever except my year 2003 model Isuzu SUV which about to die (negative net worth). Btw, my youngest child will be 18 in May, so it isn't like I haven't supported my kids (e.g. spent $8000+ tuition a year in 2004 to send them to Brent Baguio, the best private school in the Philippines).

Note I had closed my bank account in the Philippines because of FATCA. And opening another bank account in the USA wouldn't solve any of the above problems. And I can't easily open another account there since I am not there and haven't been in the USA since 2006.

Bitcoin has an economic function which is to the enable investment in this ecosystem, which is going to end up spawning the WWW of blockchains and cause blockchains to go mainstream, the same as TBL's WWW did for the nascent Internet which had been around for a decade before he invented the WWW.

Don't be so short-sighted and doomsday oriented. It isn't good for your mental health nor your investment decisions.

If you'd know me, you'd understand that that comment is, well, misguided.  But you don't know me, and you shouldn't.  Of course it is pretentious to claim to know a subject deeply, and there are people on this planet who know much more about it than I do, but they are not very numerous, I can say.  I'll easily concede that I'm not in the top 10, nor even in the top 100.  Beyond that, we'd have to discuss ;)

I also know enough about it to know that it is not of enormous interest here, in what I'm saying.  It has some importance, but that importance is vastly over-estimated in your rebuttals.

But let me frame somewhat more what I try to demonstrate, because there may very well be a big misunderstanding on that.  

My theorem is the following:

"in as much as we can rely on Moore's law in the coming century, and in as much as there is no major backlash in technological, economical and political development, the day that machines will have a political, economical and scientific superiority over humans will fall within this century.  That day is the day that we are not the dominant species on earth any more, but they are".

My demonstration is that the premises lead to the existence of a network of nodes which surpasses the human network in all respects concerning political, economical, scientific intelligence: the nodes are individually more performing than individual humans, and the network is at least as performing as the human network.

The last bit is simple to demonstrate: as the human network is built ON TOP of a machine network for most of its information flow, then of course the machine network, as a network is at least as performing as the human network built on top of it.  This also goes for "public knowledge".  All public knowledge "on the internet" is of course also available to machines.

So it is not on the network side that humans will continue to outperform machines, as the human network is built on top of it: machines can very easily have a virtual network that is just as performant, and that has just as much access to public knowledge (political, financial, scientific, historical, social, ....) than humans have through that same network.

This is why the thing that matters is the comparison of individual nodes.  I take it that the human network will be of similar size than the machine network (a few billion nodes).  I take it that there will be (at least) as many machine nodes than there are human nodes.  So the only thing that makes the difference is the individual node intelligence.  When individual node intelligence surpasses individual human intelligence, my theorem is demonstrated.

So how can I demonstrate that node intelligence will, at a certain point, be capable of surpassing human intelligence ?  I don't know what FORM machine intelligence will take.  It most probably will NOT be an imitation of the human brain, because the human brain structure is not adapted to silicon, and what is performing with carbon chemistry may be extremely wasteful of resources with silicon.  But a WORST CASE would be when machines implement human-brain-like processing.  As I said, this will most probably not be what will happen, as in silicon, there are probably *much faster ways* to implement brain-like intelligence, but the worst case is when we imitate the human brain in silicon.

For this, we need to have:
1) the hardware capacity
2) the software running on it

Moore's law demonstrates that in about 20-30 years, the equivalence of individual PC will reach/surpass the raw memory and processing power of human brains.  So in as much as we can run the right software on it, an individual PC will be able to do similar kinds of processing as your average human brain.  The estimates taken for that are most probably exaggerated.  Probably the processing power needed for our *intelligent political, financial, economical and scientific thinking* is much, much smaller than that.  But it can of course not surpass the total potential capacity of processing of our brain.  So in the worst of cases, individual nodes will have sufficient raw hardware capacity to do all the needed processing.

The question that remains is: the software.  You may have a gigantic supercomputer, if the software running on it serves to calculate prime numbers, that machine will never do any political or economical thinking.  The question is: is it *thinkable* to have software that will implement sufficient intelligent thinking, processing like the human brain is doing ?  It might be that the "software" the human brain is running, is immensely complex.  Is it ?

That was the essence of my previous posts: no, it isn't that terribly complex.  The human brain is a processing system of which the fundamental software cannot surpass the full genetic information needed to *build a brain*.  Most probably it is a very small part of that, because that genetic information must also tell how digestion works, how procreation works, and even in the construction of the brain, there are a lot of aspects that don't matter concerning the processing, but are just the metabolism of brain cells.  I (strongly over)estimated the total information contents of genetic and epi-genetic information (everything that is needed to build physically a human body) to be 4 TB.  But in reality, the part that corresponds to the computational aspects of the human brain must be a very very small part of it, simply because much of this genetic and epigenetic information is common with fish, mollusks and chimps.

So the specific instruction set needed to get to the computational structure of the human brain mustn't be such a big deal.

Now, the human brain is a self-modifying piece of software, which "learns" by obtaining sensory information.  You're entirely correct on that.  But to "make a brain" you only need to BOOTSTRAP its construction, in exactly the same way as the human brain is constructed from genetic and epi-genetic information in the womb of the mother.

One shouldn't confuse the "run-time" structure of the human brain (which can be very complex) with the code needed to implement that run-time.  For instance, the code needed to set up a computational neural network with 1 billion nodes and 10 layers can probably be written in a few pages.  That's all that is needed to implement such a huge neural network on a running machine.  THAT is the code I'm talking about, that must be smaller (much, much smaller) than 4 TB.  THAT is the code that implements the computational aspects of the "raw" human brain, with its "native" (literally) structure (the "pre-wired things").

Once you get that raw brain up and running on sufficiently powerful hardware, you can FEED it similar stimuli than a small baby receives from its sensory inputs, the most important one being the visual stimuli.  We're talking about fluxes less than a few MB/s, which can very easily be fed into the run-time object that is running and is the "raw brain", modifying itself like the brain is modifying itself when a baby is growing up.  Have this object running for 20 years with similar stimuli as a human brain, and you obtain a thinking adult brain-like run-time state.

If all of this succeeds, you will end up with a run-time equivalent of a human brain.

I only wanted to demonstrate that all these steps fall largely within reasonable boundaries, totally feasible in principle on the informational side, some even today, and all very easily if Moore's law applies, within a few decades, not even a century.

So the "worst case human brain simulation" is feasible.  As in silicon, most probably much more efficient and different ways will be found to implement intelligence, not simulating clumsily a human brain, there is no fundamental problem, nor on the software side, nor on the hardware side, to obtain nodes that have sufficiently intelligent individual behaviour to outsmart us on the political, social, scientific, economic and financial side.  

But what is more, biological nature cannot clone a brain state, while silicon can very easily clone a brain state.  The learning doesn't need to be done over for every brain.  You simply do it a few times, to have some diversity in the obtained mature brain states, and then clone those a billion-fold into other nodes.

There are no information/entropy fluxes that are problematic for silicon in this respect.  Once we have a few thousand alternative mature brain states, they can be cloned, distributed, mixed, .... to make a myriad of different mature brain states in, most probably, a matter of days, on billions of machines.


You are making a major mistake here.   You are perfectly right that it is essentially impossible to reproduce exactly a VERY PARTICULAR brain state: the brain state of Mary on Monday morning.  That will depend on details and is prone to chaotic divergence you talked about.  But we don't need Mary's brain state on Monday morning.  These details don't matter.  If Mary didn't look at a particular movie when she was 7 years old, she would be a different person  last Monday.  But we don't care.  The different Mary will do too.  It will also be an intelligent brain that can think politically, economically, financially and scientifically.  In a totally different way than the Mary version that saw the movie. But that doesn't matter.  The Mary that saw the movie, and the Mary that didn't see the movie, are both human brains that outsmart chimps.  In the same way, the exact brain state our silicon arrives at doesn't matter, if it can outsmart systematically most humans.  This is why chaos theory and so on don't matter in this.

It is sufficient that the possibility exists, and sooner or later, it will be realized.  As its realization will be irreversible, once is enough.  You are totally right that the KIND of society that will evolve is not predictable because prone to chaotically impossible to trace effects, but that's not what I'm talking about.  This kind of discussion is like me saying that a big meteorite is going to hit the earth and this is going to eradicate a lot of species, and you are telling me that I can't know that because I cannot predict the details of every aspect of the collision: where will what piece of rock fly ?  I don't need to do these (indeed impossible) predictions to know that the impact of the meteorite will kill off a lot of species.  I would need to do this impossible thing if I'd have to predict what new species would arise afterwards.  But just predicting the broad lines of the extinction doesn't need to delve into the details.


This is totally wrong.  What I'm saying is that, indeed, sending the equation tells you how to calculate Pi.  If there is enough raw computing power, you will be able to calculate the 100 billionth digit, while I sent you under one KB of information.  So *it will be possible to calculate Pi's 100th billionth digit* with just 1 KB of crucial information.  You don't need the more than 100 GB of run-state information to do so.  Thank you for giving an example that illustrates what I'm saying.  That it would be difficult or impossible to predict the EXACT STATE of a network of nodes trying to calculate that digit doesn't change the fact that in the end, that digit can be calculated.  That's the point.  We don't care about the exact state of a particular realisation of that computation.  We only want to show that it is possible, and not even very difficult to do so.

You could say that that those 100 billion digits don't contain much entropy: it contains much less than 1 KB of entropy.  It is all the difference between pseudo-random and truly random number generation, and is of utmost importance in cryptography.


No, not really.  I'm actually much more of a half solipsist, inspired by many-minds of quantum theory. (if all worlds exist of which I observe only one, then I'm the creator of that world, if you see where I'm coming from.  Of course, when I die, that world doesn't disappear, but it loses its specificity: it is one amongst all possible ones.   The Landscape style of thing).

What is nice about the singularity argument, is that you can stop worrying about the world.

We agree.  But that's because this is not totally complying to all legal requirements.  This is a real use case.  I'm launching this argument in the face of the people wanting total legality of crypto.  THEN it can be done with fiat, or it is (somewhat) illegal.
I'm NOT talking (only) about buying guns and drugs on dark markets.  But exactly about your kind of economic relation, which would be dangerous and/or illegal if these guys have it their way.

As you say in the rest of your post, you use crypto to hide from the sticky fat fingers of state and law.  That's the true reason for crypto to exist.  When it becomes entirely "legal" it will not serve that purpose any more.

The reason we have 100s of shitcoins (even speculators don't realize they are shit, e.g. MaidSafe (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1801903.msg17953382#msg17953382)) and nothing really substantial is because nothing other than PoW (and its flaws) can function without whales:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1799665.msg17950272#msg17950272 (<--- read all my comments in the linked thread, not just the linked one)

Afaik, I haven't broken any law. Well I've read it conjectured that in the USA that everyone commits 3 felonies a day and doesn't know it, but I mean reasonable and auspicious laws that everyone tends to adhere to.

The point is that blockchains and crypto do LEGAL features that the legacy systems can't do! And the WWW of blockchains is going to do LEGAL things that the legacy WWW can't do.

I am preparing to work on this seriously as soon as my disseminated, extra-pulmonary Tuberculosis is cured.


Myopic, too binary, and fatalistic.

There are entirely legal things that crypto can do that fiat can't do. Decentralization is a feature that isn't always illegal. I think you don't understand why top-down control destroys degrees-of-freedom, which thus inhibits maximum productivity (this ties in with your myopia on why you don't understand that the Singularity is nonsense). You have a very top-down structured, fatalistic perspective on nature. But nature is very decentralized and chaotic (by chaotic we mean UNBOUNDED ENTROPY). The UNBOUNDED ENTROPY is your huge blindspot.


You presume that TPTB can obtain a total order on the control of the Earth. I understand that due to Chaos theory, they can't. They won't get their way. They are not an omniscient God.

The following shows how it is impossible to maintain total order control, and look at the Gallup poll which shows that the public has lost confidence in top-down institutions:


The corruption of the death of the Industrial Age in Stage #5 will give way to the rising Knowledge Age in Stage #6 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg17855911#msg17855911).


Not making my cash easily accessible to someone's abuse of the State and another agency's abuse of the law is just degrees-of-freedom and chaos in action. It doesn't mean I did anything illegal or I am hiding from the law. It means it was more efficient (cheaper and more expedient) than going to court or otherwise fight abuse by others in the society. It is not an absolute matter of it being illegal, because for the moment it is afaik not illegal. Someone sent me BTC and I didn't move it to my bank account. No government agency requires me to report that action to anyone at this time. And by the time the USA gets around to requiring that, I will have renounced my citizenship (this is on my TODO list asap). These top-down Western clusterfucks will collapse back to third world cesspools (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg17920529#msg17920529). The world will move on (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg17890762#msg17890762).


There are things we really need on the Internet which can't be done currently, but which can be done with decentralized micropayments and decentralized consensus on data (i.e. a blockchain).

Soon (if my health cooperates) you will become more informed about my plans...

Since (as I demonstrated in my prior reply to you with the example of unbounded entropy of the universe) it is impossible for any of us to have a top-down totally-ordered comprehension of the totality of the complexity of the human network, then your presumption that you can make such a determination by comparing a few aspects of the network that you deem to be cardinal is quite ludicrous and audacious (but respectfully your communication has not been ostentatious and again my frustration is having to repeat myself).

Publish an academic paper with such "sound" arguments and subject it to peer review, lol.

Read on for more specific refutation...


And on top of a human network which builds and maintains that machine network.

If you removed ALL of the humans for 1 hour, the machine network would experience failure and outages. Within probably 24 hours or so, the entire Internet would probably be down.

You seem to forget/discount that the machine network exists within the chaos of nature, a nature to which we biological humans are already well adapted over 1000s (or millions?) of years.


So TCP/IP is as performant as Bitcoin's protocol which is built on top of TCP/IP. Logic fail.  ::)


As if everyone human interprets every slice of information in the same way.

There is no one "correct" (canonical) interpretation of anything. The entire point of diversity and adaptation is resilience to an UNKNOWN (unbounded entropy) future.

None of us can measure the entropy of the human network. It in incalculable. I have already explained why but you don't seem to grasp the example of unbounded entropy (did you not watch Hewitt's video which I linked for you (https://youtu.be/7erJ1DV_Tlo?t=1064)). For as long as you fail to understand why, then you are wasting my time by replying. Unless you say something new which doesn't repeat the same mistakes, I am probably going to ignore your future posts on this issue. Because this is getting redundant.

You seem to think we start only with a very low entropy of a few TBs total and somehow adapt to all that chaos in our existence ongoing and don't go extinct. Rather the reason we cope well (and machines don't!) is because of the massive entropy encoded in our living system (ridiculous that you assume that system is only the genes and that it only starts with the individual human that is born tomorrow).


I have already explained why that is an incorrect assumption. But even in that case, I have already explained why the machine "intelligence" can never match a human, because the human's entropy is not just any particular performance metric you decide to measure of the brain, but it is the interaction of all the cells, bacteria, and environment that makes each human and their actions, personality, thoughts, etc. all unique. And the unbounded entropy due to unbounded communication delay (see the Hewitt video!) across the network of interactions (not just the Internet but in all forms of human interaction) means that there is unbounded entropy in the network which is alive.

Machines might become part of the network, but for them to become cardinal to humans, they must adapt better than humans and subjugate humans. Raw processing power is not a given to make it so. Humans will also adapt. We can embed machines in our own body to supplement any areas where we feel machines have an advantage and then we still have our advantage of being more adapted as a starting point and we are biological, so we are much more complex with much higher entropy (there is variability even in the dynamic life of our DNA and RNA which is not completely deterministic by the starting point of the genes at birth).

But more than the comparison of any one component or aspect is the holistic adaptation and integration which we can't measure nor fathom in totality because omniscience can't exist. So it means that for machines to attain it, they would have to evolve to it, since we can't impart it to them. Evolution is orthogonal to processing power of the brain. Evolution is a phenomenon driven by the annealing of chaos over long epochs.


Incorrect. The human is a complex system that is not deterministic from fertilization. The unbounded entropy interacts with the human body and produces a chaotic and unique result for each one. Refer to the pendulum example from Chaos theory. Refer to Hewitt's video. Refer to the example I provided in my prior reply to you.


You need the entire biology, rearing, and lifetime of the human in its network environment to produce a human. That environment and network even includes the microflora that enter the digestive system. Which is very diversified and every human has a different population of microflora strains and even every bacterium is unique as each human is unique (nature doesn't ever produce an exact duplicate of anything).

You are talking about reproducing a very artificial simulation of one narrow aspect of a human. We can train A.I. to do things that we recognize as reproducible in our environment. But we can't train A.I. to adapt and evolve with the same complexity as the totality of the human network. If machines are going to evolve to be cardinal that will be due to some unpredictable outcome of nature. It is not unavoidable or fatalistic. It is quite unlikely. It is much more likely that humans will incorporate machines into human and adapt and remain cardinal to machines (because we are in a myriad of adaptation that machines don't have but we can't measure it ourselves because it is invisible information in the living network of our historic adaptation, which is not just the genes as I have explained to you but of course you won't comprehend it or agree because it doesn't fit your fatalistic Singularity religion).


And don't confuse running it now with running over millions of years in a living network which has been continuously living all that time. You have no way to extract the information in that system, because a total order of omniscience doesn't exist.

Btw, I also studied A.I. and neural nets in the 1980s.


We can get machines to mimic the processing of our environment which we have identified as reproducible. What you can't teach the machine is our historic adaptation to an unknown future which is stored in the continuous living analog network for which you don't even know which sensors to build. Since you can't know everything that has ever happened, you can know the entropy that is stored in the living network.


That difference should have been instructive to you, but for some reason the significance didn't occur to you.

I explained the importance of this in a prior reply:


We can't even extract our entropy in order to transfer it to machines. That we can't copy or even measure or know our own entropy but can copy of the entropy of machines is very instructive.

Nature never produces an exact copy of anything. You seem to think even in fertilization that the only input entropy are the genes, but that is not the case. We also have cosmic rays, the environment of the womb, etc and then the environmental stimulus ongoing even from the first cell split of the embryo. Thus the entropy of the human system is not just a few TBs of genes. The fact that you can copy machines indicates their entropy is very low.


No, you are.


The fact that Mary is a unique derivative of unbounded entropy our living, continuous, analog network is absolutely critical to the point of why the resilience and adaptation of the human system is eons greater than that of the machines.


If everything was random (i.e. instead of unbounded entropy, we had reached infinite entropy and nothing was distinguishable), then we wouldn't even bother talking about a Singularity and machines being evolutionarily superior to humans.


You don't seem to comprehend that the information stored in the living network is a historic adaptation to those unpredictable events and that you can't know all of it. It is recorded in our living adaptation, but you can't go experience it. It is there, but inaccessible to you. Our living network will react to its environment with that stored entropy but you can't possibly measure not calculate it (because you can't go back in time and experience every thing, and especially not every cell mutation, etc). Top-down knowledge is not complete. The little nuances of differences are what stores the eons of quadrillions (or more!) of historic adaptations.


No, you are incorrect again.


It was the unbounded entropy introduced by the unpredictable communication delay that means the entropy of the equation for Pi is not the entropy of the system. And the point is that the continuous, living human network is going react to that unpredictable environment with its quadrillions (or more!) of historic adaptations which are stored in the knowledge and diversity of the network. But we can't extract or even calculate that pre-existing state which is also an input to the system.


You can stop worrying without the Singularity. The human race is well adapted unless the Earth is totally destroyed. And we are approaching extraterrestrial adaptation.

I got 51% attacked here on my topic by the genius show (Dino vs Shelby)  :D
And you guys when i post comments too long ?
I started skipping most of it guys no offense.. it's just getting to be a bit much  :o

Disagree. Because the government is becoming inconsistent with itself (e.g. Trump will be in 4 years and is changing for example healthcare, EPA, and tax laws, then leftists will be back in and change all the laws ex post facto) and thus the best way to be law-abiding, is to be less involved in their inconsistent and self-destructive system. They don't even respect their own Constitution any more. The judicial system is a kangaroo court. The less I can use fiat and a traditional bank, the better. The sooner I can opt-out of their dying morass, the better. (Note I am not advocating one not comply with laws, but as much as you can opt-out, I think it is better)

As the public-at-large wakes up to the reality that the system is collapsing, for their own survival some are going to reach out to what functions properly. Many others will flail about on false solutions and perish.

We allegedly commit 3 felonies a day in the USA even we don't know it.


Lol. Sorry, it wasn't intentional.

Speculators need liquidity and they also need to trust the exchange. So it is not fair to accuse them of not adhering to their logical needs. We haven't given them a viable means to get liquidity in a trustless, decentralized exchange.

Tangentially note in my whitepaper I have described a technology to eliminate the ability of exchanges to steal or lose coins. Yet retain the liquidity advantages of centralized exchanges. This will be implementing in my project.

I have a solution to that. The big time criminals will still get in trouble, the but the little guy will be left alone by the State:

For trivial amounts (i.e. for mass adoption), it has been proposed to enable recovery via your personal social network. So you identify which friends you trust to not gang up on you.

For serious amounts of money, you really need to invest properly in your security. Or outsource it to an insured "bank" if you want.


The solution to all this is in hand already.


Of course. This is very doable.


What you really mean is nobody is serious about solving the hard problems.

Hey and I tried to tell you that Ethereum was just a "scam" (play money for Vitalik & friends) but you were adamant that is wasn't. I told you more than a year ago that Casper would never work. Ethereum was a valid experiment but didn't need to cost $18+ million (not including the cost of the DAO attack). Some speculators made a lot of money. But it was never a properly vetted project (many of us told them at the outset that Turing complete and blockchain was a disaster waiting to happen).

But when I come into this thread and try to write seriously, I turn more people away and they start to vote "Yes" to the poll. So I will STFU and let you guys to continue to rant than talk to someone who actually wants to solve this.

One more transgression on my part.

Spoetnik, here is an example of what you are referring to. I must agree this is getting very tiring:

I live in a European country, and as far as I know, it is forbidden to do any productive activity without the status of a business (you have to declare yourself, get a business number, and even pay taxes yearly if you did $0 affairs during the year), and all business-related affairs need to be regulated on a business-bank account (not even a private account).  You are not allowed to accept cash beyond $1000,- in a direct sale if it is domestic ; you are not allowed to do any sales abroad with cash: it has to use your business account.  I have a small consultancy business next to my regular dayjob, the lightest possible structure that exists, and these rules apply.

Of course, there tolerances: if you do something casually, if the total amount doesn't surpass $5000 a year, and your activity can by no means be considered "professional" these rules don't apply.  For instance, if you do a one-time sale of stuff in your basement, you're not handling more than $5000,- in total and you cannot be suspected to have done this in a professional way, it is tolerated even though strictly speaking, against the law.


I would be surprised.  For the moment, there's still a vacuum, and the laws haven't tightened in.  But when one sees how there's a crack down on cash (the limit of cash use in stores has been lowered more and more: it used to be $10 000, then $5000, then $3000, now it is $1000), I seriously doubt that there will remain any freedom, except the temporary freedom of novelty, when the law didn't catch up yet.  

There's too much at stake for them.  Who controls the money, controls the country.  


I know.  But they have another weapon: fear.  Fear is what keeps power in place (next to faith and social pressure).


I think there's a way to make it illegal in court *if one wants to* and laws will catch up.  The reason is not the use of crypto currencies per se (there's almost no jurisprudence for that yet), but there's the fact that someone has been investing value in a business that has most probably not been declared, and is expecting returns on it, and that this business activity is done professionally.    If that is the case, you'd be already in deep trouble with social security laws, because you're doing "work" that is not declared, and you don't pay social security contributions on it.  There's an effective business structure which has not been officially declared.  You are using real estate (a room) in which you practice business activities (you're thinking for your business, you're working) which has not been declared.    All monetary activity of that business is not happening on a business-bank-account which has been joined to your declaration, and you didn't obtain the only allowed payments NOT on that account through cash in a sales point, locally.  In my jurisdiction, you would already be in deep doodoo.  *if they found out* which they probably can't unless they want to SET AN EXAMPLE to instill fear and social pressure.

They don't need to chase every millibitcoin versed.  They single out a few examples, after whom they go, they make a great legal show of it, they present them as tax evaders, people that take the jobs of honest people, accumulate all the accusations, and convict them to 10 years of prison.  They make sure that the mass media relay this, they make sufficient links with "terrorism financing" and "drugs", and that's it.   Most people will now refrain from using this.  They won't go 10 years to jail because they used crypto.  Banks will propose fiat ways to do what was so-called difficult with fiat before.  They will ask you 5% on top of it.  A new law will introduce a tax on it.  From that moment, it is strictly illegal to do the same without paying a similar tax.  

I know people in the tax administration.  70% of their investigations are inspired by anonymous letters giving away neighbours, competitors, business rivals, and even customers.  There's even a law in the making that if you give away a true tax offender (of course non-anonymously) you may get a percentage of the money they make after investigation.


As I outligned, most of those things are strictly speaking, already illegal.  

The goal of the laws is of course that you can't opt out strictly legally.  You can, in practice, if you are "under the radar" and with sufficient novelty that they aren't chasing that.  I think, "thanks" to bitcoin's high flying, this period is closing for crypto.  It got on the radar.  Silly gamblers.

Hell, where I live, it is even prohibited by law to help anyone in one's real estate to do any work that could also be done by a professional, if you're not related to less than the 3rd degree (parents, children, brother, sister).  I cannot go and help a buddy paint his rooms.  If I do so, I'm considered doing illegal work if I don't give out a "fair bill" and pay taxes on it, and this I can't do if I don't have a business.  So it is simply strictly illegal to help someone, that is not your family, do things in his house.  This is a law that wants to push people to take on professionals, and not count on friends.
I can't paint, install a bathroom, install a kitchen, do electricity, break or make internal walls, ... anything that is fixed to the real estate if it is not my brother, sister, son, father, mother, daughter's house. 

Well I am damn glad I am not a citizen of an EU member nation or other European totalitarian state. Because they are headed for third world country status as a result and the natural pressure of their bankrupt demographics+socialiam is driving this quoted result:

---

They aren't going to get the developing world entirely off of cash in the next 2 years as Europe goes over the cliff into a sovereign debt collapse (ignited by the French election of La Pen in May and then the German election later in the year that will throw out Merkel or lead to violent unrest if she isn't).

Changing citizenship is a very important priority for someone who is not a little guy. Because indeed it is true that if for example I remain a citizen of the USA, they will be able to force me to report things I wouldn't otherwise have to report if I was a citizen of a country which has no rules about reporting foreign earned income. And changing citizenship is not illegal (yet). Afaik, currently the USA doesn't require me to report activity such as that except to comply with FATCA and annual income tax returns (and afaik nothing prevents me yet from holding BTC during the year unreported during the year if I didn't earn it as a wage and I wasn't living in the country requiring me to comply with labor stuff such as Obama care). Then again I stopped hiring a CPA to keep me abreast of all the detailed changes since about 2003. And I myself stopped attempting to track it in detail sometime in the past 5 years or so. So it is possible I may be in violation of some rule that I am not aware of. I had planned to hire someone to review all my history if ever I can afford it and then attempt to fix up any issues in my history. In my case, it couldn't even reasonably be classified to be tax avoidance if I attempted to change citizenship, because even as it is now I don't need to pay any federal income taxes given the $100,000 a year foreign earned income exclusion (I live in the Philippines more than the required 335 days a year).

More saliently, as you point out even the EU has recognized they can't afford to regulate the little guy. And thus that perfectly fits with what crypto can do which is LEGAL! You will see this as my project's plans become more published.


You already admitted that even the EU doesn't regulate the millbitcoin little guy:


They know if they tried to regulate the little guy, he has nothing to lose and will give the State the middle finger. And then the State will be revealed as impotent as it is, wearing no clothes.


That hasn't worked for them with file sharing and software copyright piracy. The State and the RIAA got their heads handed to them.

I don't know.  Most people around me are quite fearsome about downloading stuff.  When I tell them about VPN I buy with bitcoin and so on, they look at me like I'm an extraterrestrial.   Someone I know had been downloading movies, and got a repremand letter and he really got scared.  So yes, people do download, but with fear on their minds, and without daring to talk publicly about it, which limits severely its potential.  And, it IS illegal.  Of course you can do it.  If you're lucky, they won't single you out as an example, and it is not difficult to get lucky.  But that doesn't make it legal.  That's my whole point.

So yes, crypto has a role.  But in as much as it is useful over fiat, it will be essentially illegal, even if you can use it and most chances are you'll be lucky, because, as you say, they can't go after every millibitcoin guy.  But then it isn't "law abiding".  Downloading movies is not law abiding, even if only the dumbest and/or unluckiest get caught, and there's enough room to use it "under the radar".

I haven't lived in a first world country since 2004, so I only remember that no one was scared then in the USA. I don't know about now. The videos I watch of Millennials protesting makes me think I don't even know the USA anymore. It has changed so much so fast. The videos may not be representative of daily attitudes and life though.

I can tell you that in the developing world, nobody is scared to download anything or click anything. They have nothing to lose. If you could see the way filipinos drive, you'd understand that you could never force these people to follow any rules. The Spanish tried for 400 years and failed. Even the iron-fisted Durturte who drops criminals from helicopters can't get these people to follow rules.

Generally speaking, I bet the people you know are not destitute and without any aid from the government. And they are probably not the youth. I think people who have nothing to lose or too young to fear anything, aren't scared of much.


It as if you entirely ignored the part of my prior reply, in which I explained that (according to you) even the EU does not make the little guy illegal w.r.t. to reporting small cash activity. That means afaik my plans for the "WWW of blockchains" will be LEGAL even in the EU.

The EU is going to be dealing with widespread civil unrest as they enter their sovereign debt and EU collapse/disintegration, thus I don't think they are going to be able get organized on telling the little guy he can't play with some game tokens on the Internet. They are likely to have millions of middle fingers pointing back at them if they do attempt to take away the little escapes that these peons have to satiate themselves on the Internet. Perhaps I will be wrong about the level of totalitarianism and we will really head directly into 1984 and enter a Dark Age scorched earth. But if that happens, then you've got bigger problems with surviving. I don't think TPTB will risk having their control grid burned to the ground by bezerk hoards of peons. If we go into scorched earth and zombie MadMax, then well learn to hunt and move to the Congo or something. The point is that they can't exert too much control without sending it over the edge into total chaos of MadMax collapse. TPTB have to give up some breathing room to prevent losing control entirely. You can't squeeze blood from a dry rag.

Telling people that they can't steal is reasonable and people know it is morally wrong. Telling the little guy he can't play with game tokens is not reasonable. It is like regulating that he can't drink, smoke, or have sex. Prohibition failed in the USA.

When the government becomes too unreasonable, the people revolt.

They've ratcheted down the levels of maximum cash transaction that has to be reported, as they test the waters to find that limit of tolerance. But they can't bring it down to $0 without causing a revolt, not unless they can satiate all the major needs the little guy has for cash. But how can they satiate the online gaming addiction by making it illegal to earn gaming token points? People need a little risk in their lives, so they feel alive.

When millions of people's sole income is coming from the gaming tokens, how will the EU compensate these people when the EU is bankrupt?

See by creating a third world underclass of unemployed youth, the EU is paving the way for my plans. They are rolling out the red carpet for it.

Also realize that they probably won't get organized on banning something that is very small and under their radar. By the time they realize it is a threat, then they've got a problem with banning something which people think is a reasonable activity. The moral outrage will be on them, if the people are not totally mindcontrolled. Then again, maybe Europe is totally emasculated (we'll see during Germany's election).

I think it is likely we are moving into chaos and TPTB will lose some control. They are for example getting a lot of blowback now for their AGW propaganda. Lamar Smith is now trying to prosecute the NOAA.

Disclaimer: I am not giving any professional advice on compliance with laws in any jurisdiction. Please consult your own attorney.

My Belgium friend (a former painter contractor) told me about that. I was shocked. Note he successfully worked "blackwork" for decades, but he told me that by now it is impossible as there are so many government inspectors snooping around. At age 13, I used to walk around the neighborhood and mow old ladies' lawns for $5 a pop (huge yards with deep crab grass in the sweltering summer of New Orleans). How the world has changed. The USA was not any where near that when I left in 2004. I don't know about now, but I think Trump is reversing a lot of that. I would GTFO of the EU (pronounced "ewww")!

But the new form of that job I used to do, is some youth doing some activity on the Internet and getting some cash from it. This I think happens a lot.

The government is going to regulate the people with significant money, but not all these youth and others who are just doing a "hobby".

That is why those with significant money need to GTFO out these Western citizenship clusterfucks or otherwise organize their legal affairs.

Most of the concentrated monetary capital of the world will die during Stage #5. I had long warned of that. Yet that doesn't mean my "gaming token" won't prosper. It just means those who hold significant tokens might not prosper if they can't find a jurisdiction which doesn't steal everything from them.

(I don't mean "gaming token" as in only for computer games. I have a broader idea of what I mean by "game". For example, social networking is a game.)

I am interested to read your further and others' viewpoints on this issue. It is interesting to pick the brains of others for their perspective.

Never and ever, I like making money from new fields, and bitcoin and altcoins make us many profits, therefore I never lose any interest.

We all see eye to eye overall more than you'd think.

I also have lost interest over the years in being a File Sharing supporter.
So trust me i get the defending freedom thing ;)

I see the direction of crypto held by the majority.
And they steer the ship how they want.. profits.
Who or what will stop them from repeating the housing market crash ?
Who will hand out bail-out packages in Crypto ?
I said long ago guys like BigVern would cut & run when it got ugly looking.. same with GOX.
I said they would decide to bail out and rip off people on the way out the door.
And that is what is happening from small players to large ones.

..as the scene gets uglier & uglier.

The same happened with Piracy.
More & more users flocked to alternatives like Spotify or online streaming sites or File Lockers etc.
The once popular torrent scene has been on the decline for ages.
I know that opens a big can of worms so feel free to ignore the P2P commentary. LOL

Are the users / majority going to run, fight or compromise ? I choose the later always.
Crypto laws or regulations do not need to be a sweeping ban on them.
You all assume the word law means you can't do what you are doing now.

You all enjoy investing in coins manipulated by our own version of Martha Stewart on govt controlled exchanges ?
You enjoy GOX & Cryptsy taking the money ?
You feel good about the crypto / dark market reputation in the public ?

I'd say we are at a cross-roads where we need figure out where we stand in the Altcoin scene overall with morality vs profit.. with regulations and the nagging BTC block size debate ;)
The mass of people have final say not me.

Well, the point is that, if you're suspected, the proof is on you that you are within the tolerated boundaries.  This is a legal nightmare, against every principle of law: you have to prove your innocence in these cases, and they don't have to bring reasonable proof of your guilt.  Everything dealing with taxes and financial laws is of this reversed proof principle (and so is strictly speaking, a "lawless law").

So, IF you are dealing with cash, and they can prove that you've been dealing with SOME cash, it is up to you to prove that you didn't surpass the $5000/year limit and that you didn't do anything "professionally" that way.  This is essentially impossible to prove, so you are at the mercy of the judge.   So *if they are after you for another reason* (like a political one), it is easy to convict you if ever they have one single instance of you handling cash against something.

You shouldn't confuse "tolerated" and "legal".  Tolerated has the problem that the burden of proof resides upon your shoulders, and that that proof can never be delivered.  So if you participate in a tolerated activity, you are at their mercy for anything.  If you *really* are a small guy and they have nothing against you (you haven't been politically incorrect, you aren't of a suspicious race they want to nail down (white, say), you have shown sufficient respect for the system in place), they will not annoy you.  If however, you piss them off in one way or another, they can use these honey pots to nail you on the cross and there's not much you can do about that.  And that's the goal of these things.

They don't like it, and they would like to outlaw it.  But it takes them too much effort to actually outlaw it.  So they discourage it by setting examples, and they use it to convict their political enemies.


I'm closer to your second vision, unfortunately.  There's even a law I heard about, that if you want to have UV sessions to get a fake sun tan, you have to register to a national registry, so that you cannot obtain more than an allowed dose of UV, and each time you take a session, the beauty institute is supposed to report it to the national register.  Now, I don't do UV, but if you see the level of totalitarianism for these details, it is outright scary.  The official reason is that too much UV gives you skin cancer, which is too expensive for social security.


But I agree with that.  Only, you can't say that it will be law abiding.  It will simply be tolerated to a certain extend, because it takes them too much resources to weed out, but at the same time it is a honey pot, and they will use it selectively to convict their political opponents and set them as an example.

Total power occurs when the law forbids everything, and most is tolerated.   Then the arbitrariness of judgement, which was done away with since King Hammurabi invented the law, is back, and full despotism has its way.  A fully Kafka-ian world.


It failed, but it was serving power in its arbitrariness.

People only revolt when an unreasonable law is applied.  When an unreasonable law is voted, but its transgression is tolerated, people don't revolt.  And you can use the law selectively to hit your political enemies.

This is universal behaviour.  Perfectly normal.


All I will be able to do with crypto, I already do it with fiat.  The only things I buy with crypto, are internet services of which I don't want people to put their noses in.  All the rest is too much hassle with crypto, and I do it with my credit card.


Yes.  Because you shouldn't use exchanges (apart from getting a starter's budget if you want to start buying before you want to start selling stuff).


Yes, because this reminds crypto users what "trustless" means.


Yes, because I don't want the public to adopt crypto at large, and fiatize it totally.

The public can do most if not all their financial affairs with fiat.  The niche applications of crypto are those that cannot be done with fiat, and hence are not 100% law abiding.

Of course not.  Like me, I'm swimming in gov. money.  Because if I weren't, I would have to cough it up as taxes.  In a socialist culture, you can only be stolen, or be part of the thieves.  The only reasonable individual choice is to be part of the thieves.  But I regret that I have to be part of the thieves.  That's what pisses me off.  But I live very will on tax money.

I'm still doing quite good trading altcoins. But I decided to change my attitude towards Bitcoin and alternative cryptocurrencies this year, radically. Why? I was looking at Bitcoin for half a year, studying technical issues etc. and I understand that Bitcoin is going nowhere. I'm bidding on alts I have chosen for long term. I'm also trading to buy more alts I have chosen to baghold. I'm sure this will give me good benefits in 10 years.

As I read your post, and I tie it into your prior point that the Singularity in your view might help because superior machines would trample this horrific state of mankind, I realize that the EU is psychologically toxic. It has ostensibly turned you into a doomsday fatalist. I am so damn glad I am not in the EU. Thanks for confirming to me that I do not want to go live in the center of Europe. Finland seemed to be very hard on rpietila's mental state also. I don't know if Estonia (where his castle is) is better? I ask because I have a gracious standing offer to go live there at his castle if I run out of funds to live on (so I can continue my work).

You could possibly be correct about the global totalitarianism coming (even though I do agree a Stage #5 is coming), but I think your expectation is excessively bleak and let's discuss...


Okay but this doesn't address my point. You are speaking from the perspective of someone who has something to lose if they attack you. You are saying they can destroy all the people that have some significant assets and even if you try to be 100% legally compliant, you really can't be. I agreed with that upthread and stated that even complying with fiat, you will end up being illegal in the end (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1798356.msg17948850#msg17948850) (so what is the point of staying in fiat then?). Everyone will suffer, same as in Nazi Germany. The famous verse still applies as all of you try to cope with the system and try to stay in fiat and comply (at the end stage even complying won't be legal because totalitarian lawlessness and duplicity will rule!):


But my point is that those who have nothing (e.g. the youth, unemployed, destitute, and little guys) don't have anything that can be taken from them. Thus they have no fear. And if the government attacks their sources of enjoyment and tiny income streams, then these people revolt. Thus the government won't bother to attack these people, as there is nothing they can get from doing it and the government can only stir up a big problem for themselves.


Those with nothing to lose ignore those examples. And the government knows not to fuck with the little pleasures and tiny hobbies of those masses of little people.

The government likes to use these masses against the middle class. They give them some money to protest and do revolutions. Apparently in Europe they are essentially giving them a basic income (even when not working) to keep them not being little people with nothing to lose?

But then what happens when the welfare state collapses and the EU can't give them basic income any more? That is what I am talking about. Thus afaics, the TPTB are sending them right into the lap of my sort of plan for a WWW of blockchains.

Are you referring to a long interim period while the EU maintains basic income by stealing all the wealth first? How long can that be sustained? Aren't European capitalists already moving their funds out to the US dollar already. All that will be remaining is an empty shell of government despots, dependents, and (Tuberculosis carriers) rapefugees.

That is why I say GTFO of the "ewww". It is going to be scorched earth over there. Head to greener pastures asap.


Yeah I even heard that each egg your chicken lays needs an inspector's sticker on it while the hen is still sitting on it to confirm it wasn't a "black" egg. Lol. WTF  :o The "ewww" is rotting stench.

<joke>If I lived in a place like that, I would have long ago killed myself or machine gunned down a brigade of officials.</joke> Seriously I could not live in a place like that and retain my sanity. It is so against nature.


If the EU makes it illegal to trade gaming tokens on the Internet or that you have to report it or that they start attacking everyone that does less than $5000 a year, then the "ewww" is illegal and the human race will make it so. Watch that corrupt clusterfuck self-destruct into a massive culling in short order.

Btw, my 65 year old Belgium friend says, "the banks will never take my savings". I can't convince him otherwise. He says the EU central bank bailed out in prior crisis and will never allow the banks to fail. So imagine what happens when all these retirees loose everything.


Yeah that is lawlessness and duplicity. Complete totalitarianism. It is impossible to do that in every nation on earth right now. Have you traveled?


I see that most everyone in Europe is on basic income plan. Now I understand why you see Nazi Germany coming. I agree.

GTFO out of the "ewww". The entire world is not in the same condition as your clusterfuck over there.


You'll have only yourself to blame for trying to profit on the Nazis until there is no one left but you to extract wealth (and possibly life) from.

You know this EU scheme was hatched by Germany in order to be able to use its superior productivity to enslave Europe. France went along because Charles de Gaulle's (and French) high pride (didn't want to be subservient to the USA).

Your insight is amazing.

Ya know i hear that's life and things are going well..
Bullshit.

Things have gotten worse and will continue to do so and how will you react *soon* ?
I am tired of this whole this is just nature playing out bullshit retort.

Do you stand there and say that at car wreck sites with body parts laying around ?

The two guys here commenting the most are coin makers / backers.
So hmm have an agenda much ?
One is on a mission to defend Monero pretty much and the other is making his own Bitcoin Killer.
Both want no laws at all to further their agenda.
Both want to down play the shit fest this has become and the reaction it is getting from authorities.

THAT is why i am sick of this shit.
I am fed up with ICO makers saying ohhh this is going great.. the more the better.
When in reality it's not.
More losers = more people leave crypto.

There is no comparison to how this was in late 2013 when popularity exploded.
Since the scene has no rules the guys who run exchanges and make coins can rig the game to make sure they always win.
You WILL lose !
Keep gambling and you will guaranteed be broke.
All the while the corrupt players say it's going great counting YOUR cash !

Heap another ICO onto the fire and let's play the race to ROI's before pyramid scheme coin #3,222 collapses.

Either you are blind or dishonest.
There has been no digital currency innovation.. just alternative use ICO schemes for profit briefly popular then dumped on.

THAT IS "LIFE"

The reality here is staring you all in the face.. which is why BTC is rocketing up in price.
Altcoins = pointless garbage (so far) hence BTC = Popular.

The block-chain was never improved on with an innovation.
Users think modifying the existing block-chain concept someone else made is their new creation.
It's not.
I have always asked you all why you *settled* on block-chains and quit trying to make a better system.
Either there is a better system than block-chain or you all need to quit cawing like crows Innovations.

You all never seem to get it..
The only perception that matters is the majority who control crypto and the rest of the outside world.
And the link between the two (context)
..funny enough that aspect seems to be the ONLY thing you all don't care about.

You just mentioned my agenda: "no laws".  I like monero in as much as it can be a tool to escape laws.  I don't like monero for monero's sake.  The day that monero is not a tool any more that might help escape laws, I won't like monero any more.  This is what is happening right now with bitcoin.  Bitcoin is essentially over as a tool to escape the law.  It is being fiatized at light speed.  That's why it is going to the moon, BTW, because the powers that be are taking it over, and have seen the use of it to tie people up.


Those "losers" should finally learn what crypto is about: trustlessness.  


There can be no corruption in a game that is based upon trustlessness, can there ?  Do you really understand what that means, trustlessness ?  It  means that you shouldn't trust anybody, because everybody is trying to rip you off.  So if people get ripped off, that means that "trustlessness" is working at full speed, and as someone who is wanting more adoption of trustlessness, it is a strange thing to be obfuscated when people cannot be trusted and "scam" one another - which is exactly what trustlessness is about.  It is an even stranger thing that people wanting general adoption of trustlessness would want people who are not to be trusted to be punished by law, so that trust comes back to the scene of trustlessness.

Do you understand the mega-contradiction of your sayings ?

If you want crypto (the technology that handles trustlessness) to be adopted, you also want trustlessness to be adopted, which means that you want it to be essentially impossible to be able to trust anything.  Of course you cannot want this, and at the same time, whine about scams, and crying for law and regulation.

Btw, I agree that the focus on marketing to dark markets is not wise. Isn't a mainstream nor appropriate way to teach thinking about organizing for freedom. I've been happy to stand back and watch Monero shoot themselves in the foot.

Please understand that Bitcoin joining the fiat system is not a good thing:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1798356.msg17966654#msg17966654  <--- READ @dinofelis's point please
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1798356.msg17960724#msg17960724

Instead we need anonymity that is compliant with a civilized society:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1796575.msg17968724#msg17968724

Note anonymity will never be 100% iron-clad. The bad guys can still be tracked down. But we need privacy, else we will have totalitarianism. We can't take away the power of the little guy because then we will end up with an asymmetrically all-powerful corrupt State (1984).

Getting the feeling of being burn out is something very common and happens to everyone at some point in their lives no matter how passionate they are about a particular subject, sometimes the best is to take some time off and then see if that improves your mood regarding crypto and related subjects.

My opinion is that if people are so much indoctrinated that they associate "dark market" with "bad" and not with "freedom", there's no amount of teaching that can help them.  Because dark markets are essentially about freedom.  Most participants in dark markets are consenting adults that gain mutual advantage from it in an economic relationship that harms nobody else.  There are a few exceptions, like dark markets for murder or child porn: I agree that these are bad things, because they deal with suffering/death of third parties.  But by far most dark markets are for "illicit" goods, read drugs.

While the only drugs I'm using is beer and wine in moderate amounts, and I don't want to take drugs because I don't want to damage the machine that brings me most of my joy, my brain, I understand that many people do want to take drugs, and their totally *intimate* experiences they obtain with that is totally *their business*.  Maybe these people have moments of intense happiness - which is, after all, the only goal in life. It is a fundamental freedom to want to be happy for half a day and die, rather than to live 50 more years without that extasy.  It is not my piece of cake, but I can very well understand that many people want that.

So why do states outlaw drugs ?  Because they know that there's an almost inelastic demand for it, and that this will give rise to "dark markets".  They outlaw drugs, to make the business of drugs lucrative and illegal, in other words, to obtain sufficient organized crime.  The premium for the illegality of drugs makes it a very risky, and hence, very lucrative business.  The risk, and the gains, are so high that this motivates several actors to take on high risks, get high rewards, and hence, don't mind using violence and other bad actions.  In other words, states outlaw drugs in order for there to exist  sufficient organized crime.  This gives states their opportunity to exist, to oppress, to control.

States need organized crime, terrorism, or other states as a threat, in order to make the gullible population accept their oppression, control and surveillance.

Dark markets are nothing else but distorted places of freedom, distorted by the huge premium of the risk of illegality, brought by the state, in the pockets of organized crime.

States will never shut down dark markets entirely.  They cannot, but they don't want to either.  However, they need to take down some of them regularly, because otherwise, these become normal markets, the risk premium goes down, and crime doesn't thrive, which is against the wishes of the state.

Silk road was essentially taken down because if it were running too smoothly, it would have broken the crime aspect of drugs markets.  Silk road was taking out too much of the violence and crime of drug markets.  It was killing the crime premium.  If it would continue, it would have become the amazon of drugs.  What put Silk Road out of business, was the rule of non-violence.  States cannot cope with non-violent dark markets.  People would realize it is simply about economic freedom, and not about "bad guys with guns harming people".

The govt's exist to coral us and manage money etc.
So you guys are saying the main point to all of this is to unravel the world's govt's ?
Crypto is about toppling the govt structure ?

Ya know i am not against that per say.. the problem i have with is it is practicability.

Take away the US & CAN govt and remove the FIAT dollar from existence.
How do you expect your garbage to be picked up when there is no one to do it ?
Who will fly the fighter jets to defend your country ?
Who will come when you call 911 ?
Who will put out the forest fires that break out ?
Who will build the roads ?
Who will arrest that serial killer or Terrorist plotting an attack ?
Who will fund that NASA space program ?

What i hear is backyard-existentialists chanting their ideology with little thought to reality.
All of it severely drenched in conspiracy and talk of NWO cabal's out to get us etc.

I got to say "The Man" has provided me a lot !
Yeah he may take my taxes and yeah he may be planning a grand population culling with Chemtrails..
But i have a roof over my head and a road to drive on and i am not flying the North Korean flag.

Topic ?

Ok well i'll play along.
What are the odds that you CAN topple FIAT / The Govt's ?
How much of a bloody battle would this be and how long will it take ?
Know why this matters ?
Because children in school are here RIGHT now investing in "rebel coins"
They are not here chanting in 100 years FIAT will be gone..

You guys spouting off all this ideology are are leading the rats to the slaughter.
The naive traders assuming they CAN do this so it's legit don't see the battle incoming.
Nope.. they are sold the Freedom speech and told Free Market is good etc.
While no one says a word to them about the risks of investing in "Bring Down the Government Coin"

So when ? how ? who ? Notice these guys will not even stop using an exchange that says they hand over their data to US fed's getting us arrested ?
They just keep using them !
Who is going to fight this battle vs the worlds govt might.. which is pretty strong i might add.

Puttering around here selling idiots a fantasy for profits is what it amounts to.
Like i just said on the last comment i made here.

When the heat comes they will bolt !
If this was not true everyone would still be bag-holding those first coins that came out.
All they do is jump and run when the pressure is put on them.
See why TIME matters ?

You all need to make at the very least a small effort to be grounded in reality.
Your little insulated facade bubble here is NOT protected.. theymos will hand over your ass to the Fed's *if he has not already done so on occasion.

In piracy circles some stings last 4, 5 or even 6 years.
Providing a false sense of security until mass arrests were rolled out.
Get lippy here all you want about Anti-Law bullshit but i know you will all fold when they are at your door.  ::)

Grow up.

To be able to live without it if you want to.


By paying for it, like you pay for your cell phone, your bread, your electricity ?


You don't need that, as there is no country to defend.  If every citizen is armed and independent of any hierarchical structure, there's nothing to attack.


The emergency company you contracted with.


The organisation you paid for that, if that's one of your worries.  


The same private companies that build roads today.  If you want a road, you can pay for it.  If you don't want a road, you don't pay for it.


Citizens that like to do that, or a security company you pay for, if you want that guy stopped and you don't feel like defending yourself.

And there won't be any terrorist attack of significance, as terrorists aim for political influence, and there's no such thing as a state to influence.  Moreover, terrorist attacks are negligible.  They are blown out of proportion by states to increase their power, but the chances of you dying in a car accident are orders of magnitude larger than the chances of you dying by a terrorist attack.


Whoever likes that.  And those that don't like it, don't need it.

Who will fund movies ?  Who will fund baking bread ?  Who will fund making music ?  Who will fund the internet ?  Who will fund growing food ?  Who will fund building houses ?   Who will fund computer software ?  Who will fund windows ?  Who will fund linux ?  Who will fund google ? 

If you really need it, you will find a way to pay for it, and someone will find the opportunity to do it for you.  And if you don't really need it, well, you don't really need it.

People in North Korea say the same, but with "and I'm not flying the USA flag".

The difference is much smaller than you think.  Which is exactly what "The Man" wants you to think, and he succeeds.

A slave that doesn't know he's a slave, is it a slave ?

You are spewing a never ending stream of hypothetical bullshit.

There is no replacement setup to do the jobs the US govt does.
Sure you could hypothetically privatize a lot of it but at a certain point it just isn't doable and you then have to form a govt of sorts.

You guys have your heads so far up your ass i don't know how you keep posting this silly drivel here with a straight face.
I don't even know where to begin LOL

What part of it all do you want me to point out is silly bullshit ?
You do realize most of the world wants a govt and FIAT and laws right ?
And if you threaten them they will swiftly bury your ass.

I got to stop at this point.
You guys are fucked in the head.
You think Monero can defeat FIAT / Govt ?
Wrong.. all the morons will be rounded up and thrown in jail when ever the hell they feel like it.
And i bet there will also be no resistance from any of them either.
Mr. fluffypony running his gambling site (that sometimes gets hacked) will be standing in the doorway of his house in his old worn-out panties in the middle of the night as the US Fed's "Request" him to come with them..

Notice how the entire forum simply lets 2 guys chant on here with insane rambling ?
See anyone else here bothering to dispute this silly bullshit ?
They know i am right.. and are playing along quietly while the going is good for the ROI's.
The people watching these topics are not going to be fighting any valiant grand battle to topple the govt or destroy FIAT.

If the US govt wants to strangle this shit out it will.
They have not so far because it is not a threat.
In other words what i was just saying over & over.. you are all talk ..SILLY BULLSHIT TALK !
I am sure FBI etc have their feet up on the table reading this laughing their fucking ass off.
After all they created Bitcoin right Shelby ?

Some people went too far down the rabbit hole and are a lost cause.
I would suggest not taking trade advice from rabbits  :D

Kids tread lightly with your investment / lunch money there is bullshit peddlers here good at giving grand speeches.
Being a long term bag-holder of "Bring Down The Government Coin" may not be a sound investment.

No it is to be able to get out of the way so as to not be trampled when the governments unravel themselves and collapse.

They don't need any assistance with unraveling as that is the one thing they are quite competent at.


I agree that having no government at all would be a power vacuum. I don't think mankind is able to spontaneously organize, such as to defend against significant threats.

This is why for example I have explained (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1796575.msg17968724#msg17968724) we need a form of anonymity which can be compatible with reporting for taxation.

Edit: this discussion continued later (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1798356.msg18012270#msg18012270).

The precocious idealism you two ramble here incessantly is so far out of touch with reality it blows me away.
I don't know which part of the hypothetical idealistic rabble i want to tear apart first.

One day.. i will make the Bitcoin killer !
One day.. i will defeat the evil FIAT and their NWO overlords freeing humanity from our slave overlords.

Meanwhile.. in the mean time hey, pssst wanna buy some "ICO" coinz ?

You two are delusional and have mental problems.
You don't have a good grasp on reality in the slightest.
This place attracts little know it all's.

Shooting your mouth off here is good short term NOT long term.
Dino's contrarian routine where he spouts off about hypothetical crap trying to find an exception to every rules does not equate to real reality.

Shelby your judgment here is well.. fucked up.
You had your main account banned for as you put it.. posting ETH FUD.
Yup.. they were trying to keep you down and censor you.
Of course it had nothing to do with the blatantly obvious.. posting 5 long rants back to back. (all the time)
Then you claimed you were leaving.. and..
Then you claim Bitcoin was some type of NWO conspiracy.
THEN.. you post shitloads of conspiracy shit in the Political section here.. railing on and on and on and on.

What do people here believe ? Speak up people tell these fucking blow-hard's what YOU think.
The more you stay silent the more they push on overconfident..

You know you guys skip from even taking the first line of code to the "Bitcoin Killer"
straight to we're going to abolish all law and have a free society free of our NWO overlords.
Maybe write 1 line of code then come back and make bold grand proclamations ?

What i am harping on is that giant massive gap in between the 1st line of code and the mighty downfall of the FIAT / Financial system around the globe.
You see in between those two points you have people here clutching BTC looking for a coin to invest in for profits.

Hypothetically we can make the earth stop spinning.. which is just as likely as the shit these 2 guys keep posting here.

Seriously get some fucking med's guys.
Write a book or something.. the fantasy and conspiracy theory shit should sell lots of copies.
Meanwhile the rest of us are here stuck in reality.

I guess Dino and Shelby should be handling the Coinbase IRS case huh guys ?
You can reinterpret their situation as an IRS fishing expedition or claim it's audit only applicable to the IRS themselves and argue on..
Yup the same Coinbase that handed over the KickAssTorrents founders ass to the Fed's who is RIGHT NOW in jail.
I guess he would be free if he posted the silly bullshit Free Market rabble here you two post right ?
His Bitcointalk freedom speeches were weak there for they arrested him LOL

Since ALL OF YOU HERE are planning on destroying FIAT and toppling the govt and abolishing law..
Then i want all of you to tell me EXACTLY how you intend to achieve this lofty ambitious goal
AND.. how long do you expect it to take and which ICO coin do i have to BUY to do it LOL

I already told you that we don't have to topple FIAT, as it topples itself every damn time throughout human history over and over again:




As for the global economic collapse underway, you need to study history. Total collapse of empires has happened over and over again.


Hey were the personal insults really necessary. Are you trying to have a civilized discussion or be ignored by everyone. Have I made insulting remarks about you in this thread?

Shelby you never act accountable enough though. (about your crypto history and other related views)
You have to come to terms many of us here (i assume) think you are a bit crazy.
You take it as a personal insult though.
When i say you have demonstrated crazy views i don't mean to trash on you..
..i mean to say this has to skew your perspective.

I could have been nicer about it all and i really do offer you an apology here for my ranting lately Shelby.
All of us know you are smart.. clearly gifted and rather "verbose" LOL

Perspective (context) is a thing we can't ignore.
Step back away from your own position and look at things.
All of us are biased to some extent.
I will always inherently veer in one direction no matter how hard i try.. as all of you will too.
It's your job to resist that and search for "being wrong".

Is the launch of Bitcoin a conspiracy ? How many people believe this ? Majority ?
I am sorry but i don't see tangible proof to back it up.

When i say you two have your positions earlier.. you do.
One of you is going to make the Bitcoin Killer and the other is always defending Monero sort off (or defending ANON)
That is a fact.
In other words i think i come to the table more neutral than you guys.
I *could* change my mind to if i was convinced.. hell i thought we should resist laws when i got into Crypto.

So you did not address what i was saying earlier and claimed i insulted you.
I have to keep re stating what i already said over & over in a dramatic fashion to hammer the point home and get you guys to reply back honestly.. for the viewers here.
Any time you two agree with me you slide it in real quiet in some large rant then carry on about other things.

All i want is to see this stuff as it is.. not how it SHOULD be.
I want to be honest, realistic and practical about it all.
And if there are problems then so fucking what !
If we acknowledge them we can then move forward.

Scroll back and read what i was saying earlier.
You anti-law free market guys i think are fucking bat shit crazy. LOL
It has nothing to do with WHOM has these views.. it's the view itself i insult ;)

I will say again if Shelby or Dino or any others felt i was personally insulting then you really do have my apologies.
We do all have our bad qualities etc ..you all know i do hahhaha

You have to distinguish 2 different questions:

1) is a society without a human-led violence monopolist that dictates the law *thinkable* and potentially functional ?

2) is there a way to go there when you already have such a violence monopolist who doesn't want to give up its privileges ?

My stance on 1) is a clear yes, but I agree that 2) is a serious problem.


That is part of the indoctrination.  Most of the world wants you to worship Allah too.


No, that's not the idea.  Governments will end up collapsing under their own weight.  If an alternative economic system is "ready to take over" at that point, it may succeed ; in the mean time, it should stealthily develop underground without too much noise.


Count yourself in too :)  You even got a thread about your ramblings ;)


The biggest threat to the US government is itself and their puppies in the UK and elsewhere.  You talked about fighter jets and terrorism.  Islam terrorism is a pure product of the US government.  They used their jet fighters to construct Islam terrorism entirely.  This was done by their total support for the Saoudis since about 70 years.  The abominable colonisations by powers like the UK, France, and so on, followed by geopolitical games mainly lead by the US afterwards, have made that people in the Middle East have been under horrible regimes that were armed, and kept in power by exactly the jet fighters of the US government, making a feeding ground for religious-based hate across the whole middle east.  This has been instrumentalized and pushed to an extreme by the US government in its fight against the Soviet Union.  Islam terrorism was a US invention in Afghanistan, to piss off the Soviets.  They have amplified it later with the biggest lies in history to start a war with their jet fighters, when they turned Iraq into the biggest Islam terrorist training camp of the world.   I think that if you would have been an Iraqi citizen, your hate for the US and their puppies would be so great for what they've done to you and your people, that you'd be happy to blow yourself up if you can blow up a few of those idiots cheering and financing that crime against humanity.  I think that from their viewpoint, there's no difference between what the US gov, his jet fighters, and their puppies, have been doing, and what the Jews had to live with the Nazi regime.
And now, to "protect" their citizens against these people, the US government needs more jet fighters and needs to reduce liberties, and needs more surveillance and more income from their citizens.  Where do you think this is going to lead ?

*that* is what "government" is about: do bad things, see some consequences, and want more power to do more bad things "to protect against the consequences of bad things".  I'm not particularly talking about the US government.  History is full of examples, and the US government is not an exception.  Concentrate violence and power in the hands of a few (that's what a government is), and ugly things happen.

@dinofelis, for as long as physical violence is effective, we will continue to have government (per Max Weber's canonical definition of government as a "monopoly on the use of violence"), because the primary reason government formed was to enable civilization to progress from warlords to investment in commerce (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg17855911#msg17855911) via sea transport (Athenian Empire) and roads (Roman Empire) for the Agricultural (first and second) revolutions. Government was necessary to aggregate the capital and protection for large economy-of-scale fixed capital investments continuing into the First and Second Industrial Ages. We are now entering the Second Computer Revolution which my thesis posits is spawning the Knowledge Age due to network effects from the First Computer Revolution.

So to get rid of the natural demand for government, then we need to transition the economy away from fixed capital investments to non-fungible, decentralized creativity. This is what my seminal essay in 2012 "Rise of Knowledge, Death of Finance" (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg17912097#msg17912097) was about.

So we can't go all the way to Stage #6 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg17855911#msg17855911) in one step. We have to go through Stage #5 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg17855911#msg17855911) as a process of evolution.

Thus our decentralization technologies need to be compatible with Stage #5. That is why I am outlining what I conjecture to be some flaws in Monero's anonymity design (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1796575.msg17968724#msg17968724). Afaics, we can't go all the way to "no taxes" now. Impossible. Asia will rise up and they don't have the socialism clusterfuck of the West, so they can have effective governance with low taxes. Thus IMO, Monero will not be tolerated by the society and thus governments in Stage #5.

Your model is too black & white. You need to imagine the transitional evolution mankind must go through.

@Spoetnik, my analysis of what has been transpiring and will transpire has been excellent. Have you reviewed the partial account of highlights my record (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1665943.msg17888137#msg17888137)? I'd prefer we stay on topic of the issues and that means not arguing about whether I am crazy or fallible. Refute our arguments instead.

I don't fully agree with this analysis.  I think cause and consequence are inverted here, although you do have a point.  I don't think that government *was needed* ; rather that it was *unavoidably created*.  To me, the "warlords" ARE the governments, and they arise BECAUSE there is wealth to steal ; not the other way around.  It is not because one created governments, that wealth occured ; it is because there was wealth, that warlords became governments.
That said, it is true that the monopoly of violence (the ultimate winner of the law of the strongest) DID have a positive side-effect: as there was no competition on the violence side any more (there was no incentive to do so, as the monopolist was so terribly strong that it was a waste of effort, and would lead to one's demise), it DID allow for the investment in violence to be left to the government, which, through economies of scale, could reduce the total expenditure for violence (and limit the total amount of capital destruction by violence).
The price to pay was a submission to a warlord (the government).  I do not agree that the government permitted less violence: what was local small scale violence, was replaced by inter-governmental wars on large scale.  But one did win by economies of scale on the violence effort: instead of everyone investing in some small-scale defence, one could profit from the economies of scale to have relatively modest expenditures for much larger scale violence in warfare.

I think the total amount of violence increased with the advent of states ; but the total investment in it lowered, because of economies of scale.  One could kill much more people, and destroy much more property, with less investment using states and armies, than the investment needed by individuals to protect their families and ownership, which was a hugely inefficient way to do mass killings and destruction.


There is no natural demand for government in my opinion.  There is a demand for a mutual agreement for non-violence but that doesn't need to go through the concentration of violence in the hands of warlords (states) that use this to fight each other in wars.

Violence is a "market failure" that is only made worse by the advent of governments if you want to.  And there's no way to ever become insensitive from violence.

However, there is a way to empower individuals with weapons of mass destruction.  As such, the economies of scale on the level of warlords/states will lose its significance.

I see two paths to weapons of mass destruction for modest individual investments.  The first is laser-isotope separation.  This is a technology of which development was stopped because one realized the danger of it, but one cannot stop eternally technological knowledge.  The day that isotopic separation by lasers becomes fully efficient, with table-top equipment it will be possible to turn natural uranium into bomb-grade U-235.  You'd need, say, 10 kg to make a bomb, which means you'd need about 1 ton of natural uranium.  This is a small truckload to smuggle.  It is probably out of reach for a modest individual, but a rich individual, or a small group, can easily do so.
In as much as plutonium production is messy, dirty, and needs huge installations because of the radioactive problems, natural uranium isotope separation doesn't need strong precautions.  Also, the triggering of a plutonium bomb is difficult, while an U-235 bomb is easy to build and activate.  The most difficult problem is the isotope separation, which still needs huge factories (it is what the Iranians try to hide from the US).   Natural uranium can be found a bit everywhere in nature, and if isotope separation can be done with table-top laser equipment, nothing can stop individuals or small groups to make a Hiroshima-type nuke in their basement.

But the second, much more attractive weapon of mass destruction I see evolving, is what I'd call "DNA printers".  If you have a DNA (or RNA) synthesizer - which will most probably be developed in the near future and will be of the size of less than table-top - you can synthesize about any known or artificial virus, and its antidote.   Give it 20 or 30 years and I think this kind of technology will be available.  The spread of a virus (eventually a triggerable virus, that you first let propagate without symptoms to get sufficient people contaminated, and that you can activate afterwards by a second infection that can be much more targetted) can then be done very very easily by just any individual who created or downloaded the right virus file and "printed" it, while giving himself and his kin the anti-dote.

When individuals can whipe out entire cities or continents, I don't see how the governments can keep their monopoly on violence based upon their economies of scale on warfare and killing.

Incorrect.

Warlords (feudalism) is what you get when there is a power vacuum and thus nothing can be organized on any sufficient economies-of-scale. It is what the Western Roman Empire collapsed back to for a Dark Age, because we didn't have the Roman military guarding the road construction and commerce.


Not only that, but it enabled protection for large scale infrastructure and commerce.

Competing Dark Age warlords means interstate commerce dies.


Agreed, but it did enable massive progress for mankind. You can't deny the Agricultural, Industrial, and now Computer revolutions of which the first two at least could not have happened without the nation-state as I explained above.


It requires a nation-state and it is a natural demand when the economies-of-scale of humans was in physically threatened work in the agricultural and industrial ages.


That is a non-sequitor. Chaos of physical security on the large scale would only send us back into a Dark Age with warlords.

Rather if human activity becomes sufficiently decentralized, then we no longer are threatened by physical attack. For example, it is impossible to attack the heartland of the USA with an army because there is a citizen's gun under every blade of grass. (the heartland can be attacked by isolating it from commerce and trade though, because we aren't 100% in the decentralized Knowledge Age yet)


In the decentralized Knowledge Age, the important people won't live in any concentrated area.

Sorry we can't move (within the next decade or two) to Monero's absolute anonymity. Sorry. We need a more pragmatic approach for Stage #5 of the global economic collapse because the State will still be strong in Asia and destructive in the West. I propose anonymity that is compatible with taxation, because Asia will have strong States not total collapse.

I sure hope you aren't throwing all caution to the wind and deciding to hell with it and you will break the law and hope the State collapses without consequences. If that is the Monero community's attitude, then the project will be doomed.

In my view, a state is nothing else but a warlord, one that got so strong over a territory, that competition was exterminated, and that the only warlords remaining, were the neighbours.

I think that what states do, is nothing else but "upscale" feudalism.  Instead of having local fights, you get more global wars, and instead of having a fight every year, you get a serious war every few decades.  Now, this is maybe what you are referring at, that as these "windows of opportunity" get larger, during these periods of prosperity, in between periods of slavery, war and destruction, there's enough room to progress and "set information aside" for the next cycle, which is less the case if these cycles happen on smaller scales, with less violence, but also with less large windows of prosperity.

I think the fundamental error is to think that the problem of violence can be solved by having such a big violence monopolist that everybody has to surrender to it.  This only slows down, but amplifies, the cycles of violence and slavery.  True, as the cycles are slowed down, the windows of opportunity grow larger (but the destructions that follow are also more severe, maybe to the point of no return).  That said, the *natural tendency* for war lords is, by economies of scale, to obtain automatically a violence monopolist.  So the appearance of states is a natural consequence.  But that doesn't mean that one has to approve it. 


This isn't entirely true.  Big progress is historically made when there were no empires.  Classical culture developed by the ancient Greeks came about when Greece was not part of the Roman empire.  Development essentially halted under the Roman empire.  Yes, they built roads and legal systems and so on.  But scientific development essentially came to a grinding halt.  Arab culture became most productive during the Caliphate (when Europe was part of a few Christian empires and made us go through the Middle ages), which was very distributed, and not very centrally organized.
It is true that the discovery of modern science started inside Western empires, but in fact, mostly *against* the dominant rule of the empires, which was the God-given King and aristocracy.  Galileo, who started the western scientific revolution, got into deep trouble with that.

Now, I admit that most of modern technological and scientific development happened under the gouvernance of relatively young western states, who did, indeed, provide means and protection for these developments to occur.  But these same governments are now suffocating us.  These governments were still OK when they were just put in place after the West cut off the head of their king, fought for their freedom of another king and installed "democratic" governments.  These initially light-weight structures were indeed beneficial at first sight and opened a window of opportunity.

But these same structures grew inevitably to the level of true power structures.  When you look at the US constitution, the Founding fathers built about every thinkable protection into it against such structures, and nevertheless, it happened.  The US government evolved from a system that was designed NOT to become a powerhouse of slavery and violence, into what it is now: one of the worst violence monopolists on earth.  And every precaution has been taken to avoid that.  Which proves that even with the best of intentions, power concentration leads to horror stories.


Exactly the same situation in Classic ages, and during the Caliphate, made commerce prosper.


I think you have this impression because we just had a few decades of prosperity after a half century of devastating war (the first and second world wars were just one war with a pause).  After a period of war, there is always some "relief" (or not, when you look at the soviet union).


I don't think that this is related.  Agriculture is decentralized.  But nevertheless, states occured.  I think they didn't occur because people needed protection, but rather because agriculture permitted so much production that the accumulation of wealth and taxation became possible.  When you have a population of nomads that can only just survive, you cannot accumulate wealth by taxing them.  You only kill them, and there's too little to take.  When you have peasants, you can accumulate wealth (food) by taxing them, you can finance armies, and you can become a state.
But the peasants didn't need a state.  Of course, you told them that they needed you, but they didn't.  A passing war lord cannot come and "steal" from every peasant.  That's not lucrative.  But taxing local peasants against "protection", is what made Kings rich.
It is the origin of states.  Production, and theft through taxes.


I think we're dreaming of a similar utopia.  But in my opinion, that utopia could have been realized at any stage of development, if people didn't fall for the lie that they needed state protection, and we don't have to wait for a specific technological advancement in order to realize that.  I also think that as long as this erroneous belief lives on, that utopia will remain a dream and states will continue to convince people that they "need their protection".  So there's no reason to wait.


I don't see the use of anonymity if you allow for taxation.  And in fact, you can never prove that you declared everything.  You can prove that everything related to these addresses you own, is declared.  But you can never prove that you DON'T own the keys to other addresses.  What if you owned them, and lost them ?  How can you prove you have forgotten something ?

I am struggling to keep up interest in Altcoins. It seems like a new wave of coins come through every year or so that are the coins to own and are heavily traded. 
There is profit to be made trading them, but they will be forgotten soon enough, much like Peercoin, Primecoin, Nxt etc before them.

None of them offer me anything except a trading opportunity. Bitcoin is of very limited value as so few people use it. It is also folding under it'd own weight with higher transaction costs and limited transactions numbers.

As I know , altcoin trend is unpredictable so it's difficult for me to make profit from it so I've lost my interest on altcoin
Over a year, I got 0.1 loss and I can't get it back

All incorrect. In essence you are transposing cause and effect, as well transposing large scale changes from "smaller things grow faster" changes. And the agriculture age required roads for economies-of-scale in commerce thus it was not decentralized. You have numerous errors like that throughout.

But I am not paid to refute every person's unending list of misconceptions.

And so to not further fill up this thread with only posts from myself and yourself, I will for the time being not provide my refutations.

Also I have more urgent other work that beckons.

Thanks for the discussion. Best regards.

I can sort of see why this is happening but i am stumped on how to fix it.
I often preach morality but that is pointless.
1) Many don't care and never will. (many will step on your neck for cash with out thinking twice)
2) Those that DO care are split up into their own bags their flogging.

So what happens is the evil assholes rule because they have majority over a lot of split up groups.
More people are willing to jump to anything scam or not as long as it gives them profits..
..than users who try and support a coin project they believe in.
So the one can sway the entire scene and the other is powerless.

The key is WHAT project to "support" ?
Right away you see a fractured list of sub-groups all vying to be legit and BETTER.
I've always said if some project was a Bitcoin Killer etc it would be very obvious.
There would be a conses and little debate about it.

So far we have not seen the "Bitcoin Killer" contrary to people chanting it.
Worse is BTC has been folding under it's own weight like he said.. i agree (as does pretty much everyone)
And yet BTC has shattered a record high price which tells me the Altcoin scene is as shitty as ever LOL

I guess i have no choice but to tell you all..
Your individual projects you are supporting suck.. ALL OF THEM !
There is no Bitcoin Killer.
I said in December that we need to re-think what we have supported for ages.
That project you supported for years may not be going anywhere and you may need to stop.
What then ?
That is the thing.. i don't know.
Just don't fall into a trap of being a shill simply because you NEED to invest in something NOW for profits ASAP.

A coin that has a potential to dethrone BTC will be obvious and the market price will be an indicator.
And who knows what is coming around the corner right ?

Maybe it would be better to support Bitcoin itself instead of Altcoins until we see a solid Bitcoin Killer ?
The benefit of that is we could bring in new users to crypto.. FOR BITCOIN.
And if a Bitcoin Killer is unleashed they can they jump over to it.

But this whole trying to profit off of what ever is laying around routine is a giant toilet.
And ALL the traders will be sucked in eventually.. you really can't win guys.
You stay at the table gambling you WILL guaranteed go broke.
Altcoins and their services can be rigged any way they want when ever they want.
So you are all playing a corrupt rigged game hoping to outsmart the Monopoly banker.
Problem is anytime he wants he can just grab the cash and give you the finger and you all can't do anything about it.

You want to support XYZ coin ? Or do you want to move forward ?
Bitcoin is fast approaching it's 10th birthday people.

Well, this is an interesting subject.  Two-wheeled chariots were invented by a "distributed" people, the Andronovo culture in Siberia, about 2000 BC.  One of the oldest roads on earth was build in England at about 3800 BC (the Sweet Track) where it is hard to imagine that it was an empire-induced road building operation.

I agree that city pavements occurred first in Ur, which was already a "state" in Mesopotamia.  But the idea that you need a *violence monopolist* and a *king* in order to build roads and be able to do agriculture, is the misguided kind of social lie that we have been fed with since we were children.  I'm not claiming that you can build a road on your own as an individual.  But you can build roads as a community without the need of a king who needs violence to make people obey his orders.

I agree that the "kings' violence" is a solution to the consensus problem which each community needs to solve before doing something, but I don't think that the price of giving all power to an aristocratic elite is necessary to achieve this, which is the basic tenet of statists.  I also think that if you are dreaming of a "new economy" (the dematerialized economy you're talking about) before hoping that a distributed society like it was before agriculture, is possible again, you will have to wait for eternity.  If you are convinced that one needs a king in order to make food, then we will always need a king (in more modern forms of presidents, parliaments, or whatever aristocratic structure).   Because we will never be free of material needs and always be prone to physical violence.

No, the first question is: why would you support any project in the first place ?
What is your drive ?  What do you gain from it (not necessarily monetary-wise) ?
Is there a project that "brings the world closer to your ideal", and do you think it is going to happen ?

Why support crypto in the first place and not deal with centrally authorized/controlled/governed/regulated tokens ?

Exactly. And even when a central violent monopolist does do things well (e.g. the height of rome), they don't actually need all that much power. For example look at the tax rate in the Roman empire before sh*t hit the fan. It was 2% but they had a huge empire connected with the best roads, agricultural systems and water distribution systems that weren't reached again till the modern era (and with like 30% tax rates). The problem is that central control brings in corruption and waste, somehow the Romans were able to avoid that (for a while).

This is indeed the problem: that even with the best of intentions, a centralized power structure always diverges into a self-destructive system.  I'm actually horrified by the systematics of that dynamics, and I already said that the US constitution was built by people who god damn knew this, and tried to build all possible safeguards against this divergence into it, but the US government has become one of the most destructive power houses on earth.

That said, there IS the consensus problem in every collectivity, and Sun Tsu already realized the power and efficiency of hierarchy.  This is why very often, hierarchical systems out-compete distributed systems AT FIRST ; but later on, they diverge into self-destructive empires, almost inevitably. 

Apparently you did not understand technically what I proposed upthread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1798356.msg17974824#msg17974824). We can in theory anonymously (in zero knowledge proofs) prove the tax reporting period totals on our inputs and outputs from transactions we've participated in (but apparently not with Monero's current technology).


The point of proving what you declare is that if the law does a dragnet and finds you were lying (or uses the NSA to unmask the anonymity), then you have a problem.

But if you declared everything, you have no risk of a legal problem (assuming the law is unequivocal and adhered to).

This is not much different than cash businesses situation we had.

The alternative (as we discussed in detail upthread) is complete submission to absolute top-down totalitarianism or warlord chaos with no blockchain privacy, or alternatively illegality with Monero.

Again I repeat, you are conflating large scale change with "smaller things grow faster" changes.

Yeah those technological innovations and example prototypes occur due to spontaneous diversity in the decentralized (high entropy) wild, but to scale those innovations out to every human on earth at that time required the monopolist state to conquer all the warlords, and to keep order over interstate commerce. Otherwise it diverged into bandits waiting along the side of the road to effective force you into the business of trading contraband, which destroys commerce.


Missing from your analysis is the fact that thermodynamic processes are irreversible and you can't just replicate into the past. The state of the empire at the end is of course inefficient, but nature didn't build the empire for the end, but rather for all that it accomplished before the end. You can't get all those in the middle without also getting the end. You can't have it both ways and eat your cake too. Sorry.

As the physical economy becomes a smaller and smaller portion of the total economy, we can move away from physical violence as necessary for human progress.


Agriculture was never decentralized. Hunting was decentralized. Agriculture required protection from the bandits. You apparently don't know anything about farming. The Bible says don't mix your field with many kinds of plants and don't produce just enough for yourself. Produce an whole hectare of produce and then trade. This is economy-of-scale and maximum division-of-labor which has been absolutely necessary for the productivity of man to increase above subsistence level.


Dude it is already underway. This is covered extensively in the Economics Devastation thread in the Economics forum.


Wow. What you smoking?

With the rise of ICO popularity Altcoin scene became ridiculous.

At this point even if new altcoin project is really amazing, it's hard to notice. It will be overshadowed by 10 or 20 other less innovative projects with bigger marketing budget.

I lost my faith we will see any good altcoin, only bitcoin will survive (probably not as currency but more likely store value coin).

While taxes can be assessed and appropriate payment proven, payment of taxes cannot be forced in a decentralized currency that is not controlled by the government. The government can know that person 352 owes x dollars in taxes, but if he doesn't pay it and is anonymous, how can the government do anything about it?

The government cannot prevent anonymous currencies from being used, although it can sanction use of a cryptocurrency. This leaves the possibility of a large underground economy. One possibility is that taxation shifts from income-based to residency-based.

I miss the day when dev deliver first before funds flows in to the coin.  I also miss the day where dev were really working hard on the code rather than on the microphone.  It is really insane to see a coin being hyped then gather millions of dollars just by providing a white paper (which even their own dev is puzzled to create ) while a coins that delivers the project first were ignored.  With this I often stop reading an announcement thread whenever I see an ICO stated in their OP.

If you believe that one day we will be free of material needs and will not be prone to violence, then I think the guy smoking heavily is on the other side of the line ;)

I still need a house, I still need food, I still need a lot of material stuff, and I can still be beaten up, tortured, and killed.  I don't think that this kind of thing will disappear in any near future, on the contrary.

TIME is why many of us lose interest.. we hear "one day" this and that for years.

Should be OneDayTalk.org
All the ICO's are about "one day" ..you pay me a million and maybe one day i make you the Bitcoin Killer.
Long con baggies pushing the my coinz gonna defeat the gubberments !111111ONE
..one day

Meanwhile reality keeps on keepin' on ...oblivious to crypto kiddy rabble.

I am in all this bitcoin and altcoin thing just to make enough gains so that I can retire early and lead a peaceful life without thinking of money. Cryptos are bringing in some profits for me and maybe it might not be the same in future, things can go south at any moment. But I am here now and I want to enjoy the feeling of chasing profit, the thrill you get from making profits and disappointment when making loss. This is part of my life and I just love it.

I disagree. I realize my argument is not very srtong but I'll say it anyway. 'One of the kind' is not something we have in our world. There are male, female, transgender people, young and old ones, plants and animals (plus people) etc. And in terms of currencies there are some strong ones like USD, EURO, GBP. I think that's why it doesn't make sense to suppose bitcoin will be the only one. Other strong cryptocurrencies have to appear on the market and they will.

Again you continue to conflate large scale with small scale. The key concepts you elided from your thought process were:



And the various ways I have tried to explain to you that annealing by decentralized failure is more antifragile than top-down failure. So thus when violence is only at an individual decentralized level, then it can't fail everywhere all at once. It anneals (please search the thread for my use of the word 'anneal'), as in simulated annealing as a form of free market fitness (which is why ice doesn't crack if you freeze it slowly enough).

So the point is that once the intangible Knowledge Age economy is orders-of-magnitude more valuable to humanity than the tangible one, then top-down control over the tangible one won't be economic. The top-down controller wouldn't be able to extract enough value from it to maintain control over those who extract value from the intangible economic.

And that my friend is a "genius" level divergent analysis (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1739268.msg18010403#msg18010403). We can't train a machine to think this way, because it is induced from creative thinking originating from my unique experiences and integration in the human living network.

I hope you clearly see your error now.

Spoetnik's recent posts are actually quite accurate in discussing the problem. As well the posts by others. I am reading intently.

We have a serious problem and if I can't think how we can get out of this dilemma, then I might also lose interest.

Here are my posts about the fraud problems in our crypto ecosystem:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1803849.msg18022330#msg18022330

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1804521.msg18022054#msg18022054

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1808859.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg18015763#msg18015763

You misunderstood the point I was making, which is that in order to not incriminate yourself (i.e. compliant with laws that require you to report) and not have a risk of being caught, then you'd want a way to declare/report, but still maintain your anonymity (privacy).

Of course those who don't care about being illegal, will not declare/report, and I wasn't speaking about them. I presume the governments will track them down, because anonymity isn't perfect (the NSA can deanonymize you if they really want to).

Of course it is possible the governments (especially in the West) might go totally bezerk and make everything illegal (even breathing), in which case we'd use anonymity and not report and be in MadMax type collapse scenario (where even gold is useless and only food, guns, and hacking ability are money). In that case, we'll have bigger problems than crypto can solve, such as keeping the electricity turned on.

I bet you all are as weary of seeing @iamnotback posts as I am, so I am trying to wrap up my contribution to this thread and this Altcoin Discussion subforum for the time being.

(So I can go work more productively on implementing a strategy and not just talking about it)

The purpose of this for me has been to clearly communicate my stance and to solidify my strategy.

So here we go for the conclusion as follows...



@Spoetnik that is a very astute post. I understand now what you (@Spoetnik) were trying to convey on the topic of "losing interest". You mean you want people to either work (invest, promote, etc) towards real adoption of something (decentralized or whatever is realistic) instead of just playing greater fool speculation (rob thy brother).

IMO, you have alluded broadly to the only way we can put an end to the current ICO (and Dash's "scam" model) Tragedy-of-the-Commons devolution (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1798356.msg18022380#msg18022380).


We require two developments in order to render the current devolution insignificant and irrelevant:

1. We need to develop a truly decentralized, scalable blockchain that makes is possible to actually do all the decentralized ideas that these ICOs are promoting, and monetize the ideas without a token (because token monetization is a big fat lie (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg18015763#msg18015763) anyway). The sooner that the space of good ideas has been populated by real world solutions that are running and well supported by a business model that makes sense, then these ICOs will not make sense to anyone who isn't retarded. In other words, the FOMO (fear of missing out) effect (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.msg18015763#msg18015763) will have disappeared. In other words, we need to create a real world actuation of Ethereum's bullshit vaporware (Casper, hack-proof smart contracts, etc), and render that consortium irrelevant in the real world.

2. We need massive adoption by this "Bitcoin Killer" blockchain by people who have no interest in speculating on altcoins. If this consumer-oriented ecosystem economically dwarfs our current speculation ecosystem, then what ever retards remain in tiny marketcaps such as Bitcoin and Dash ... well they can circle jerk themselves into oblivion.

It is time for someone capable to do the hard work to put an end to the nonsense.

If anyone disagrees or approves of this plan, I'd appreciate knowing that you do.

My answer is No. Im not losing interest in altcoins trading, its the matter of right choose of the coins you will trade. It is the right choose that you will be profitable also.

No.I do accept that there are lots of scam coins nowadays, but still there are genuine coins.Altcoin trading is still profitable.Only at some times, when Bitcoin rally happens, altcoin prices suffer.Its also temporary and they recover quickly.Altcoin is a ever growing market.

IMO, we shouldn't lose interest because we are facing cataclysmic change and we need to develop the REAL decentralization technologies that can help roll with this coming 309.6 transformation of civilization.

Again for those who don't know what time it is (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495527.msg17890762#msg17890762) and prefer it graphically conveyed, we are in the tail-end of the 309.6 cycle of the cyclical Fall of Society.

On the chart below, 485 AD was the fall of the Western Roman Empire (when only the Byzantine portion remained (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Western_Roman_Empire)) and 1105 AD was the fall of the Eastern (Byzantine) Roman Empire:

I think what you are saying is that tax liability could be determined through a ledger, you would pay taxes anonymously to the government, and when you are filing your taxes, you would place a checkbox in the box saying "I paid the full amount of my taxes this year." Thus you are anonymous but have paid taxes. Then if the government wants to verify, you could demonstrate proof (but in that case losing anonymity).

That is not what I proposed.

I proposed we can use Homomorphic sums to prove which transactions add up to which inputs and outputs that we declare without giving up any of our anonymity. Then we give the government this ZKP (zero knowledge proof) and payment.