Yeah, that's why I said 2032 is possibly the date we will see socialism finally go extinct.
There's strong divides appearing now with people beginning to realize the problem is socialism, it's suffocating the life out of the middle class.
It isn't suffocating the life out of them in the UK - Junior doctors escalate industrial action to all-out strike next month Unions are an integral element of liberal socialism and they destroy the middle class: https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/evolutionary-process-of-labor/https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/unions-out-of-control-the-real-poison-pill/http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6541 (Why labor unions have lost their moxie) http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5034 (Fixing the fast-food strike) http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=264 (Outsourcing breeds more jobs) The dramatic crossover from short to long-term unemployment in the rest of the working population is, I suspect, the result of my two friends multiplied by umpty-bump million. This is the job market exiling people who can’t generate enough value at work enough to cover the tax, regulatory, and deadweight costs of their employment. And I mean that “deadweight” as a very broad category including the effects of minimum-wage laws, the Davis-Bacon act, union work rules, diversity mandates, and all of the other ways we pile social costs onto employers. Obamacare, of course, will be yet another and can be expected to depress employment still further.
|
|
|
|
|
Btw my mother has non-publicly criticized me behind my back in the past, belittling my attempts to relay such information to her. An arrogant or ignorant pride is the way I perceived it. She was very angry at the person who told me she was doing this. And she claims to not being doing this any more. And I feel like a snake for publishing this not just to a few private individuals but publicly. But how else are X gen males going to understand, if they don't have examples like this to relate to.
And more importantly, how can I vent years of frustration. I don't want to hurt my mother. I hope this doesn't get back to her. And I hope none of you ever know of her by name.
If I had taken more time to cool down (not anger but just fired up enough to bother even writing the OP), I probably would not have posted it. But also since I took the time to write it and explain, I felt my effort is wasted if I only send it to my mom. The effort has the most value (actually impact, maybe poor value for me personally) open sourced.
|
|
|
|
Yeah, that's why I said 2032 is possibly the date we will see socialism finally go extinct.
There's strong divides appearing now with people beginning to realize the problem is socialism, it's suffocating the life out of the middle class.
The delusional youth supporting it have yet to feel that suffocation, but they will.
MA believes socialism will be 90% extinct by 2032.95, I agree with him on this.
See also this: http://relativisticobserver.blogspot.com/2015/11/rapidly-growing-niche.html?showComment=1458758870054#c7494278038077251657And this followup: ...
Edging into a new topic for the moment, I read recently that one way PEOPLE may get to be better able to secure their iPhones (and others) would be for someone to write cunning little apps to do that. I can think of one or two possibilities already (one would be to mimic the iPhone being off and then require a new password, perhaps another to hide info that a user would want hidden if an FBI were to break into the phone, I am sure other ideas would come along...).
Perhaps the apps writers would have to be outside the USA. And I suppose Apple might have its own requirements (burdens) on such apps to make them accessible to AAPL itself or the FBI/NSA.
What's say TPTB? That might be a fairly quick way to make a buck...
The operating system and hardware vendor can undermine any security programmed into an App. We need to move to completely open sourced OSes and hardware, but even Android is not that. Sorry you won't be able to hide from the backdoor if Apple loses their case. Based on the extremely limited contacts I have w/ cryptographers (and limited reading), it is my opinion that a large group of concerned folks like us can make it VERY HARD for LE to get some information, even on cellphones. (Not including phone call info of course)
That is incorrect. The OS and hardware can be designed to leak everything. Although perhaps the encryption could be done on a USB dongle mini-computer (plugged into the user's computing device) that is running custom open source OS and hardware. What is very hard is to hide that the OS and hardware has that capability. Easier to hide if closed-sourced. But knowing it has that capability won't help us prevent it from leaking the data. Well I guess it could if we refuse to connect our device to any network. But who the hell is going to use a mobile device that is never connected to any network. The only technical solution is to open source all the OS and the hardware. But we can't open source the hardware because the foundries can be subjected to a national security gag order. The only non-technical solution is political. And the politics won't be improving until the boomers are gone. If Apple loses the case and the government mandates a backdoor on encryption, then computing is fucked. Because any backdoor can be hacked. The tech giants are all fighting the government on this. It would lead to a computing Dark Age. If they explain it properly hopefully the political support exists to stop the government. But that might not even stop the NSA from handing out national security gag orders and finding some way to put a backdoor in the hardware. |
|
|
|
You patronise your mother, you insult her intelligence, you attempt to undermine her by appeals to obscure authorities she likely has little inkling of, you berate her over things beyond her control - you abuse your mother. I'd like to say that your mother deserves better - but in truth your mother has a lot to answer for  Thanks for your feedback as it is very indicative of the kafkatrapping, political correct speech crap that dominates the West. And you are well known to be a liberal socialist. I have attempted to relay the facts to her over the past several years and she covers her eyes and ears and thinks negatively (or pity?) about me because I try to share that which she characterizes as "gloom and doom" from her perspective. Yeah I understand liberal socialists think any default on their bankrupt agenda is "doom and gloom". Reality was never their creed. In this particular case, I wasn't trying to ram any information down her throat. She was venting about Trump and I had to responding rationally instead of being a "yes ma'am" tool. When I pointed out that Trump is just an early sign of the breakup of the USA and that all of this had been predicted years ago by Armstrong's computer, she became distraught to the point of telling me to not speak another word on the issues or hangup. I wrote this to her to try to help her because her life is ostensibly being hampered by a fraudulent ideology (although I think it so deeply engrained in her personality now at age 70 that the only point was to make sure she understood I was being rational so she can't blame me to support a delusion of self-pity). And I published this, because other X generation men might be in a similar predicament as me and need some help on understanding the generative essence of their conflict with their boomer parents. I also published this to explain some of the dysfunction some of X gen males have had to slog through in life. |
|
|
|
Yeah, that's why I said 2032 is possibly the date we will see socialism finally go extinct.
There's strong divides appearing now with people beginning to realize the problem is socialism, it's suffocating the life out of the middle class.
The delusional youth supporting it have yet to feel that suffocation, but they will.
MA believes socialism will be 90% extinct by 2032.95, I agree with him on this.
Politics is stuck in the economic collapse of liberal socialism until the boomers stop vomiting |
|
|
|
Politics is stuck in the economic collapse of liberal socialism until the boomers stop vomitingA copy of an email to my mother. Note I only put about 15 minutes into writing this, because I am in rush. I don't think it is written very well and the concepts could be better organized and articulated. Also I forgot to go into the other point that had caused my mom to feel threatened and depressed, when I mentioned that the USA will fracture into regions. Here are links to the logic on the coming breakup of the USA (e.g. the southern Bible Belt will break away from the Liberals in the north, in a repeat of the Boston Tea Party "Taxation without representation" protest as the global economy goes over the cliff in 2018 ... note Europe is already going over the cliff now with Liberalism facilitated Muslim invasion compounding the sovereign debt crisis of the EU): https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aarmstrongeconomics.com+breakup+USAAnyone who thinks Eric Raymond is not a genius, read this: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7060#more-7060And no I don't hate Muslims specifically. I merely acknowledge the impact and free market raison d’ętre of religions including the feminist variety: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1373864.msg14013907#msg14013907Mom,
Make sure you read the entire message before letting your emotions explode. Calm rationality please.
When your emotions explode (as they did on the phone yesterday evening with me), then you put words in my mouth that I did not say and you then do not allow me to speak so that I may clarify.
For example, you went off on a tirade about how I was accusing you of being in control and how you have no control, and I was trying to speak so I could not only explain the following paragraphs, but also so I could explain that it is not you specifically who has any control, but rather the irrational, intellectually dishonest, selfishness of the boomers which is in control, because there was a bubble of births after WW2 thus the boomers have the most voters. Boomers share a certain set of values which derive from their experience of being incredibly spoiled by the golden 1950s (their parents coming out of Great Depression and WW2, the USA became the strongest economically in the world) affording them the luxury of pursing intellectually dishonest liberalism, e.g. feminism and socialism:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong-in-the-media/a-vision-for-the-youth/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/what-socialism-destroyed-govt-shutdown/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/socialism-at-its-best-how-to-destroy-the-wealth-of-a-nation/
Some Iron Laws of Political Economics:
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984
Others have stated that the boomers are the most selfish generation because it has always been about what is best for them, not what is intellectually honest and rational. The X gens are much more ruthlessly pragmatic. We question everything and we want the facts, not the political obfuscations. That doesn't mean I don't love you. It doesn't mean I want you to die. As you alleged on the phone. I am just stating facts. I prefer our generations could work together, but every time I interact with a boomer they become disingenuous when their intellectually dishonest vested interests are threatened. Another recent example is how I explained in technical detail (in a comment post to his blog) to my former boss (from Fractal Design in Aptos, CA when we made what is now Corel Painter) who was close with Steve Jobs and still works at Apple, that Apple Pay is flawed compared to a hypothetical crypto currency, he (a boomer) ostensibly changed his tune from being chatty(I didn't notice he had posted another reply) and supportive of me to ostensibly censoring my blog post(my blog comment post has appeared) and deleting me as one of his contacts on LinkedIn (perhaps it is possible that he hid or removed his profile on LinkedIn, and I haven't bothered to verify). Here is a link to a copy of what I had written at his blog:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1399040.0
And here is a link to my last comment on his blog:
http://relativisticobserver.blogspot.com/2015/11/rapidly-growing-niche.html?showComment=1458168442723#c4266073379197244313
It appears to me that you entirely lose control of your ability to have a calm, rational, discussion where both sides can present their side and not be interrupted by emotional tirade. You seem to do this on issues that do not adhere to your world view. In other words, it is your way or the highway; and you do not respect the views of others. Feminism for example is sham that is built on such analogous intellectual dishonesty. If you have any shred of ethical objectivity, then read a 160 IQ writer, mathematician, and computer scientist (i.e. an extremely rational man) who is for empowering women and sexual freedom, so you can learn something new about yourself and your intellectually dishonest politics:
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aesr.ibiblio.org+feminism
I don't support Trump because he thinks he can solve our problems with a dictatorship. Nevertheless, your irrational attack against Trump (about him denying knowing David Duke) is the analogous emotional kafkatrapping to the feminist intellectually dishonest political power trap:
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6907
Trump is handling the KKK issue politically because he understands very well that the liberals are trying to divide-and-conquer his base of supporters. The establishment politics doesn't like the fact that Trump attacks liberalism. Come on, don't tell me your IQ is too low to understand that.
My verbal IQ is not that high, but my IQ in terms of understanding the generative essence and structure of issues apparently so far above yours that we can't even have a rational conversation. Or more likely, you have the IQ, but your vested interests hindbrain blocks you from reading, learning, and using your pre-frontal cortex on issues that impact the feminist intellectually dishonest empowerment religion. Read Eric Raymond explain how the feminists are not about empowering women but rather about creating a context within which those who can manipulate the movement can steal the most from the collective (the Iron Law of Political Economics strikes again). Feminist leaders replace a meritocracy and rationality with completely dysfunctional socialism where they control the politics not according to intellectual honesty and rationality, but by hatchet jobs on males (which actually destroy females who end up all alone as you are and as Eric Raymond explains in some of his essays I linked for you above via Google search).
If you respect your fellow man, and especially your son and the X generation, why not be intellectually honest with yourself and take a few hours to read the Google linked essays above. Excuses about you have too many other priorities, are just excuses. If you don't take time to learn new things and to respect the views of others, then how do you expect anyone to respect you and have an intelligent conversation with you.
You are only lowering yourself. I refuse to be ignorant. I challenge my own values continuously. I read the logic presented by all sides. If you can refute Eric Raymond's essays, let me hear it. Hahaha. Just try! If you think you are smart.
It is not about disempowering women. Rather it is about recognizing the facts and the realities of for example hypergamy! Read Eric's analysis so you don't remain ignorant. Or remain ignorant. I don't have any more time to waste on trying to work with the boomers. It is time to route around the their cancerous politics and ignorant delusions.
And don't even get me started about 9/11 conspiracy. I am engineer. I studied the facts. The engineering analysis is irrefutable. But since you are not an engineer and not rational, it is pointless to try to explain the facts to you.
What does it take for a son to get respect for the details he knows that his mother does not know? A son who listens intently on the issues he realizes his mother knows better than him. Mutual respect is what is lacking.
|
|
|
|
Not one single point of yours was not totally debunked.
Correct: [...]
Notice even I provided a link to Vitalik for this thread, and have refuted where he replied to me twice (once on Reddit and once on his blog for Casper), he has (afaik) never replied to my refutations and never refuted my allegations in this thread about scaling, sharding, Nash equilibrium and security.
Also wherein I have explained that most Dapps such as Augur and Slock.it can't work technologically.
He completely avoids debating me on these issues.
|
|
|
|
After nearly 40 pages ... seems like a load of old FUD to me.
Ostensibly because your face doesn't resemble this feeling: |
|
|
|
This thread is just too wrong headed
In every meritocracy I have been involved in within my 50 years here on earth, whether it be team sports or team development of software, whether someone had ostensibly good or bad intentions was irrelevant. What mattered is what did they produce. If both Vitalik and Bobsurplus promulgate crapcoins, then is there any real difference. Not in a meritocracy of competition. Maybe at your church or social gathering there is a difference. |
|
|
|
Having said that, philosophically I would wish for absolutely no regulation and let fools loose their money because they are fools. That should move the money to those who aren't fools and thus make the economy more productive.
big flaw in this is all those involved in ICOs are fools, so there is no redistribution of the money simply just fools passing it to fools. Seems you missed my post refuting you before you wrote yours. Or perhaps you thought the ICO insiders concentrate wealth into their hands, but no they end up losing all the money to those who properly save and invest. Crime and fooling others doesn't pay. Trust me, every person with bad ethics ends up in the gutter eventually. I am 51 years old this June. I have the wisdom to see that cheating always eventually ends up biting the cheater's own ass. For example, these ICO insiders will very likely end up in trouble with the securities regulators ex post facto. Even Goldman Sachs et al are going to lose everything eventually. The time is coming... Keep your ethics strong but don't become a dogmatic preacher, and you will live a long and productive life. That should move the money to those who aren't fools and thus make the economy more productive. That doesnt mean the economy is more productive.Speculators/scamers for instance arent that useful for that purpose.And $ easy made is $ easy spent. The power-law distribution of wealth insures that the money ends up with those who know how to save and invest[1]. [1] A. Dragulescu and V. Yakovenko. Exponential and power-law probability distributions of wealth and income in the United Kingdom and the United States |
|
|
|
Anybody who has underwent the task of reading through the entire thread actually needs to commemorate it by getting that T-shirt  Lol, my face resembles that feeling after enduring this thread. |
|
|
|
Re: ... any real difference ... of crapcoins?
What a[n oxy]moronic thread
FTFY |
|
|
|
We need some slick graphics presenting the truth competitively to Ethereum's geekcool media campaign.  Re: ... any real difference ... of crapcoins?
What a[n oxy]moronic thread
FTFY This thread is just too wrong headed
In every meritocracy I have been involved in within my 50 years here on earth, whether it be team sports or team development of software, whether someone had ostensibly good or bad intentions was irrelevant. What mattered is what did they produce. If both Vitalik and Bobsurplus promulgate crapcoins, then is there any real difference. Not in a meritocracy of competition. Maybe at your church or social gathering there is a difference. |
|
|
|
That should move the money to those who aren't fools and thus make the economy more productive. That doesnt mean the economy is more productive.Speculators/scamers for instance arent that useful for that purpose.And $ easy made is $ easy spent. The power-law distribution of wealth insures that the money ends up with those who know how to save and invest[1]. [1] A. Dragulescu and V. Yakovenko. Exponential and power-law probability distributions of wealth and income in the United Kingdom and the United States |
|
|
|
The sharding solution they have proposed, whereby contracts can only interact in the same shard, will work just fine. That of course brings with it usability issues, whereby a contract/account on shard 5 can't interact in any way with a contract/account on shard 10.
Enabling contracts to interact across shards is a different level of hard altogether, and I'm at the tipping point of accepting that it can't be achieved after looking at the problem myself for the past year or so.
As many know, eMunie has partitioning (our name for sharding) of transactions, and these partitions can interact with accounts in a different partition. Great you might think, then just apply the same mechanics to contracts.
Unfortunately its not that simple, as with transactions you are managing a single, known state (the balance) that is native to the system, so you are able to build functionality and algorithms that leverage those properties to enable cross partition/sharding interactions. With a contract its much more complex, as a contract may have many states, all of which will have an unknown/indeterminable function, and be arbitrary in nature.
If the states of a contract are arbitrary, the system can never know what all the states might be (because they are defined by the contract creator). Nor can it know the rules that govern them due to the same reason (the rules too are arbitrary), thus there is no way to enforce consensus across shards. Therein lies the root of the problem.
For this to be possible at all would require that the system knows, natively, all possible states for any contract that may ever exist, and the rules that govern those states....
I endorse this. The user scripting is what breaks the ability to do cross-partitioned (cross-sharded) decentralized. Of course centralized or every validator validating every partition works but defeats the entire point of decentralized block chains and reliability by eliminating trust, reputation, and the power vacuum failure modes thereof. Upthread I had explained how I think Fuserleer is managing handle cross-partitioning for ledger balance. In theory this could be applied to the gas if the gas wasn't also intertwined with the contract state transitions, but the gas must be so intertwined. Also in that upthread post, I conjectured (having not seen his design specification yet) why I think Fuserleer's attempt will have to forsake long term Consistency or Access for those transaction trees which can't converge across all Partitions. Fuserleer apparently reduces the convergence problem to per-transaction graph, versus per-block. In other words, I conjecture that eMunie's design purports to isolate transaction trees which are conflicting and converges only on those transaction trees which are non-conflicting (in terms of a double-spend) across all partitions. i am expecting collatoral damage or other issue, but I must wait for the full specification before I can really comment meaningfully more than just wild conjecture based on what Fuserleer has written about eMunie's design in various threads. I don't feel like searching the thread for the post I am referring to. |
|
|
|
The Ethereum "Star Trek" logo is listing. Capsize to follow soon? |
|
|
|
You don't build something worth $1 billion... by arguing with angry keyboard jockeys that have built nothing.
Not to be braggart, but to defend myself, I must point out that I have built million user products that have achieved commercial success: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shelby-moore-iii-b31488b0Whereas the young kids who are developing Ethereum have never produced anything but hype. At Vitalik's age at 21, I had already coded WordUp which was a significant commercial success with very significant user adoption (you do realize that 38,000+ copies of boxed software in the 1980s is equivalent to millions of uses in equivalent market share on the current internet population). The source code of WordUp was extensive given I wrote the majority of it in 68000 assembly before switching to C later in the project. Also I think you fail to understand that market cap is a misleading metric. My accomplishments were in the real world, whereas Ethereum's are in the pump&dump vaporware and illegal unregistered securities underworld. It's getting pretty hard for anyone to make the case that Ethereum isn't a giant bubble. What makes this coin worth a billion dollars?
Selling all the ETH will never net $billion. Maybe $10 million before the price is near 0 due to the selling. Market cap is a misleading metric. More relevant is volume, except we have no way to know what percent of the volume is real versus insiders buying from the themselves to pump the price and volume up. I am not angry: I created the thread(s) that attempts to decipher what the existing law is on this issue: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.0I have concluded that offering an ICO/IPO is incredibly risky for the developers and insiders. I think the G20 will eventually come after them in a concerted cooperation by governments to appease the voters who are fed up with corruption in government and banking. The G20 will use this as a political witch hunt to divert attention from the sovereign debt collapse that socialism created. Having said that, philosophically I would wish for absolutely no regulation and let fools loose their money because they are fools. That should move the money to those who aren't fools and thus make the economy more productive. But making decisions based on what I wish to be, is not a pragmatic methodology. Being a lead developer on my own crypto project, I must obey the law that is, not my fantasies of what I wish it would be. |
|
|
|
There is no way to do sharding of smart contracts without breaking the Nash equilibrium that creates a majority consensus instead of many competing forks.
Considering that you have spoken kindly of Lucius Gregory Meredith (publicly) and have recognized him as a competent academic, I am having difficulty accepting that his comments on this issue are based on false pretenses. I recognize that he appears to be a bonafide published research academic and I am not although I also do informal research and some math. He also appears to be getting paid to say what people want to hear. He is also making sweeping statements in video Hangouts such as "we modeled everything for Casper mathematically using process calculus and Nash equilibrium doesn't apply", without providing a complete derivation and detailed mathematical explanation. I have stated that I believe he is (either intentionally or unintentionally) not pointing out that modeling the consensus-by-betting does not mean the model won't show that there are flaws in convergence and/or that the model does not consider the externalities that apply to the Nash equilibrium. In short, I believe he has some serious blind spots in his analysis, similar to the blind spots I allege about his white paper for Synereo. Yeah he is intelligent and so am I. And I am sure who is correct on this matter (and isn't him). I will be vindicated in the end. But it really doesn't matter because I am working on my own project and by the time I am vindicated, my project will be worth more than Ethereum. I don't have much more time to waste on this Ethereum shitcoin/Dapp nonsense. My stance is derogatory towards Ethereum and its shills, because I am confident is a scam that will never be adopted by users and is also an illegal unregistered security offered to unqualified USA investors. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
