The typical excuse a pumper makes when is unable to refute any of the facts stated by me.

The conversation with the Computer Science Professor continues:

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/49a14r/how_the_heck_are_actual_bitcoin_users_who_want_a/d0rt03p

That is hype. Not truth. Read my posts in the Ethereum Paradox thread if you want to understand the truth. It requires understanding the details.

If all you want is a good fairytale, then read the link you quoted.

Another failure that followed Tablet.

Actually I did briefly some months ago state that I thought the honest miners could fork away from the 99% adversary if they could identify which transactions were censored on the dishonest chain. I hence explained in the Decentralization thread to monsterer why that is not possible because there is no objectivity other than the longest chain rule.

Amazing he forgot that discussion, since that was another thing I taught him that he thought was possible. If he denies that, I will dig up the link.

Oic. Monsterer is referring to something I wrote many months ago then, which I told him was flawed and was abandoned (that was well before I started the Decentralization thread about the CAP theorem and the Satoshi Didn't solve the Byzantine Generals Problem thread wherein it is has become quite clear that 33 - 51% is the maximum ... it also happens to be when I was in delirium in the August to October timeframe due to a 10 day water only fasting and precipitous decline in my health which I have since improved considerably). He somehow conflates that with the design which has gelled since I started the Decentralization thread.

I am not claiming resistance against a 99% hashrate share proof-of-work adversary.

I have challenged Vitalik twice and he hasn't replied. All the experts here have access to my posts and can refute me, and they haven't.

Your post was completely devoid of any informational value. You've refuted none of my technical posts. Zero. Zilch. You are completely silent.

What does that even mean? How can something be impossible when it is ill-defined.

Nobody knows how to scale a block chain decentralized. Iota neither.

That is the issue that isn't solved and Ethereum sharding direction will never work because it is fundamentally mathematically impossible to make it work.

I have an idea of how to scale a block chain with decentralized control.

On top of that, scripting can break the security of the block chain by opening new income for 51% attackers. So it is another step to solve after solving the scaling problem.

None of these 2.0 clones are any where near to those solutions. Ethereum is flying off in the wrong direction, which is perfect for me. I hope they continue with Casper. The smartest thing I could for my coin is to shut up so no one tries to go review my past descriptions and figure out how to do it.

The gloves come off with Iota. Sue me David as you threatened to do in a private message.

Actually if you review my prior reply to CfB, then if I am correct that Iota must centralize in order to maintain convergence of consensus (which I am), then the centralized agents will be the ones resubmitting transactions (and redoing the PoW) to put the transactions on a branch that respects the enforced mathematical algorithm.

Thus these centralized agents will need to reimbursed and thus they will end up charging fees.

I am sorry but you and CfB are both wrong.

And proof-of-work is not any more negligible than the actual cost of processing transactions in Bitcoin (for the same hashrate security level). It is rather the centralization that drives up fees due to the power it enables to grab greater profits.

Please don't hype bullshit features.

Is Iota not using servers on launch? I thought so.

Granted I unintentionally conflated that use of servers with the fact that merchants (payees) are the ones who have an incentive to redo the PoW and resubmit the transaction. Apology and thank you for catching my error. It was unintentional and I frankly don't keep every detail about Iota fresh in my mind, just the overview of my conclusions from our past discussion.

None of these changes my point which is that transactions aren't free because proof-of-work isn't free.

P.S. I am not trying to manipulate. It is just difficult to comment on so many things and not make a conflation once in a while. I still maintain that Iota will need centralization to enforce a mathematical model on a significant majority of the transactions.

Commenting factually is not spamming. You are spamming, by making posts which add no information.

How much are you paid to pump ETH? Don't lie.

I don't feel like searching the Decentralization thread, but you will find it there. We were discussing attacks and you explained the PoW could be redone and the transaction resubmitted on another branch to mitigate a specific attack I explained.

P.S. note the slight correction to my prior post.

The poll states "after the bubble". It doesn't specify when the bubble ends. My answer of below 0.001 (not 0.01) is for when the whales are done selling their coins to fools and stop buying from themselves to create the price rise illusion and paying Coindesk to pump this shit to fools.

If you were a senior level programmer, you would understand it can't be something great. You should review my posts in the Ethereum Paradox thread which have not been refuted by any one. Zero rebuttals.

The difference between hype and success, is like the difference between Microsoft Tablet and the Apple iPhone. Microsoft didn't understand a damn thing about how to do it. Apple did. The reasons are in the technological and market design DETAILS. If you don't understand the DETAILS, then you don't understand. Microsoft had been trying for years to produce a touch screen device. And they are still trying and failing horribly with Windows Phone.

Btw, Ethereum's Casper engineer Greg Meredith hails from Microsoft Research. The other on the Casper design team are kids with no proven experience whatsoever.

And I am software engineer with million user products under my belt. And yet you think I am bullshitting. Sigh.

Please restart the poll and allow us to vote for more than one.

The poll is useless in this forum, because so many of those are scams.

My ranking by most scammy at the top:

Dash
MaidSafe
Ethereum
VanillaCoin/Vcash
Factom
Ripple
Bitshares (more like confused than scammy, but there is an element of scammy in the presales of Protoshares, etc)

Monero is not a scam. Those voting for that are Dash and V(anila)cash/coin trolls.

If you are asking about "accusations", I don't see that as a reliable measure of anything. Ask us which ones are the most scammy, not which coins receive the most FUD.

Stop criticizing that which you do not understand. There is nothing announced. Nothing for sale. And no white paper.

You will have ample time to apologize to me when there is.

FUD.

Is that the best you can do?