We already have rudimentary self-replicating algorithms. They're also self-repairing/amending, which is why algorithmic trading with Machine Learning works so well compared to traditional and commercially available trading bots. Considering that these algorithms automatically adjust as new data rolls in, you could already say that they are self-aware (of their relevant metrics) as well. The reasons why these algorithms aren't shitting on human intelligence is mostly due to a lack of sufficiently intertwined networks, but we're slowly getting there.
As far as "outsmarting" these algorithms is concerned. That's only partially true. We can screw with AI algorithms by analyzing precisely how they assimilate data (which doesn't work with all algorithms because it's sometimes impossible to tell what is going on and they're pretty much a blackbox). But they are usually significantly better than humans by a large margin at solving specific tasks. As mentioned earlier, the only reason they aren't capable of solving general tasks is because they're currently specialized algorithms for specific tasks. Once we can efficiently connect many such specialized "modules" together, humans will seem like complete retards compared to AI. Which raises the questions of whether or not we want to merge or inevitably have AI as our near-literal God.


I would argue the contrary in continuation of my above ramblings. We don't need to mimic the human brain perfectly. Humans simply don't compare to specific task algorithms. All it takes to trump us is connecting modules together whilst allowing for the creation of new ones by the algorithm itself. And as I've mentioned, the first algorithms to create code already exist. So either of higher computational power or more efficient algorithms should be enough and reality both of these will get satisfied over time.

We didn't copy birds or fishes either to fly in the skies or swim through the oceans either, and we're significantly better at both of these tasks. There is no compelling reason to create a carbon copy of the human brain for this specific purpose.

Hello. I assume you mean shares? In that case, shares get updated manually and the team is currently very busy with the ICO, so the updates are delayed. You will get your promised shares after the ICO regardless of what is displayed right now though.

His shape is marvelous. And people still believe that it's not possible for humans to achieve anything they could ever conceive of, even though we have a guy here that is literally defying the laws of physics by not being a perfect sphere.

It's either because you pasted the wrong links directly, or your activity level could be too low. I'm not sure on the latter, but it might be that you have to be at least Junior Member or something to be able to post pictures.

For now, try using the following template:


Do note that the link I'm using has .jpg in the end, the ones you are using link to Imgur and its viewer, rather than the pictures themselves.

I don't care if they believe in crypto or not, if they actually turn pro-crypto - even if just to gain votes - that would be a positive development for humanity. After all, governments are supposed to represent the interests of the people. If all of politics worked this way I don't think I'd have any further problem with it other than the oversized bureaucracy, excessive tax rates, and sometimes overly strict regulations.

But the latter issues require more education in the general population beyond partisan bullshit. It's easy to be pro-crypto because there's a very realistic chance to make a fortune with it. That's not the case with the other issues, which are far more intricate and grossly misrepresented and oversimplified in politics and media.

Welcome to Blocklancer!

I remember seeing this sometime ago and it made me really excited for future possibilities. Imagine a world in which you can e.g. pick up an instrument and master it in a very short time (the interface between the bionic arm and the brain "learns" through machine learning algorithms, which are going to get more and more sophisticated). And mechanical things like that are just the surface. Perhaps we'll be able to experience new colours and sounds by increasing our bandwidth and resolution, or even navigating (digital) spaces of higher and lower spatial dimensions than 3.

I'm not overly concerned with the mind of the public. We have a very strong support and an increasingly large industry. The public mainstream will eventually follow along, regardless of whether or not they realize it (e.g. by crypto forming some invisible back-end in Paypal like apps).

When the internet and computers were more fringe, even as little as two decades ago, people who used those were often frowned and shunned upon by the rest of the population. And we can all see where those innovations are now. There's also no denying that some developments in the blockchain industry, as well as the blockchain itself, are groundbreaking by a multitude of measures. What the internet did for information, the blockchain does for finance.
I'm trying really hard to find cases in which cryptos could fail to better educate myself, but I can't seem to find any that aren't less probable than winning the lottery. From what I've gathered over the years, far too many factors would have to align simultaneously to bring the crypto space down, and I just don't see it happening.

My future vehicle of choice.

Funnily enough, there was some article about the BIS bitching and moaning about crypto being a bubble and ponzi scheme just yesterday if I recall correctly. Pretty sure we passed it through this thread as well. I had no clue what the BIS was, so I had to google it. And the first thing that showed up were corruption scandals and allegations.

Ask yourself this question: How much money would you have to pay for commutes and how much would you save from not needing car insurance and fuel? If it's more or less a wash, go ahead and sell it.

It means that they can't be taken down, because just like Bitcoin they would be a distributed peer to peer platform. The details are more complex, with atomic swaps and whatnot, but basically you'd be trading with people directly via smart contracts, which would actually be safer than traditional exchanges as well due to the abolishment of counterparty risk (as long as there's no Parity style fuck ups).

Why would anybody give a rat's ass about regulation when decentralized exchanges are on the horizon? For the very first time in history regulators won't be able to dictate their rule upon citizens.

So as in my first line, you're coming from a position of philosophy. And when it comes to those realms, you can make any point as long as you expend enough effort into digging up supporting and logical arguments. And while I really love philosophical arguments for any case, however fringe it may or may not be, none of these will have any impact on the utility aspects and practical applications of knowledge and technology.

Hence, even if the argument was objectively true (which it is not because it's circular) doesn't change the fact that ML/AI is going to be an overwhelmingly powerful tool that will not only be comparable to the jump of an ape to a human being, but in fact much greater. The question will be whether or not those tools will be external, or if we're going to enhance ourselves with them in a more direct manner (assuming that we don't go extinct).


What exactly is btcbase?

Have you studied AI/ML? There is no myth of AI, unless you're trying to argue about whether or not it is conscious in a way that humans are.

And at that point you can only guess anyways, since we don't even know what human consciousness is or how it works, and I certainly don't even know if you have an experience of the world that is in any way comparable to mine or even any at all.

ML/AI does fundamentally what humans do, which is gathering and assimilating information, and with higher computing power and other breakthroughs (physical interfaces for example), they will be producing tangible goods that will be beyond the sophistication of anything humanly possible. We already have algorithms that can fine tune other algorithms and there are first rudimentary steps towards algorithms programming programs (one example being an algorithm that "looks" at video footage of a game that recreates the underlying game engine).

These algorithms are fundamentally just applied statistics, which is just applied Mathematics, which is equivalent to human interactions with the world in the most abstract form that we are aware of. None of these are a myth.

P.S. I looked at the guy's bio and he's a computer scientist. As such, I don't really care too much about his opinion since he's not qualified to assess what AI is and what it is not, since as I've mentioned it's an extension of Mathematics, not of computer science. Will read once I got some food though.

There's also AI and computing power. So it's certainly not impossible. I wouldn't be all that surprised if some of us ended up in the last generation to miss out on longevity breakthroughs given that such research has been gaining more traction and financing in recent years (on top of technological and scientific advances).

They stated that there would be no delays after the Jade Green was posted on their Instagram. So we can expect cards to roll out in the next few weeks as Money 20/20 approaches. There might be a chance that the 500 tier cards will get shipped later than the free and 50 MCO cards though, as apparently the beta doesn't include the 500 MCO cards according to the last Q&A... Hopefully we'll know more about this soon.

If the profits were accumulated over several years then 100,000 BTC wouldn't really be a lot. Especially if they reinvested some of the proceeds into altcoins. Even at last year's $1000 per BTC the profits would "only" have to be 80~100 million. Go another year back and you're in the several dozen million range, which I don't think would be all that far fetched for a large scale drug operation. And turning 10m into 100m with altcoins over a span of one year wasn't really all that hard even with blind spray and pray "tactics", which could realistically result in $1 Billion worth of BTC today with 2-3 year operation.

Also, your point #4 assumes foresight on the guy's part. And based on how some of the darknet markets apparently got busted that would be quite a stretch. Apparently one market had the admin literally use his real fucking real email for both the market registration or newsletter (don't remember) and on public forums that had direct ties to his real identity.

People who go into ventures like drug dealing are not the sharpest spoons in the drawer. If they were, they would be making money without compromising their security (getting murdered and/or jailed) by producing something of value or playing the existing markets.

If you believed (contemporary) Apple fans that would actually be true. If I had never seen how ridiculous human behaviour can get I wouldn't believe God himself if he descended and told me that Apple was the most successful company on planet earth. I was very fond of it under Jobs, when the first iPods came out at a time where MP3 players barely fit a single album, but holy fuck has Apple turned into unimaginative and uninnovative shit.

Because countries are to a large extent just pawns on the chessboard of a few mentally deranged clowns that care more about stupid games than advancing humanity. I wonder how many more revolutions and generations it will take before governments either disappear entirely or start acting in the interest of humanity.

Welcome to both of you!