@CoinCube, you and I had a long discussion (actually a proof-of-work technological edification from me, which you apparently refuse to absorb/accept even though you’re an applied math graduate) about why Bitcoin must be centralized into an oligarchy.


I don’t know why you continue to hang on to those religious nutcases when their points are invalidated by that technological argument. (As you know, I long ago debated both of them and my most recent response to @traincarswreck).

@r0ach, I corrected your disingenuous lapse of not linking from your recent blog to the prior discussion here which you quoted from in your blog. That’s quite barbaric (as in uncivilized) of you to attack “Anonymint” as a “crypto shill” while quoting him, then not linking to his prior counter arguments in the context of the quote you cited.

The generative essence of your inapplicable rebuttal is that there’s nothing else that can serve as an agreeable monetary asset for resetting the global monetary system, that would avert an otherwise total chaotic collapse into a Dark Age. Even if that were true (and I even stated that possibility in my prior rebuttal to you), as I pointed out (in my prior rebuttal to you) this would have no bearing on our individual decision to choose gold or silver as hedges against the collapse of the current monetary system:


I had already explained in this thread, that the government has now the increasing power to make sure that during any such monetary reset that they can make it impossible for private investors of (significant quantities of) precious metals to achieve any hedge whatsoever. I had even alluded to this problem back in 2010 (after I had heard that USA Treasury officials stated they would “burn the fingertips of goldbugs up to their armpits”). What the heck do you think the Zionist false flag 9/11 which enabled the Patriot Act, KYC, AML, and the terrorism magic bullet against private wealth was all about? They know damn well they’re taking us to a global monetary reset and they’re funding/encouraging/facilitating the goldbug propaganda (e.g. FOFOA) so that tinfoil hat wearers such as yourself will be trapped at the end game with an asset that will be confiscated if you want to redeem it or buried in the ground forever (until nobody cares about gold anymore ever again any way, so it’s useless to pass it on to your heirs). I hope you love fondling all that metal, because that’s all you’ll be able to do with it. Actually try to carry 10kg of that silver shit in a backpack as I did from Manila to Davao (and back) in the 2011ish timeframe (and my shoulders were stronger at age 46 than now approaching 53), and you’ll appreciate silver a lot less especially after having to bribe police and airport inspectors along the way.

So it really boils down to you can choose precious metals and be expropriated by the nation-states, or support the Zionist’s Bitcoin plan for the NWO. The latter is also fraught with nation-state risk if you’re not careful (e.g. not doing KYC on the people you’re trading with and not trading on an exchange that does, a recent revelation for me that is discomforting), but at least there’s huge gains to offset the costs of paying fines, attorneys, accountants, and gaming the nation-state jurisdictional landmines.

Also the Zionists know damn well what they’re doing to take us to a NWO global reserve currency via a monetary reset which replaces the USD as the reserve currency with a global one. And that is why they created and planted Bitcoin as a surreptitious creative destruction of the nation-state central banking system with the USD as the reserve (which served it’s interim role but now they’re capable of moving to next level of global integration and control so they want to use subterfuge to disintermediate their own surreptitiously controlled central banks surreptitiously).

Of course, as I had explained 6 months ago that the nation-states would never politically agree to such a disintermediation by a global elite (if admitted in the open) and the nation-states would then fight over what should be the next global reserve currency because certainly China and Russia (and the rest of the developing world) don’t want it to be the USD (because the Armstrong’s $trilllion short-vortex dollar squeeze driving the USD skyhigh coming soon is going to collapse the world and make the nation-states realize how painful it is to be reliant on another country for the reserve currency, which btw Rothschilds installed Trump as POTUS via his control of WikiLeaks as I predicted presciently yet again and is continuing to do so, so that he can be blamed for this short-dollar vortex by all the nation-states of the world) and they indeed have been backing their economies with hard assets and some gold. Thus if hard assets were what was going to recapitalize the next monetary reset then the world would collapse into a Dark Age and a horrific WW3 between the major superpowers. The global elite are trying to avert such a horrible outcome (Bitcoin is a surreptitious way to avert the political morass of proposing and agreeing to a new independent global reserve unit, because for example SDRs backed by various baskets have gained no traction because as Armstrong pointed out the IMF is openly part of the politics and corruption), thus it’s absolutely necessary that they eliminate hard assets as a viable recapitalization, which is why they have no choice but to do 9/11. They’re all about their role of maximizing global cooperation, although it also requires them to be usurists, fixed capital investment, and probably incongruent with the knowledge age as I’ve pointed out to you again recently (prior page of this thread) about my theory essay on the Rise of Knowledge, Demise of Finance. Even Armstrong doesn’t understand this yet, because he’s too compartmentalized in his awareness and thinking. He thinks he’s in the global elite inner circle because he knew for example Margaret Thatcher personally, lol. The reason the global elite have not accepted his proposed Solution Plan, is because it would not resolve the global reserve currency issue!


So as I told you from the start, gold isn’t very useful in many collapse scenarios. The global elite instead has to create a surreptitious new global reserve currency named Bitcoin (which they surreptitiously control already) so that the nation-states will be powerless to resist it as the next reserve currency at the next monetary reset. Yes of course Bitcoin is a fiat but the fact that nobody can prove it is yet, is one of the key reasons that for this coming monetary reset, Bitcoin sits at the bottom of Exter’s Pyramid. You’re conceptualization is lacking an appreciation for changes over time. You think Exter’s Pyramid can be some static base asset indefinitely, but gold has never been a reserve currency since we entered the industrial age. It was merely a symbolic mirage maintained by Rothschilds for the purpose of leveraging his banking and finance empire without political resistance. And do note that a few years ago (right before or after Bitcoin was launched), Rothschilds exited the London Gold Fix business.

---

And they’ve done quite well for themselves with that niche marketing strategy. So perhaps we should conclude they’re marketing and strategic geniuses.

Agreed I was trying to make that point in other words:


Also I think they felt (based on for example my interactions with @smooth and @ArticMine) they were compelled to disavow any symptoms of a common enterprise for the purposes of maximium protection against securities and FinCEN regulation, which I had pointed out in my prior post is potentially going to put XMR in favorable position if the next crypto winter includes widespread regulatory action against the whales of ICO-issued projects (and perhaps equivalent obfuscations such as STEEM, EOS, and DASH, although note the larger projects seem to have bought off high placed former regulators such as Gary Ross in some juridiscations, yet the European regulatory powers have been apparently recently consolidated with MiFiD II but this is far too detailed for me to expend time to study in depth).

P.S. we intend something very strange with our CRED project to side-step that issue, which afaik has not been tried before in the cryptocurrency realm.

P.S. my past dissent (and disgust with some Monero community members former condescending arrogance about anyone who didn’t volunteer for them being critical of some of their technical/market/economic theory claims was attacked as being a defector who would be steamrolled by their superior opensource/volunteerism model/team, e.g. @iCEBREAKER) is mostly (notwithstanding the impact of CFS due chronic liver disease and Tuberculosis on a person’s mood, outlook, energy, objectivity, and (especially continuity required for programming) productivity— which btw the TB is confirmed cured and liver/spleen cysts are under natural treatment with diet/lifestyle changes) because I wanted to create mass-market project (as has been the focus/goal of every s/w project of my career except for the contracting work I did on EOS Photomodeler), and I needed to make money starting from an entirely depleted capital position (whereas those guys had capital and wanted a project to invest in and play with in their spare time).

Slick Willy @r0ach said, “That depends on what your definition of 'is' is.” and “I tried marijuana once. I did not inhale”.


So gold isn’t going to protect us (that is unless we can live 600 years to await the Dark Age to end) when we economic collapse to food as money (and no it wasn’t barter but in fact rice that was the fungible money in Japan for 600+ years).

And gold isn’t going to protect us in the vast majority of the cases where the economic crisis resolves without reaching the need to revert to trading physical gold as a currency with weighing scales.

And gold isn’t going to protect us (from government totalitarianism in the sort of economic crisis where the bonds, currency and other monetary instruments on the pyramid fail) in any case any more because the times have changed and nobody will accept gold any more any where in the world, except for regulated dealers and market makers which the government controls.

So what the heck is Exter's (inverted) Pyramid (with gold at the bottom) useful for then? I’ll tell you what it’s useful for— propaganda for people who wear tinfoil hats.

You might be able to make the argument that central banks will still have gold on the bottom as the risk-free asset, but that has no bearing on what we as individuals should choose if we’re concerned about the bankrupted government expropriating our wealth. (notwithstanding that globalized decentralized cryptocurrency will subjugate and disintermediate nation-state central banking)

Physical money is so agricultural age. Gold ceased being money as we moved into the industrial age with well developed banking and finance. It was kept around by central banks mostly for symbolic reasons. Now as we move into the knowledge age, gold is a barbaric relic.

It’s impossible to have civilized discussion with a person who is unwilling to ever admit when he’s incorrect.


Iota didn’t come any closer than anything else. I challenged CfB to remove the centralized Coordinator (or any obfuscation of it) and afaik they haven’t because they can’t. The consensus will not converge without it. You've got altcoins out there with $billions mcaps which are entirely BS technobabble including RaiBlocks.

Okay one more post because this important and a timely issue.

I can’t say with certainty that you’re incorrect. I just want to point that you may be misunderstanding what appears to be driving this rocket. Afaics, it’s not transaction volume adoption, but rather the fact that everyone we talk to is interested in getting into speculating on Bitcoin. Most of them aren’t even informed enough to know about the transaction fee issue.


Future’s contracts don’t exist just to make profits on shorting. Profits can be made going long also.

Apparently the actual volume on the futures has been underwhelming thus far, so they’re serving more as a confidence confirmation:


Shake the trees to get the weak hands to sell, then they’ve got to go long because there’s too much fundamental demand at this time.

Even my son, my ex-wife, and several random Joe foreigners I ran into for first time in past month in the Philippines are all mentioning the Bitcoin phenomenon and wanting to know what is the best price to get in. Even my 71 year old mother finally admitted that I was working in area that is becoming legitimate and hot topic.

My expert trader friend says he has so many contacts in the USA mentioning they want to get in and HODL.

Mark Cuban is even getting into cryptocurrency, and so many people look to him as a $billionaire to follow.

Juggernaut.

Also take a look at that regression fit chart I had linked in my prior comment post. You’ll note that the current move to ~$20K was very similar is relationship to the trendline on that chart to the $214 April 2013 peak, not the subsequent $1200 peak before the long crypto winter.

Afaics, you’re infringing on our use of the CRED token name. Our plans/use of this name predates yours as best as I can determine based on the first public post from your project being early October 2017 on Medium, which didn’t even mention CRED. Your whitepaper has a reference to “Oct. 18, 2017” on page 12, so it wasn’t created before that date. Do you have any public evidence of your plans/use of the CRED name from before October? The first public mention of “CRED tokens” that I can find is on your Medium post of Nov. 8 and the OP of this ANN thread which is also dated Nov. 8.

https://www.name.com/whois-lookup/cred.cloud
https://www.namecheap.com/domains/whois/results.aspx?domain=cred.cash
https://imgur.com/a/JvmFI

I think that for a considerable duration of time it won’t really matter. Our projects have different target markets. I don’t expect an issue on the exchanges because of this (I won’t tell you why now and actually you’re use of the CRED name on exchanges is somewhat of a blessing for us). And I doubt very much that your narrow scope, ERC-20, ICO-issued project¹ will be of any serious threat in terms of name confusion to the scope of our goals/plans. But none of us can predict the future.

Yet this serves as notice that we don’t intend to stop our use of the CRED name.

To avoid confusion and dilution of brand (mostly at your detriment, if any, since CRED is the name of our project and domain name), you might want to consider changing your token name to REPS (can’t be REP as is taken by Augur). Since reputation seems to be your project’s primary function.

Other than that, best wishes for you.


¹ _{I have strong doubts about whether ICO-issued projects will survive for more than a year or two due to a sea-change in regulation on the way.}

James A. Donald aka JAD or Jim (the first person to respond when Satoshi announced Bitcoin on the mailing list) has a thought provoking discussion going on about the future of religion in terms of promoting the maximum productivity of society:

https://blog.jim.com/culture/fixing-christianity/

https://blog.jim.com/uncategorized/request-for-research-assistance/#comment-1774211

I’d like to comment over there, but seems I’m banned there also.

Religion exists to create societies which are much more productive than without religion (i.e. the religious societies are more productive/erudite and thus resilient and anti-fragile…that’s until they’re co-opted by the unholiness of human manipulation of the institutions of the religion):

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/were-only-human/why-do-we-have-religion-anyway.html

It’s long-term ineffective for us humans to rally around admiration or dedication to another human (although this happens sometimes in the short-term for example for cults and political leaders), because humans are imperfect and this will eventually lead to a collapse of such an idealism.

So humans can be very motivated if they believe there might be some higher purpose to their existence that unifies around their core needs and maximizes their collective success.

Since we’re unable to prove scientifically that a God exists or doesn’t exist, this plausibility of a higher purpose to our existence is open to all possibilities (as it must be for us to exist as I have explained numerous times in prior discussions in these forums with for example @CoinCube). See quote below.

I’m intrigued by the comments over there at Jim’s blog pondering if an upgrade to Christianity might derive somehow from technological developments, such as the rise of social networking over the Internet.

One of my last recent public comments to @CoinCube was a challenge to tell me how I can be successful, i.e. to give me actionable information.

One thought occurred to me that up until now, social networking has been shaped by centralized corporations who are subsidizing and promoting leftism and unproductive activities (e.g. you should see my gf click Like on everything from someone she knows, without any thought to whether she really likes it).

As we move the Internet to a decentralized paradigm, one of my goals is this subsidization will cease and we’ll have a more meritorious form of social networking.

For me lately one of the higher purposes that has been driving me is the thought that perhaps decentralization would ameliorate to some extent the corruption of top-down control power vacuums and that would include the institutions built around religion. Perhaps this may help drive humans back towards religion in its decentralized form as exemplified in Matthew 6:5? Thus any State violating the meritocracy would be viewed rightly so as a parasite and a heresy.

So can decentralization improve (the institutions of) Christianity more towards Jesus’ ideal?

P.S. Trump is kicking butt.


Or it could be like the peak in April 2013 and the drop from $214 to $64, then rise to $1200 months after:

https://99bitcoins.com/price-chart-history/ (turn on the log chart and turn off the events)

I do think we might get another leg down to $7000 – $8500 to shake the trees of weak hands, who fear a crypto winter now.

We’re not far enough above the regression fit trendline yet to have a crypto winter (click quoted link below for the chart):


We’re likely headed to $40k – $100k probably within 2018.

Also IMO (and other sophisticated traders I talk to) there’s too much new investment/speculation interest in Bitcoin for it to enter a crypto winter now. Everybody I talk to is thinking about entering Bitcoin but most have not yet. The general public has soured on general stock markets since 2009, yet they’re very much focused on buying the next Apple or Google specifically.

The SEC and European regulators are just warming up to ICO regulation. The SegWit theft attack is not probably not well seeded enough yet. South Korea is being petitioned by 200,000 of its citizens to not ban cryptocurrency exchanges. The Nasdaq futures are going to be launched after some months. Chinese exchanges are already transitioning to Japan. Etc.. Bitcoin can’t be banned by one or a few countries! Bitcoin is nation-state jurisdictional arbitrage, but @r0ach can’t seem to appreciate that gold doesn’t have this attribute anymore.

We’re just not quite at the point yet for another crypto winter. And when that winter comes, it will be shallower and longer in duration because as you can see the regression trend line is flattening as adoption matures. Click the quoted link (of the banned user) above.

Nothing is certain though. There’s some small chance we’re going into a crypto winter now and new ATHs will be more than 2 years from now.

---

In the knowledge age, it’s your credibility (reputation) that is more important than your monetary wealth. We want to move the centralized Internet (e.g. Wikipedia, Facebook, Redditard, Medium, etc) onto the decentralized ledger.


No more name changes. The token is CRED.


IMO and reflection on when I first heard “bitcoin”, was already a great name for its target market which was/is an “Internet gold” as the whitepaper stated. The “bit” could be misinterpreted a ”small portion” and the “coin” was more retail oriented than the actual hidden intention for the fees to go sky high and it become a reserve currency. Yet I posit the Zionist creators were also thinking about it being a unit-of-exchange in an offchain fractional reserve system they will control. And their intention was to market it initially as a transactional coin. So I can see why they chose that name instead of Szabo’s bitgold name.

IMO, Monero was a very cartoonish name when I first heard it and for me still is until now, because the name is targeting the serious notion of money but in a playful manner (people interested in money are very serious about it). They basically patterned the name on the concept of the game Monopoly (whether they realized it or not), thus it’s funny money aka monopoly money (not real money). Perhaps they were motivated by money+euro, I dunno. On the positive side, they would argue that everyone would know it has something to do with money and they would argue for brand name recall being reasonable. But my criticism remains the name is too silly (for a name that should mean serious money), too many syllables, and doesn’t speak to the advantages of the project. That the people who have invested in it have learned to like it, is I think not indicative of what a mediocre/sub-optimal if not horrible name it is, if the target market was something greater than a fringe anonymity cult. IMO, the name targets people who have an unsophisticated perception of branding and for me the personality of @fluffypony is indicative of the lack of mainstream marketing sophistication of that ecosystem. Even their logo sucks IMO. It‘s like they want it to be some volunteerism, playful enterprise yet also academically very serious. Reminds me of the way MimbleWimble started as a Harry Potter theme. Very geeky. Monero is like what happens when you ask young math/compsci PhDs to run the marketing department. I’m not going to feel bad for speaking frankly as this has been my unwavering position since it was launched. And they had the arrogance to presume that anyone who didn’t volunteer for them was a defector and an idiot.   Are you trying to get me banned? How about we stop talking about specific projects. The projects’ websites will be available for details. Btw, Monero was I presume as fairly mined as Bitcoin (if not more so), so that is one potential advantage it has going into the next crypto winter compared to ICO-issued (including obfuscations of ICO-issued) projects (if the regulators intensely go after the whales of ICO-issued, instamined, stealth mined, etc).

But realize the primary differentiation of the CRED project is not a decentralized currency, although one will be created that can do millions of tps with sub-second confirmation latency, and it’s important for the function of the project. We want to decentralize the entire Internet. Bitcoin is not designed to decentralize the Internet, but rather to decentralize banking. Which is why the programming language choice/issue is so important for our project. Millions of LOC (lines of code) to follow. And I think that for that target market, CRED name is a helluva a lot better than STEEM or EOS. What does “EOS” mean to your average Internet user? EOS, Ethereum, Cardano’s ADA, and others also target a ledger which validates scripts (aka programmable ledger), which is also something we’re looking into, yet this distinction is about focus, priorities, onboarding (without a dubious/illegal ICO nor mining!), and true decentralization. IOHK chose Haskell for example, which is an obtuse, academic language that isn’t likely to lead to wide-scale adoption by programmers. Specifically I mean focusing on adoption oriented applications as the highest priority, not pie-in-the-sky and hyped innovations for the future. My career history and skill set is on applications actually used by millions of users. So I will focus on my strengths. I can’t enumerate why I should be stronger in that area, you’ll just have to observe the result because it’s dozens or 100s of smaller design/focus/prioritization decisions wrapped into an outcome.


mono+ero

Lol, didn’t I just write that the “small portion” interpretation of ‘bit’ would be a weakness. And were they too myopic to realize the Monopoly is more well known in the world than Esperanto? (popularity in 103 countries versus 2000 native speakers and maybe only 2 million who can speak any) As I said, this is what happens when you put some math PhDs in charge of the marketing department.

So they were thinking of uniting/replacing the European languages into a single language (the reason Esperanto was created) and enjoining the failing concept of an EU? Were they so arrogant as to believe that they would displace Bitcoin as “the standard of money” because of their assertion that fungibility requires anonymity? If their coin is primarily about anonymity as the main distinction from Bitcoin, I think the name should reflect that. Any way, I think they also claimed they were just an experiment which they hoped could be added to Bitcoin in the future. I just don’t think they were ever that serious about the marketing.

What’s even more telling is that you can search my archives and you’ll find a post where I discovered monero was the Esperanto word for money, but obviously I forgot. So that exemplifies the problem with using words from obscure languages.

---

Well internally I advised taking profits at $300. But yes I would re-enter on this dip. And I believe we’re still holding some. And I know someone who is holding because to trade would incur CGT  (capital gains tax).

So yes to $500+ we go eventually. Note the alts seemed to rise more than BTC out of this bounce off $10K. Maybe they will continue to lead. I don’t know. I’m not thinking about speculation any more. So please stop following me for predictions on tokens. I’m a developer now.

---

Yep here goes his myopia again:


He doesn’t seem to comprehend technologically that all of the governments would have to ban it in order for Bitcoin mining to cease. And even then, the cryptocurrency addresses are like endospores and can’t be destroyed by any centralized actions.

And he doesn’t seem to understand that the move from public-to-private (which his model expects) may also be a move from centralized to decentralized governance. The consensus algorithm of my project is technologically along the lines of moving towards decentralized governance.


The technological problems are (on paper) solved and being implemented. The government will be all of us controlling it decentralized.

Nation-states are collapsing and dying. Decentralized ledgers are disintermediation (and I posit an intentional creative destruction subterfuge by the Zionists) of the nation-state.


Lol, he needs to read our refutations of @r0ach. How can you move gold, real estate, and shares to a new country without the government tracking it? Who will trade you for it without using a market maker regulated by the government?


Without a power grid, civilization reverts back to the Dark Age. In a Dark Age, only food is money. WTF  

We the people (and our governance) are not going to agree to go back to the 1700s or early 1800s technologically (which would be such a shock that it would takes us back to the Medieval Ages in terms of upheaval)!

And technologically we’d have decentralized ledgers running with decentralized power within a few months, with mesh P2P networks running and line-of-sight WiFi long-distance relay networks supplemented by short-wave radio and other decentralized means. Marty doesn’t seem to understand that technology is not stuck in the 1950s. We have 3D printers now! And advanced engineering knowledge is widespread due to the Internet. Also the Zionists who I posit are running this show, would never want to lose their intelligence gathering Internet network.

Marty is presumably (and understandably) so psychologically scarred by his (apparently unconstitutional and bogus charges) experience in Supermax prison and has such a great fear of government that he can’t see that the technology is changing what government can be. Government is still very powerful w.r.t. to individuals, but quite powerless to stop the Bitcoin phenomenon. I empathize greatly with what he endured. And I hope upon reading this, a light bulb will turn on in his head. We’d like for him to join in our prescience on this issue and be an elder of our tribe with his sacrifice at the hands of the corrupt government.

And I must say that all of this (interesting) discussion is drawing me out of INTJ mode and back to ENTP mode.

So let’s make this the last post for this week.

Seesh you force me to repeat what I already wrote, as if you have the reading comprehension of a 5 year old.

You have not refuted the point that in every Mad Max 600 year Dark Age case, then food is at the bottom and what people turn to. Gold gets buried and is entirely useless.

And in the vast majority of the other economic crisis cases, we don’t make it to gold. It abates before it gets there. In the relatively few cases, where we do make it to gold being useful as a safe haven, then it’s only for about 2 years and then it either goes Mad Max (and gold becomes useless) or the economic crisis recovers.

And on top of that, what is at the bottom of the pyramid changes throughout history and gold's epoch is ending now. Right now. You are entirely on the wrong side of change in the monetary history of the world.

Yet I’m just repeating everything I already wrote.


Decentralized ledgers can’t be destroyed by any one country or even a grouping of them. That makes them more anti-fragile than national currencies, bonds, and gold at this time. We already explained why gold is more or less useless against governments now in this modern era. How the fuck am I supposed to move my gold out of the USA or Philippines surreptitiously during a divorce proceeding? Even if I manage to transport it on a boat, how the fuck do I sell it where I arrive into some fiat which I can use wherein it won’t be flagged as terrorist money coming from outside the banking system? And this sort of tracking is increasing all the time.

Although you may be correct with the implication that the Zionists may control Bitcoin, there’s many alternative ledgers and they don’t wish to reveal the level of their control yet, so for the time being they will pretend that Bitcoin is cardinal to their control of the nation-states.

And the innovation in this space continues interim.


You presume it's impossible to create a suitably decentralized ledger. Yet damn it, this is what I’ve been working on this issue for 4 years. Go ahead and presume I’m only a stapler. Your big mistake. The speculation on Bitcoin now, includes the speculation that some innovative black swan like myself or others will suddenly appear later.

Also interim there are significant differences between a corporate run database like Paypal, and the pseudo-decentralized, distributed ledgers. For example, no one controls who can create a Bitcoin address. Whereas, Paypal account creation is centrally controlled. And I had explained that cryptocurrency addresses and UTXO are like an endospore that can’t be destroyed, same as gold. Paypal can be taxed and pressured by individual governments. Bitcoin not. Btw, this is the primary reason that ICO-issued (and their obfuscations such as stealth mined and instamined) projects are not at all anti-fragile and their doomsday is coming in the next crypto winter, because the whales can be targeted by individual countries and expropriated.


Does lying to yourself help you in some way? I already refuted this in my prior reply to you.

---

Refuted.

---

I agree with the notion that they’re a tribe and they’ve found a way to be dominant, which forces them to maintain control of the institutions of civilization. And even within their tribe, they’re hijacked and co-opted by the Zionists sub-tribe.

But my reaction is that they’re just a natural outcome. We can’t destroy them without also removing the power vacuum that causes them to exist.

I base some of my hope in the my theories about the knowledge age ameliorating their power. Which is also one of the reasons why I work on decentralized ledger theory and implementation.

Unlike James A. Donald’s unrealistic extremism, Jordan Peterson knows how to have dialogue with a much larger swath of society on this subject matter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

I don’t however agree with him that women will necessary excel for example in medicine if ever it’s no longer a state subsidized and regulated non-free market (and I do agree with him that in any case such discrepancies aren’t because of IQ differences except perhaps on the extreme outliers of theoretical science). I think JAD is actually closer to correct on the natural roles of women in a free market. However, we must assess that collectivism is a feature of civilization so again JAD’s insight may be an unrealistic extremism, i.e. socialism and collectivism may be a permanent feature of civilization yet I’m not sure.

One possible perspective is that Jordan Peterson is more attuned to where we are now at the current juncture of civilization (which makes sense given he is data driven as a clinical psychologist) and JAD is more attuned to where we might be heading with a collapse of socialism and collectivism along with the collapse of the industrial age and fixed capital investment which require socialism and collectivism.


@r0ach should correctly attribute his criticism to the source, which is JAD’s theory.

@r0ach is attempting to make a distinction here between the implied desire that women want to be impregnated (forcefully via “rape”) by the most competitive and warrior genetics, and his theory that women want to incentivize men to compete for them. Sorry but I fail to see any generative essence distinction between the two concepts.

I guess he is thinking that although women instinctively want the most competitive genetics for their offspring, that they don’t want to be forcefully abducted or impregnated and would prefer more control over the situation that follows the competition of the males. And that they’d like the competition to take place within some orderly social structure that empowers them to retain control over such matters of engagement. Yeah females may have all sorts of fantasies, but the reality is that if they want males to compete to the death then in fact they abrogate such orderly control. So what they actually want is to be raped and conquered, because surely they can’t defend themselves against the victorious warriors. Duh. IOW, women want the social structure to give them every fantasy they can imagine, which of course is an outcome of total collapse and disorder (which btw is why we need females because the Second Law of Thermo requires that the trend to maximum disorder is inexorable). The instincts and feminine traits of women render them (collectively) entirely incapable of planning and logic that would sustain social order.


Correct w.r.t. to their hypergamy instincts. But perhaps this can be ameliorated somewhat by their upbringing and social pressure.

Zero is the most recent proposed name for a proposed new programming language (an attempt to replace Go, JavaScript/Node.js, and C++ with something better, more fundamentally sound, modernized, more safe, and less of a clusterfuck). The proposed decentralized ledger’s name (and in fact the future website) is to the left above where it currently is written “Newbie”.

---

@r0ach is wanting an absolute surety with money. Even the Bible explains that is folly. As well, the Bible says we will throw our gold and silver into streets in the future and it will not save us in that day of future reckoning. If @r0ach accepts that civilization depends on cooperation and that cooperation isn’t absolutely sure, then IMO he might better understand. It’s ironic that he wants a money that is entirely independent of cooperation, yet money has no value without agreement (i.e. cooperation) about what is money.

He is correct that afawcs, all the existing decentralized ledger consensus algorithms presented so far, do have a problem that they require an oligarchy control in order to function properly:

https://gist.github.com/shelby3/e0c36e24344efba2d1f0d650cd94f1c7

https://busy.org/eos/@dan/in-defense-of-consortium-blockchains

We will introduce a decentralized ledger design wherein I posit that the power-law distribution of wealth is less potent and anti-fragility is greater. I remain cognizant that the game theory analysis of such systems is quite labyrinthine, so we’ll have to see the outcome of peer review.

P.S. I can’t go around the forum correcting every Newbie who doesn’t understand that I’ve already studied every proposed decentralized ledger design. For example, I saw someone raving about Spectre (not Spectrecoin and not the new CPU malware), but they haven’t read everything I have written. Ditto Nimiq, Raiblocks, Iota, etc…but that says nothing about whether they might still be good greater fool speculations.

I edited the above. Please note it. I will delete this post after a while. Silver will eventually make a run, perhaps even a 10 bagger, but it will likely be after 2018 and after Bitcoin has hit new ATHs. The short-term trade is sell silver for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is in its exponential move right now. Silver is not (yet). Gold and silver will move when governments start collapsing. That is not quite yet. It’s coming to Europe, but Bitcoin is making a technology adoption move now.

I’m limiting my posting so please don’t expect any follow-up.

I don’t have free time to study all the altcoin charts at this time (in INTJ “head in sand” mode as a developer, not my dominant ENTP personality trait). My thought is that BTC may lead out of this dip as difficulty resets much lower and much more profitable to mine (although I haven’t looked lately at the transaction delays factor, yet that may not matter). Also BTC tends to lead on moves up. So we (not me) traded BCH back to BTC at $2500+ (not expecting the SegWit theft yet).

If BTC gets far ahead of the alts, we will trade back into alts. I still think LTC may go to $500 for example. And BCH probably $10+K. All the alts eventually catch up, even Steem recently breached $6 (which I traded for BTC).

Note that for those in the USA, you can’t trade any more without short-term capital gains (unless you relocate to Puerto Rico and avail of Act 22):

Also you may or may not want to keep your eye out on this potential development of mine.

Note I’ve since come to understand that Eastern Europe and Russia may have a brighter future. And Australia is in worse shape than I thought.

---

Exter’s Pyramid is a theory by a former central banker. It’s not a proven hypothesis.

Armstrong has explained that Exter’s Pyramid is not always applicable. There have been several examples in human history where the collapse was so Mad Max that only food was money and gold was entirely useless. What use was it for burying your gold in the ground for 600 years (in Japan for example and again in Western Europe) waiting for the Dark Age to be over?

And thousands of examples in human history where the collapse didn’t go far enough off the rails for gold to be necessary. This is the usual outcome. Armstrong has explained that gold only serves a safety role in a very limited type of collapse that is bad enough but not so bad and only during about the first 2 years of such a collapse (because the collapse either improves or goes Mad Max). So Exter’s Pyramid is basically nonsense. Gold will only help you in a very very narrow set of circumstances and that is why the typical recommendation was to only put 1 - 5% of net worth into gold.

But now it’s even worse, because as of this time, gold has become almost entirely useless in any scenario imaginable, because it indeeds relies on middle men to have any economic function. Used to be you could hop on a boat and take your gold with you, and there would be people using it for commerce or at least fractional reserve banking where ever you landed. The government now nearly entirely controls the physical movement and the market makers who provide any form of liquidity, because no one uses metal money any more for actual commerce. (Also your logic alleging that the whales of cryptocurrency extract value from the ecosystem but not for gold, is myopic because TPTB also extract value from gold indirectly which affects your wealth if hodling gold, e.g. compare the rise in wealth of hodling productive assets versus gold in the USA since the 1800s.)

@r0ach seriously my friend. You barked up the wrong tree and you need to realize it before it’s too late for you. We’ve got a juicy correction on Bitcoin right now so sell that damn antiquated silver and get on the rocket going to $40K – $100K. Don’t let your foolish pride cause you to repeat the mistake I made in 2012 (which I attribute to how acutely ill I was at that time and my entire life turned upside down due to that and my kids being yanked back to USA), and double-down for sloppy-seconds riding a $75K short-bet on China all the way to zero, which ended up making me too poor to join @rpietila on buying 10,000 BTC at $10 in January 2013 (I still had about $70+K but couldn’t risk my only net worth when I was so depleted and ill and increased, unexpected child support expenditures). You’re going to end up being the poster boy for repeating my foolish pride during the exponential move of Bitcoin (you’re already way behind selling BTC for silver at $600 but you can redeem yourself now with a 10 bagger still to go in Bitcoin). Bottom on BTC is already in or will be $7000 – $8500. Much below $7000 would indicate a crypto winter is upon us, but that would be premature because we have so many new classes of people who are trying to enter this investment now. We need to move to those nosebleed levels before the next crypto winter which will be shallower but longer in duration than the 2014 - 2016 one (which was shallower and longer in duration than the 2011 - 2012 one). Bitcoin is in an adoption curve pattern, and even Armstrong hasn’t realized this yet. I believe Bitcoin is the next reserve currency which was launched surreptitiously by the Zionists who control central banking from further behind the compartmentalized curtain than Armstrong’s 2nd and 3rd tier contacts (e.g. Margeret Thatcher was not Rothschilds). Bitcoin wasn’t designed to be a transactional coin for the masses and Armstrong still has a myopia about this fact because he doesn’t understand all the technical minutia completely as I do. Fees will rise and the masses will be pushed possibly offchain into fractional reserve banking such as Lightning Networks (but the technical and game theory flaws are onerous so possibly instead on to an altcoin if any succeeds long-term).

Exter’s Pyramid violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics which states that entropy (aka probabilistic distribution of uncertainty and diversity of outcomes) must inexorably trend to maximum. Thus there can’t exist any form of absolute surety, because that would be highly anti-fragile, non-resilient, and non-relativistic. Exter’s Pyramid is some propaganda BS so that insane goldbugs and the dealers who profit on them have promulgated as form of truth, but it’s not an absolute truth.

Armstrong has explained that there was a time in ancient human civilization where gold was not even money because it was too rare. It was only ornamental for kings. Instead iron and then bronze were metal, and before that it was animal skins, shells, and what not. Thus what is money changes throughout time as technology changes. Now we’re moving into a epoch where precious metals will entirely lose their monetary function, because in effect they become too rare again (in terms of ability to exchange them for anything). Remember money is what the people-at-large believe everyone else will accept in exchange.

Also your fundamental fears about cryptocurrency are going to be largely ameliorated when I launch. You see the name of the project now (which I thought of many months ago, we’ve just been hiding it). Decentralized ledger technology is only at the nascent stage. And there’s another formulation that isn’t proof-of-work nor proof-of-stake nor a DAG in the sense that has been already promulgated by Iota and Byteball. It’s not absolute surety (nothing can be because we necessarily live in a relativistic universe), but remember that money is a social institution any way. So I posit my design will fit very well with that reality. And decentralized ledgers (and note the term block chain is not general enough to describe my design) are also useful for consensus ordering non-fungible events, not just monetary transactions. The former will end up being much more valuable than the monetary function, per the point of my 2013 essay which I linked for you in my prior comment post.

Btw, did y’all notice that Armstrong’s private arrays Socrates service predicted the recent top of Bitcoin to the exact day (or maybe it pinpointed the week)!

(image is cropped same as for the linked one on the blog above, but this image to the left comes from someone who pays for the Socrates service thus confirming it was prescient)

P.S. Socrates remains cautiously bullish on Bitcoin (thus agreeing with our analysis that a crypto winter collapse is not likely now). As implied above, a crypto winter is distinguished from a severe correction by the long duration before new ATHs are achieved.

The only people who care, are those who need to sell or buy. The crypto ecosystem is on an unstoppable path. Even if the entire world bans ICOs, centralized exchanges, and all of SegWit is stolen and BTC is reverted to Satoshi’s protocol, there are developments in the ecosystem that will continue the march forward. All of those adverse events could set us back into another 2 - 3 year crypto winter if they’re severe and widespread. Seems though far-fetched or premature at this time. We should be climbing a wall of worry heading towards the nosebleed level that eventually does lead to the next crypto winter. Feels more like a bear trap in a vertical market, although the severity of the correction is alarming and we should give some weight to the possibility that we’re in the start of another crypto winter.


And the 2013 bubble from $1200 to $150. So the winters are becoming more shallow (and less V shaped with a longer duration for new ATHs) which is to be expected from a maturing and larger ecosystem. So the next crypto winter may only be a shallower decline but may require years for a new ATH? If we drop through the long-term support ~$7000, then I will be worried that new ATHs could be years from now.

Buying BCH at $300 (as stated in this thread) and selling it at $2500+ proved to be yet another very prescient and lucrative trade (that was after selling the freebies for $800 on the first ramp). That was a 20 bagger compounded on top of gains already attained in BTC and LTC at the time of the airdrop fork.

Ditto buying LTC at $6 and selling at $80, repurchasing in the $40s and selling at $300. Another 50 bagger in less than a year.

We’re in a severe correction now.

Whether BTC bounces at $10K or not, looks like we’re headed down to long-term support in the vicinity of a 61.8% Fibonacci correction. If we drop below that then $4000 and an 80% correction crypto winter could be upon us.

I’m still leaning towards this is a bear trap for the newbies who rushed in and bought recently. Many will panic sell at $7000. Then I still think we’re on target for $40 – $100K over the next 18 months. However, if the ramp up of ICO cease & desist orders, banning of exchanges in Asia, and adverse tax rulings spreads along with a potential SegWit theft attack (if it occurred sooner than anticipated), then a crypto winter is possible now.

My gut is we bottom $7000ish and be back above $20K by late May after the Nasdaq futures are launched. I'm thinking TPTB are just shaking the trees now to profit on their shorts and reload. They’ll take this to nosebleed levels before attacking SegWit, in order to maximize the number of greater fools. The reload will enable more of Wallstreet to get on board before the next big run.

James A. Donald (first guy who responded to Satoshi on the mailing list for the Bitcoin announcement) a short-term contrarian indicator for the BTC price.

Yet it’s pisser for me that I have to spend BTC on developers at a lower value for next several intense months of development. I’ll probably sell more into any if any deadcat bounce off the $10k level.

Note we should be expecting a rollercoaster ride (c.f. How to Trade a Vertical Market) in 2018 but not an outside reversal (i.e. no change of trend into a crypto winter):

---

Update: overloading the name zero.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgLbAzhCgBY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FISNOewkwHQ

Regarding the alleged widespread lying media in Germany (ostensibly controlled by the Zionists) he discusses in the above linked video, note that the corporate tax burden in Germany (and Europe) was 10 - 20% lower than the USA before the Trump tax cut of the corporate tax from 35% to 21%:

https://home.kpmg.com/xx/en/home/services/tax/tax-tools-and-resources/tax-rates-online/corporate-tax-rates-table.html

The European “cattle” (chattel) have excessively high personal tax burdens and low taxes on their Zionist elite. It’s indicative of a dying paradigm of the industrial age and fixed capital investment Theory of the Firm usurists.

Conspiracy theory might hypothesize that Trump was put into office by Rothshilds controlled Wikileaks for a reason. He is lowering their taxes, reducing regulations on their business such as offshore drilling, and helping to foment the next breakout of major war in the world. And providing the polarization of US politics so that the Zionists can radicalize their liberal base of zombies when Kissinger sends in the promised blue hats to take on the “you can take my gun from my cold dead hand” militias.

Is decentralization dissemination of information undermining them?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5P4ClawlfOo

Gold is not at all involved in this decentralization of information. It’s analogous to the comparison of the value of mechanically crushed gravel compared to etched silicon. The intellectual property component of the valuation is orders-of-magnitude differentiated. @r0ach (@realr0ach) why can’t you comprehend that purely monetary stored value is dying, because the industrial age and fixed capital investment is dying. Why can’t you comprehend my essay, “Rise of Knowledge, Demise of Finance”? You’re as myopic as the Luddites, who couldn’t accept that technology had changed the economics from their antiquated, truculent understanding of the world.

So you think the Zionists can maintain centralized control over all information technology just because they presumably control Internet trunk lines? What about 3D printers that can manufacture 3D printers? Line-of-sight WiFi can transmit over great distances, etc. It’s like trying to stop the production of moonshine.

There’s anti-fragility in the millions of programmers now. And zero is being overloaded to empower more of them. Physical control is an oxymoron now. Anything physical can be ameliorated with decentralized intellectual innovation now.

If y’all are wondering why you’re not receiving replies…

As predicted, if y’all click your Profile →Profile Settings →Personal Message Options, you’ll notice that “Allow newbies to send you PMs.” is unchecked. This change was apparently made automatically recently to every established member’s account so as to prevent Newbies like myself from private messaging you (about for example an update on my health).

@OROBTC, I don’t think @CoinCube reads this thread. You may wish to notify him.

Who wants to bet this forum is controlled by people who are bought. The question is bought by whom.

(To the naive who are messaging me asking about if Raiblocks has solved anything important, please learn to use Google to search my archives by keyword. Raiblocks is and always was nonsense, but even nonsense with technobabble hype has a speculation value during this crypto bubble)


Well at least Theymos could stop asking for microBTC when the damn fee for sending it is 1000X higher. Can he be pragmatic and accept BCH? Or just be honest and ask for milliBTC to whitelist a newbie. I think I could afford it, lol. But at the time, I had no BTC only BCH in my accessible wallet and the minimum exchange to BTC via ShapeShift or Changelly was several hundred $ worth. I wasn’t willing to pay that just to be able whitelist an account that’s likely to get banned any way.

And the ICO cease & desist orders begin:

https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/12/sec-shuts-down-munchee-ico/

And the European regulator is coming:

http://archive.is/heVFi

G20 coordinated regulation coming:

And the ICO cease & desist orders begin:

https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/12/sec-shuts-down-munchee-ico/

And the European regulator is coming:

http://archive.is/heVFi

G20 coordinated regulation coming: