Religion advocate forgiving and redemption no ?



Religion is not about sticking to corrupt structures. All religions warn about the wolf in sheep clothe and corrupt structures.




Science cannot explain everything either, but religion is not really about being dogmatic or against progress, on the contrary most religion have their own eschatology and hope for better future.




This doesnt explain much either.



Lot of great scientist if not all were religious.



Its not a company, you know what jesus said about marchants in the temples etc.



Fear is a powerfull tool to influence people, but religion is not about fear normally its more about faith and hope.

It show that religion is getting forgotten in developped country, but in the same time everything become ugly, with concrete bars, high ways, with opioïd crisis, school shooting, suicide rate in japan, there are more and more burn outs and lost people who dont even know why they wake up in the morning. There is not really much anything inspiring or beauriful that comes out of those society anymore that much.

I dont really see religion in opposition to progress, originally religion also bring some progress in society organisation, and were able to stand for certains values and change the system.

Historically in Occident the catholic mornarchy was very dogmatic and prevented society evolution but its not really for theological reasons deeply grounded in the bible either.

The way i see it, i never see ICO/IEO really explaining a real business model, there is the part about the project they want to develop and everything about the token and how to buy it, but what is very rarely if ever seen, is how and when they will have something to sell, how many they are planning to sell, and how this will translate to the token sold in the ICO rising price on the exchange.

If the only thing they have to sell is the token, then it's already sold at the end of the ICO. Even if the project get actually developed and running, it's mostly free of use, or the benefits don't go the developers, fees and block reward go to the block makers, and it's the only fee there is for using a blockchain. Even if the token is fully used in an effective business after, it's not a very good thing that the initial token price is adjusted on speculative value rather than on the price of whatever service are using the blockchain.

It looks more like non profits funding in a way, that people pay to develop a product or another that they think will be useful, and the ROI would be on business that need the blockchain to run, but not on the token itself.

Like if blockchain are used for an energy grid, like a project i made a study for, then the token would be emitted when a producer emit some electricity, and can be transferred to a customer to use this electricity. The total "market cap" at a moment is the amount of energy produced on the grid. And the token price is determined by electricity producer.

With the ICO model, if there is already plenty of token in circulation before the first watt is produced, it mean there will be a gap between the price that the investor expect to sell their token, and the value of the token based on energy cost.

And the way i see it, it would be the same with any model in the 'classic' economy. The same unit cannot be used as hype pumped value to sell as fund rising with perspective of future profits, and then by user of the platform as a way to access a service or acquire assets. So even if the project work and there is a demand for the use of the platform, the token users will be buy will be a different unit than the one sold at the ICO, the price of the token for users will be a completely different model than the model used by people buying on the ICO as a speculative asset.

And if the only product is the token where all the value is derived from hype and speculation, ICO are mostly a one shot thing, you can't hype the same thing twice to sell it with a multiplier, or then it become clearly a scam to begin with.

So it's why i really have hard time to see what people expect and even on which basis to call project that doesn't do x10 in a year a scam, because as far as i know, they never really say how much profits they expect to make, when, and how this is going to translate to lot of people buying the token at several time to ICO price. So it's implied already that there is no sure profits out of it, no garantee of ROI, neither the quality of quantity or time of it.

And if the idea is to fund project to develop a product, then it's more like non - profit fundation, like ethereum or cryptonote or firefox or other open source projects that are non profits organisation, and there is no ROI in the model.

That they can reach from zero To a certain price yes, that they can multiply the post ICO price by several without some pump or price manipulation i dont really get it how.

Im not pessimistic about crypto, but the initial offering model seems misleading, and in any case its not like a share in a company , even if "if the team is nice" They can always  buy the tokens back at certain price if the projets get more benefits, but there is no obligation to do so, and its not clear at which rate They should buy it under which condition etc the model is different  from share in a company as a % of the total benefits that the company will do selling product other than the shares.

Im a bit doing a caricature too, ICO can be a good way for start up and developper to rise funds quickly,  but its hard to see how a potential success will lead to multiplication of the post ICO token price, and how the ROI is supposed to work, especially with the high expectations following bitcoin success.

I just watched some ICO/IEO lately, they never really explain the model by which they are going to multiply the ICO price where most of the value is speculation and hype.

The thing i never understand about ICO and buying token or coin as an investment to HODL expecting a ROI on it.

It's made to look similar to share holding in a company, but it's a completely different mechanism. Share prices in a company can rise because share is a % of the company capital, and when the company make profits, and rise it's capital, the share value increase.

But token are not a share, they are not a %, and even in the case of a 'good' project, that attract users and market, there is no connection between this and the price of coin on exchange. Especially that the main value of blockchain is a property transfer system, if all the coins/token are sold in an ICO and held by investor, it mean the blockchain is essentially frozen and useless. And if there is a huge speculation on the future price of the coin, nobody is going to use it as payment and the blockchain is essentially stall and useless.

In a 'regular' companies with fund rising through share, the company has an actual product to sell to customer with a profits, when the share holding agreement is made, nothing is really sold yet, it's just a paper that says the share holder will own a certain % of the profits made by selling the future product.

With ICO it seems the main product of the blockchain is the token, and they sell it all during the initial phase, and all the value is already extracted from the company at this point, and they have nothing else to sell.

ICO would make sense as a legal agreement that the funder are bound to hold a certain % of all the profits made using the blockchain, like if all transaction contain a fees distributed to the share holder, as the product of blockchain are the transactions, it's the price should be to fit with regular share holding model where owning a share can make profits, but the good model of funding is not really found yet IMO, other than going through the regular institution for the legal backing and more flexible agreements than what can be made using tokens sales.

I really don't understand how people who buy coin or token see it rise, other than riding a bull run in a pump and dump and selling at the right time scamming others who are going to buy it higher.

Essentially i really don't get it how people expect a token or coin doing x 10 or even x 2, even in case there is a rock solid team who deliver a successful product at the end, who is used by millions of people and in the economy, the price of the token is still not going to rise much.

Even bitcoin nobody can really explain why the value got so high, there is no usual "rational" reason for it to jump from 1$ to 6000$, there is no real economic for this.

The only thing that can make the coin rise if is a whale start a pump with huge funds, but in this case, the creation of value come from the whales pumping it, not from the product, either the product is successful or not. Even if there is a company behind, the benefits are going to end on the company account, and won't make the token price rise in itself.

Initially crypto were interesting because of perspective of decentralization, now it become all about people wanting to ride bull run and pump and dump on centralized exchange, which you could do even without any blockchain at all, and then calling developer greedy because they want to make profits, it's a bit the pot calling the kettle black.

I really don't get it by which mechanism people think the token will rise on value in exchange based on the success of the product itself. Especially if all the tokens that are supposed to be the main use of the blockchain are stuck in HODLers expecting it to go the moon.

On the other side there are all the private blockchain companies, who actually sell product to real company or solve IT issues in real economy, and they have zero token on exchanges, token are tied to the business logic of the company, and not sold with huge speculative promise in the future.

i've seen many people discussing this same issue, and i never got a really clear answer on how this ROI is supposed to happen when buying a token, even if the team is real and the project successful is the sense useful, used in real economy, by merchant or that other business are actually using it.

It's why this question of what make a project good, it depend what you expect of it, if you expect doing a huge profit on exchange, then any coin can do even without a blockchain on centralized site with whales playing pump and dump to keep the traders busy.

If it's about use in the economy, or about promoting decentralization, then i really don't see how the token price can do x10 or X1000 because it's getting used as currency or asset in another business or because it get millions of users. I really don't see how people correlate a project 'success' with price being pumped on exchanges. The two are completely orthogonal to me. Token are not a share in a company, there is zero legal obligation to anything, and there is no direct correlation between a project success and parabolic rising of the token price.

People saying this few year back were called FUDers and non believers, or like the price is supposed to do a x1000 "like bitcoin", but even bitcoin nobody can really explain how the price got so high, or why it would move up or down. So i really don't get it what people expect from crypto project nowday, other than them being pumped up by a whale and selling at the good moment to the good pigeon.

The main problem of steem IMO is it lacks good content and users indexing, all the rating is uni dimentional, without proper indexing/category its very hard to find the content and users you can be interested in, and the rating is mixed with ROI for whales and it doesnt help.

I started a project like this for music before, already was into this years ago, even before YouTube

But its a tough thing, most content producer are tied for life to a distributor ( even on some planet not yet discovered for some contract) , and there are very few good quality producer who are independant, and distributor generally took the habit to hate internet and in the end no real plateform of decentralized content distribution really existed. Majors did everything they could for this not To happen.

And now with competition as YouTube which is totally free with gigabytes of low value content uploaded / seconds, its hard To really compete with a serious plateform, either it will be free and based on volunteer and not very stable or professional, or it needs To be non free, and will be hard to attract users.

Even kim dot com wanted to start being a content distributor before he got arrested.

I stil think the current state of things with content production/distribution is not ideal, and blockchain could add a stone, but it would need some user attracting content producer associated to it that user would pay for. Lot of labels and producer are starving as well, so they could take any solution that bring them profits.

The main income from YouTube remain ads and it would be hard To force people To watch them in decentralized setting. Maybe it could be linked To a faucet and people would require tokens To watch certain content.

But it would need something différent than YouTube anyway.

No, the current chain have virtuelly illimited supply, to create lot of coins easily for testing.


The mainnet will have regular supply (In the 20 millions) and block reward.

But it needs to be a different model than youtube, because youtube hosts lot of low value content, without very advanced content promotion, so it's hard to see a competitor to it that could host large amount of data for free.

With content that has more value density, with paid streaming it could be workable, as nodes that host / stream the content can be rewarded on the streaming value.

Not every nodes have to store everything, only the index and public key/signature of the data. Each node can store locally only the data it needs.

But i don't think either blockchain are really going to be competitive for mass free social networking, more for archiving or small to medium user base, for less than 100k posting users or so it can be manageable.

Or it needs some sharding, but that could be easier to do on applications or social networking that already have information on circles and groups, like data for a group would be very easy to shard, and not everyone has to store all the data from the all groups, while data integrity as well as origin can still be checked publicly.

But at the scale of facebook or youtube, handling millions or billions or user seems difficult, or with a very efficient sharding, because all together most user only need to access a very small amount of the whole data, and data relationship/hierarchy can be made easy to shard, as the relationship of new content with existing content can be made easy to figure out in lot of cases, unlike transaction where any transaction can potentially reference any other transactions, content on platform like facebook can still be segregated more easily.

But the advantage is also not huge, because what make blockchain interesting is in the way it can settle disagreement on transactions which can include ordering or dependency problems, with files or social media there is not a huge need for conflict resolving and it's easy to end up with the same data on all nodes, as there can hardly be some mutually exclusive branch, unless it rely on access on limited resources like transactions depends on coins, there is not much at stake with the consensus on regular application data like for social media, the advantages would be content signature and timestamp, making the application easy to distribute in a secure manner with the cryptography, making it censor free on the global chain even if all nodes can filter the data they want to have locally and/or serve, and making page generation and data sourcing publicly verifiable.

Social media also generate lot of waste and temporary data that is only going to get viewed for short period of time, like instagram or instant chat, so for casual non important temporary data, blockchain are not necessarily a good target, but for a target like archiving, or blog post that are supposed to stay and be viewed for a long time it could have an interest.

I think it is possible.

Data can just be indexed in the blockchain with proof of existence, and the data being stored/shared separately.

Such apps would need user (or site) level filtering to only download data based on address/pubkey white/black list or other filtering.
 
Data set is much less problematic to verify than transactions, no quadratic signature problem or complex validation, or ordering problem, so it can scale virtually at machine speed.

Data can be stored in crypted form and private key shared with diff hellman key exchange.

In a full decentralized scenario, each user would run their own node and store personal data locally, then it needs some routing system to route clients toward the nodes hosting the files.

For setup like social media, there is not even a huge pressure for confirmation, because lot of data is new data that doesn't depend on previous state unlike transactions, so there is virtually no need for confirmation once the new data is in the memory pool with the signature that prove its origin, it can be considered as confirmed and will be integrated in a block sooner or latter. And it can be relatively easy to filter the data you want to have locally, like data from friend list identified with public key, if all content is signed it can allow all users to verifiy the authenticity of the message, as well doing filtering based on public keys.

For video like youtube it seems relatively hard for all reason mentioned before due to economy of scale, and seem hard to beat youtube where you can upload gigabyte everyday for free with high availability, plus all the tools of encoding/reencoding that can become costly and probably too much for most user especially if it has to be free as youtube, seems complicated. For audio or photos it could be viable though.

The other issue is that content can't be modified or deleted after it's integrated in a block, but if only the index is stored on the blockchain, and the data stored only locally, deleting the local file would make it unavailable to other nodes.

The best would be to figure a flexible fee system that can be settled by the miner to avoid object/file transaction to be cancelled because of the inputs used for the fees, to have priority objects based on fees that can still be confirmed instantly given some garantees to the miners about the fees. But even this is not a big issue for new content that doesn't depend on previous state (like new posts on social media), as it can just sit on the memory pool with no fee and cannot be canceled anyway, or some portion of blocks size can be reserved to store such data, as the problem of block size is much less acute for data than for transaction validation.

Oki let me know how it goes

Normally the build on Linux is very simple and quick, only the runtime have to be compiled it takes few secs with no dependencies.

The first block was mined in june 2016 http://nodix.eu/nodix.site/block/F9D72B506D57420CDC828A004FC3DC1A3C5D716B53735580E6B32296DE30D3B7

But its a testnet chain, i will reset it in the next weeks to launch the mainnet

The blockchain can store

• Application roots with default permissions
• Type definitions
• Object instances based on type definitions
• HTML5 templates
• Files indexed on the blockchain and shared using P2P protocol
• Portable binary modules and script to implement data sources, event sources, and page generation scripts based on live blockchain data

Proof of ownserhip of application data using cryptographic signature, and application policy and types define the permissions to transfer or modify elements of the data graph on the blockchain. Secure key exchange can be used for private data stored in a crypted form on the blockchain.

The blockchain structure can also be used to store abstract syntax tree on the blockchain for functional programming and distributed scientific computation.





Modular design allow to build blockchain easily using POW or POS with simple configuration files without compilation.

It's based on a runtime providing portable binary modules, garbage collection, and lockless multithread primitive for fast and safe responsive applications, as well as parser / interpreter for script to define event sources, data sources, or content generation including mobile compliant HTML5 pages and smart contracts.

It's still under development running with a testnet there are already demo for :

Blogging and private messaging :

https://nodix.eu/app/blog/page/blog.site/index


Collectible cards with textured 3D model :

http://nodix.eu/app/Cards/page/cards.site/viewcard/E1D4CED519E7A2BCA905FADC18B8A4F9FB34E2680FC59606692D5D5FF179159F



Audio synth based on filter graph stored on the blokchain

https://nodix.eu/app/Cards/page/cards.site/compose




https://nodix.eu/app/Cards/page/cards.site/sequence

Raytracing :

https://nodix.eu/app/raytrace/page/raytrace.site/draw/C5C0142C28292E4083A1CBA44EAAD55339527D5669126EDE34ACAF97188413D1


I'm currently developing an app to design responsive HTML5 pages with dynamic data stored fully as a graph on the blockchain with full validation of the page in the client browser from publicaly verifiable blockchain data.

Hopefully i will have a mainnet running with a sample app in the next weeks with full web hosting solution including graph data, user accounts, content management etc

What proof do you have for anything that you say ? None either. Doesnt prevent you to insult everyone, make bold statement and pretend it's absolute truth , science, and yadda yadda.

None of my familly believe in the bible, if anything that proove how you are just full of a priori, and make bold statement without proof or anything just based on a priori on things you have zero clue about.

Stop pretending you are a scientist.

You are just indoctrinated to hate religion.

"We know that God exists because mathematics is consistent and we know that the devil exists because we cannot prove the consistency." -- Andre Weil

Perception through physical object doesnt mean perception of physical objects.

It's same with cpu and programs, even if execution of program is physics/electronics, the validity or correctness of the program is not seen physically.

Like all books, including scientific book.

All the proof are there, sad you are so indoctrinated into to your irrational pseudo scientific belief to even see a proof.

It's weird thing with the pseudo rationalist/scientific, they are expecting a result out of "science" without being able to explain how this result come out , but still saying it's due to "science" or something.

They often seem to be quite confused. .. Quit sign of conditioning, or belief being pushed over them rather than being coherently constructed by their own mind ..


Big bang, relativity, and all this looks very kabbalist, with  immaterial light, dynamic space, universe expanding from one point, many things remind kabbalist exegese of the genesis.

Just like chemistry, thermodynamics etc looks derivred from alchemy, a bit equivalent of kaballah in Islam.

It's not perception of physical objects though

Philo of alexandria make the connection with the mind of god as the logos, as source of truth.

Plato speak of realm of idea similar to this.

Many says the concept of haeven in the bible is the same than those concept of realm of idea of Plato,  and mind of god of philo.

All reality and facts happen in the mind, all reality based on sense is virtual

You can never really know if you are in a dream, in a simulation etc.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)

The Soul is imagined first, then the particularity of objects,
External and internal, as one knows so one remembers.
As a rope, not perceived distinctly in dark, is erroneously imagined,
As snake, as a streak of water, so is the Soul (Atman) erroneously imagined.
As when the rope is distinctly perceived, and the erroneous imagination withdrawn,
Only the rope remains, without a second, so when distinctly perceived, the Atman.
When he as Pranas (living beings), as all the diverse objects appears to us,
Then it is all mere Maya, with which the Brahman (Supreme Soul) deceives himself.

— Gaudapada, Māṇḍukya Kārikā 2.16-19 [39]


It is the confusion, ignorance and illusions that need to be repealed. It is only when the knower sees nothing else but his Self that he can be fearless and permanent.[47][48] Vivekananda explains the need to understand Maya as follows (abridged),[49]

The Vedas cannot show you Brahman, you are That already. They can only help to take away the veil that hides truth from our eyes. The cessation of ignorance can only come when I know that God and I are one; in other words, identify yourself with Atman, not with human limitations. The idea that we are bound is only an illusion [Maya]. Freedom is inseparable from the nature of the Atman. This is ever pure, ever perfect, ever unchangeable.

— Adi Shankara's commentary on Fourth Vyasa Sutra, Swami Vivekananda

But mathematics and logic remain the same nonetheless

Descartes say a bit this too, that only thoughts are real , all sensorial perception is deceptive.

Science is more intellectual process than based on sensorial perception, facts etc.