Thus you mean centralization. Otherwise you get non-convergence of consensus (e.g. three clusters of 33% each). You keep making the same design error, which you've repeated with Iota.

Section 4 of that white paper is written by an idiot who doesn't understand economics.

51% attacking a coin requires it to be economic. The attacker must be able to make gains which exceed his costs of attacking. The problem for the attacker in PoW is that the attack is only sustained for as long as the attacker continues to spend on electricity. Thus shorting the coin is probably not going to work, since everyone knows the attacker has to sustain a negative income situation indefinitely. Contrasted with PoS where you only need to have owned the coins once (even if you've already spent them!). 

The attacker can attempt to double-spend his coins, but the community is very like to blacklist his double-spent coins thus removing his income.

The viable 51% attack is the one that forces KYC on all transactions or changes the protocol in ways that the masses don't object to. The State is the one who has the incentive to do this attack.

Or in Bitcoin's example for the mining cartel to block protocol updates such as block size increases to increase their profits via rising transaction fees.

I have a solution for the latter two economic attacks which also will reduce the electricity consumption to an insignificant level.


Not in my design.


You are ignorant.

You still fail to understand what I wrote the first time. Which is that offline nodes see two chains which disagree, and they don't know which one was first. And they can be lied to by the nodes which claim they were online.

The only solution is to use centralized community/developer checkpoints.

You are very slow minded.


That is centralization because you must trust some authority to make a decision as to which community decisions should be enacted. The Bitcoin block size debate is an example for you about community consensus not working without a dictator.

You don't have a fucking clue. And you are wasting my time.

There is no way to objectively distinguish a historic key that is respent from a historic transaction that had spent that historic key. This is a double-spend with two chains arguing about which was first.

The only way to distinguish which was first is either a decentralized objectivity which is the PoW longest-chain-rule, or for PoS a centralized objectivity such as community/developer checkpoints.

Please stop wasting my time with nonsense replies.

Parity: 1 million users versus 0 users

I received a shockingly cordial PM from stoat which I appreciate. He and I disagree about the potential of Ethereum, so agree to disagree.

Now this AnonyMint needs to try to find a way to get back to the work habits and patterns that once made him successful.


I am itching for a fight to take out my frustations for 3 years of being chronically ill, for doing what I should have done when the gang attacked me and destroyed the vision in my right eye (I was not ruthless back then because I was only 34 years old), and as a motivation to get me to train against all odds to try to break free of this chronic illness. I am not chicken shit. I relish someone who makes me angry enough.

My technological statements are fact.

stoat I have challenged you to a video debate and you refuse.

I've challenged you to have Vitalik address these issues and all you do is make excuses.

I can't help it that you don't understand the technological issues thus you are incapable of distinguishing FUD from fact. If you go on video with me, I think we can make this very clear, but you are unwilling to do so.

You've turned this forum into such nonsense that I am leaving. The next you will hear from me is when I replace both Ethereum and Bitcoin with technology that works.

Edit: thanks for the apology. You earned at least my sincere statement above with your apology.

Edit#2: I challenged you to a boxing match because you stated that I look stupid and dress like a child. I challenged you to speak such insults to my face and not from behind an anonymous shield. It escalated from there. I have never threatened to attack you physically unless you accept a duel. Of course I am not going to commit battery, break the law, and end up in jail over nonsense.

Edit#3: Ethereum has really only advanced the concept of a programmable block chain, and for this I was quiet while they raised $18 million and spent it. Waiting to see if they would actually implement it and work out the intractable issues which I and others told them they were facing. I have since that time become much more knowledgable about the intractable issues they face and thus I started to raise warning flags when they ran out of funds and started pumping the stock price in order to raise more funds to waste. When I saw what they are proposing for Casper, I became more adamant that they were really lost. One of the ways to really injure our sector is to have an enormous pump that fails. Crypto currency is gaining the reputation amongst the masses and corporations as being a fraudulent wild west. I tried to interject some sober analysis, not really expecting to stop the pump because no one can stop that given the wide reach of Coindesk and other sites that are willing to promulgate hype. I see an entire lack of ethics in our sector. This isn't anything like software development business. This is like Pink Sheet commodity mining company scams. I wanted to have a technology discussion, mostly because I am refining my presentations for when I launch my own block chain work which will fix the problems. I am not realistically trying to convince the greater fools not to buy ETH.

Rumor is they are announcing the measurement of the ratio of the circumference of Vitalik's head to his bicep. Big ratio expected.

So now we know stoat refuses to provide proof and thus is a low life lying scammer who has to beg for funds while lying about a friend in need.

He wouldn't emerge from the pub with the same facial features. Sorry I will only accept to meet him if accepts a boxing duel, because the venom he has stated is unforgivable where I come from (Deep South of the USA and the Philippines).

No leap at all. When you ask for donations, you have to prove you aren't scamming. That is the choice you make when you are too selfish to help your own friend. No proof and you are scamming.

You mean share with his friend. Either poor as shit and has to beg for donations while lying, or he made a lot of money pumping ETH and is too selfish to take care of his friend.

Ethics isn't in stoat's vocabulary.

So now we know stoat refuses to provide proof and thus is a low life lying scammer who has to beg for funds while lying about a friend in need.

Prove it. Words are cheap. No proof and you are lying.

(note I am intentionally forcing stoat to reveal his identity because I know he doesn't want to be responsible for his posts)

Who is the friend? What is his need? Prove you are not lying?

It is impossible to prove that which I did not do, unless there is a specific allegation which I can present evidence against. What do you expect me to provide an accounting of every hour of my life since birth. I already stated that it is impossible for me to be a fugitive because I have a valid USA passport. I didn't flee to the Philippines. I came here as 20-something man. And yes at that time I had a lot of sex with ladies who were 18 and above. And then I got married and had kids and moved back to the USA with them.

So tell us your life story stoat?

Whereas, I asked you for a specific proof which you are refusing to comply with. Thus you've been DOXXed.

No. As I've pointed out in the past, the securities regulations appear to be lenient against those who were merely buy and selling illegal unregistered and/or manipulated securities. Those who are promoting are dangerously close to the line. Those who are actively manipulating are flirting with the law. Note IANAL.

Who is the friend? What is his need? Prove you are not begging for funds for yourself by pretending there is a friend in need.