We are at the end of an Austrian "Crackup Boom" cycle globally, where excess credit has destroyed all profitable investments. Given the global collapse contagion underway which will accelerate from 2017 to 2020, the exodus from government bonds (and other conservative investments which are no longer viable) has really only one place to go (as Martin Armstrong predicted):

stock speculation

$450 million mcap is nothing. No where near $450 million has changed hands, rather only $10s of millions at most.

So everyone position yourself to partake of the trend. Fundamentals aren't the only factor involved. Speculation follows speculation.

Ethereum doesn't have a monopoly on this phenomenon...

Again I don't understand any of that.

I simply asked if Bob is transacting on a block chain without Bitcoin op codes, how can his payment to Alice be required (by the Bitcoin block chain) before he can finalize the transaction on the block chain with Bitcoin CLTV op code. It should be possible to explain this in English.

Stated in another way, what prevents Bob from finalizing the transaction on the block chain with Bitcoin CLTV op code, taking the funds from Alice, while also not issuing the reciprocal transaction paying to Alice on the other block chain?

What I am getting at is that is seems to me (my understanding of the cut & choose as underspecified in English) that Bob has not issued any transaction before Alice's transaction paying to Bob is confirmed on the block chain with Bitcoin CLTV op code. Thus the only way I can see that Bob can be required to issue that said transaction paying to Alice (when employing cut & choose on a block chain without Bitcoin op codes), is if the private key for signing the transaction for Bob paying to Alice (on the block chain without Bitcoin op codes) is revealed in order to finalize the already confirmed transaction for Alice paying to Bob (on the block chain with the CLTV Bitcoin op code). And I have already explained that would not be technically sound because anyone could spend Bob's UXTO (instead of it paying to Alice, and afaics Bob could pay himself). So obviously I must be unaware of some aspect of the protocol, because obviously you two would have realized that the above assumption would not be technically sound.


That sentence is underspecified. What is a 'real privkey'? Aren't all private keys real. Could you please state what you really mean and take the time to form a sentence that specifies which block chain you are referring, how it relates the protocol steps, etc..

I can't verify the high level design because the high level algorithm is underspecified per my question above.


It doesn't need to be confusing. Just takes time to slow down and formulate well thought out English description.

Einstein once said (paraphrasing), that an expert doesn't completely understand his own craft until he can explain it to a layman.

I do not (readily) comprehend the notation (and nor will I invest effort to learn or decipher the notation). I assume a proper specification would be more comprehensible to more people. However, do not feel obligated to do it for me. I can simply stop posting in the thread, which some parties might prefer any way.


This sentence is ambiguous to me. I would prefer a proper specification of what you are thinking about and attempting to describe.


I do not trust anything which I can't verify and understand. But don't worry about me. If you are 100% sure, then no need for peer review. Right?


I have no idea what part of the un(der)specified protocol you are referring to above.


I understood your point and my point is if there is demand, then the market will fulfill that demand. Coins that are dying, will die. The market is able to route around such failure.

Of course if you can provide backward compatibility, then of course you may want to provide it. But if it can't be technical sound, then obviously it shouldn't be done. Not much to argue about.

I do not comprehend why you guys are unable to specify the protocol completely in one page or post. I can't analyze piecemeal.

My point is that Alice has to be sure that Bob will issue his payment to Alice, and that he can't be capable of spending the payment from Alice to Bob before issuing the counter payment. As understand the cut & choose protocol, Alice signs the CLTV to a 2 of 2 multi-signature where Bob must reveal his private key in order to finalize that payment from Alice to Bob. But I also assume the payment from Bob to Alice (on the other block chain) must use the same private key, else otherwise Alice has no way to be sure that Bob has paid her as well. Thus I assert that once Bob releases his private key, any one could spend his UXTO to another party.

This is getting really tiring go round and round with posts and not having a complete specification of the cut & choose protocol.


It would help if one of you would provide all the details in proper specification, because it is very difficult for someone to analyze that which is underspecified (and a moving target).


I do not believe a universal solution exists. But I will await clarification.


If you don't think there is a massive demand for decentralized exchange, then why even bother.

International coordination on taxation:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/why-largarde-stayed-at-the-imf-to-increase-its-global-power/

The initial set of laboratory results are completed. I am have another exhaustive set of test results coming next week.

What they found thus far is:

Ultrasound:
* Fatty liver disease
* Mild sludge in the gall bladder
* 50% enlarged prostate
* roughened kidneys indicating inflammatory disease

Blood work all normal except:
* Creatinine 130 (normal range 71 - 115)
* SGOT/AST 58 (normal range 0 - 35)
* SGPT/ALT 82 (normal range 0 - 45)
* Lymphocytes 0.50 (normal range 0.20 - 0.35) ... note this was 0.8 in 2013
* Cancer indicators were negative: CA 19-9 XR2 5.16 (normal range 0 - 37), CEA 1.72 (normal range 0 - 4.99)

So that indicates I have a problem with my liver especially and also some inflammatory stress on my kidneys as well.



Since I have been taking curcumin in high doses since January, the sandy sludge in the gall bladder could possibly be an improvement of dissolved gall stones.

Past 2 days I have stopped the coconut milk (oil) and all fatty meats. Bought wild rice, steamed vegetables, ate raw sashimi tuna (lean, very high Omega 3).

I felt much better past 2 days walking around outside in sun and eating more correctly (I think). The pain in the gut actually increased and seems my body wants rest and sleep (doesn't want me to jog). Perhaps the liver wants to heal.

Awaiting more test results looking for an infectious origin or co-factor. Also a prostate cancer test.

Again per my prior post, my resting pulse is only 40 BPM. The doctor was concerned then I explained I used to run 10Ks < 35 minutes.


Mine will be back in the low 30s again if I can train hard.

My kidneys hurt today. But I feel good. I feel like I want to go to the gym. My energy is exploding and I want to train but my gut is very sore. I am very eager to be cured and train again. Very, very eager.

I suck at golf. I hook it and I never did figure out how to master the wrist and arm. I have never tried. I have gone to the golf course once only in my life, and the driving range maybe 2 or 3 times in my entire life.

As for skilled sports, I excelled in bowling and badminton in my early teens (13). By far, my best sport was American football but I am very undersized for that sport.

As for the photo Dec. 1, 1999, I had been doing nothing but coding during 1999 and my ex and I took off to Australia for an abortion (not available in the Philippines). When we returned we took a detour vacation in Subic. I was lifting weights that week only and I quickly bulked up a bit in my shoulders as you see in the pic and I was already benching around 110 kg just within that few days. But I was 34 years old. Yet I still feel that athleticism is lurking lately when ever I do a little barbel, but it is just my gut hurts so much I can't really go for the athleticism. I am very constrained.

Btw, my ECG results yesterday says I have a resting heart rate of 40 BPM, and I can barely train because of the chronic illness. I can't run more than 2 kms with my gut hurting too much. Yesterday I couldn't even run around the block. Yet my resting pulse is 40 BPM. Yeah I am an athlete. Golf is not a sport that I consider to be athletic (although there is an element of athleticism but skill dominates) but rather a skilled sport. By athletic, I mean raw physical capabilities especially endurance, quickness, agility, power-to-weight ratio, etc.. But I am chronically ill and I am 50..

Look I am small, but they had me playing the offensive guard position in high school American football. It was strange there were all these 190+ cm, 100+ kg guys on the offensive line and then this runt at 165 cm, 55 kg (9th grade, I'm 170, ~70 now). On the defensive side, I played defense end and also cornerback. I also played wide receiver on the offensive side. Very strange.

My weight has varied lately between 65 to 83 kg (below 60 during the August 10-day fasting). But my best weight would be around 70 - 73 kg if lifting barbells intensely as well as doing a lot of running (sprints and middle distance endurance). I am 65 now.

I am small boned in my arms and most of my upper body, except I have reasonably broad shoulders for my small body size, narrow waist (currently 32"), muscular hamstrings and gluts, and I am medium boned in my thighs, yet narrow ankles which is a sign of athleticism that is very applicable to quick/power ball sports, boxing (on a body weight parity comparison).

Any way just watch what Manny Pacquiao did to a man much larger than himself (he broke Margarito's eye socket so bad the guy required surgery):



Speed dominates size. This was the same when I played football. You just have to be careful to not let the larger guy use his raw size and strength to his advantage.

I think I am having difficulty analyzing due to not having one complete specification of the entire protocol with all justifications in one post or web page, and trying to understand it piecewise instead of holistically. Also I've been running around past 2 days to doctors, testing laboratories, and clinics.

In the original version of TierNolan's protocol, my understand is Bob obviously pays Alice, not himself. Bob and Alice each have some UXTO they want to spend to each other on separate block chains. Alice constructs a CLTV payment to Bob contingent on releasing a hash preimage and waits for Bob to construct an identical transaction which he can do once he sees Alice's transaction is confirmed. Once Alice sees Bob's transaction is confirmed, she releases the hash preimage so both transactions become finalized.

The cut & choose alternative is apparently proposed to handle the case where Bob's block chain doesn't support a CLTV opcode. Apparently the conceptual idea that Alice pays (hardwired to Bob as the payee) with CLTV to a 2 of 2 multi-sig, where the second multi-sig requires Bob's private key. Apparently Bob releases this private key when he spends his UXTO to Alice, thus Alice is sure Bob can be paid unless he pays her. My point is that once Bob releases this private key, anyone can spend his UXTO to any payee else besides Alice. Thus I am asserting the cut & choose doesn't work, unless someone can explain to me my mistake.

My proposed tweak or improvement to the original protocol to eliminate jamming is that Bob signs a message indicating he is starting the protocol with Alice, contingent on Alice submitting her CLTV transaction within the current block number. Alice includes this signature in the meta data of her transaction on the block chain. Thus if Bob doesn't issue his CLTV transaction, then he is jamming and his UXTO can be filtered by using the Coin Days Destroyed setting. Note do not permanently filter Bob, because it is possible he wasn't able to fulfill his obligation due to network outage or for other valid reason.

Edit: I don't see an intractable problem with not supporting altcoins that don't add CLTV support. Altcoins will add it, lest they fall behind what the market wants.

I got the full range of blood work available in Davao yesterday (which is limited but they can check for some markers for cancer and also liver). I was fasting last night and headed in for a full abdominal ultrasound this morning, to be followed by endoscopy within days. I don't know my result yet. I don't think she checked for fungus such as candida. I will ask her about that.

The gastroenteritis pushed on all my digestive organs and no pain. Rather the pain is on the rib bones, very strange. She said the area of my pain is the stomach, so she suspects GERD. GERD doesn't make any sense to me as I have no symptoms of acid reflux that I can detect. The pain on my bones makes think general inflammation, autoimmune problem (perhaps caused by leaky gut?), or cancer. She said the symptoms I described and my stool, doesn't seem to indicate a problem with the colon.

She had me stop the coconut milk and I didn't take curcumin yesterday. I ate raw tuna + cucumber in a dish named kinilaw and purchased some wild black rice to mix with the white, and I slept very well. But one day doesn't mean anything in this long saga.

I spent most of the day outside in the sun yesterday walking around because I had to go to several hospital clinics to find a doctor who could see me immediately and I had to drop my car at an aircon specialist since my aircon died this week also. It seems I felt better being outside. I currently work from the bedroom without any natural light at all, and I am in the aircon 24 x 7. So I purchased a ceiling fan and am preparing to move my desk to the upstairs living room which has a window and a screen door to the balcony. It is I guess plausible that the environment is making me ill without any continuous fresh air. I should have made this change long ago, but I was so ill that it was difficult to make any thought process or action. Perhaps also the continuous foruming and fighting petty nonsense word battles with trolls also contributing to not having the time to focus and losing energy on non-productive actions. If I had shotgun and some troll targets... (joke)

Tropical Mindanao near the equator, but I am well adjusted to the heat. I am quite slim right now with flat abs about 68 kilos for 170cm, down from 80+.


That is where they gave me an intern who butchered my eye. Before he touched it, I could still see, it was just lens had fallen into the eye (after a gang attacked in Subic because my ex was flipping them the middle finger) so I was seeing the wrong direction. After he was done, 90% retinal detachment. I flew to the USA and got one of the best eye surgeons in the country who managed to reattach some portion and save the eye (barely as the pressure declined to 0 and he was ready to remove it, but I fought on).

Note one of the many ways I lost my former wealth is spending $100,000s on my eye because I had no health insurance. Another was buying 5 acres near College Station, TX in 2001 and then the next week my wife (ex now) decided she didn't want live there, so I sold it at a $40,000 loss. Another way I lost my wealth, was investing in gold & silver and the cheats are pervasive in this business. One of the ways I lost my wealth was my own stupidity for carelessly following Graham Summers and speculating with $75,000 on options in 2012 on an imminent decline in China's stock market. But the reason I did that was again due to my ex who had yanked my kids from the Philippines suddenly (showed up without warning as I was still ill from the acute peptic ulcer ER hospitalization) and so my mental state was all messed up by the health issue and I thought I needed to win big in order to have the wealth to fight back. I proceed to loose $75,000 of my remaining $150,000 savings and thus when rpietila was talking to me about buying Bitcoin at $10 in January 2013, I could not risk my remaining $50,000 on it. So I advised him to go ahead but I couldn't join.

Here is a photo of me in the day wherein I was attacked in front of a disco that evening December 1, 1999:

How does the cut & choose exchange prove that Bob's has provided a hash of a private key and not a hash of something else 


And so will everyone else get Bob's private key and a miner who wins the block can spend his output before his transaction is confirmed on the block chain.

Regulation increasing as I expected...

I told you so...

The mod simply didn't understand the entire context because he just read a few posts and made a quick decision. I don't really blame the mod. I did message him about it.

Your entire post was filled with technical error stacked upon error.

For example:


That statement is entirely wrong. John has designed nothing to deal with the fundamental Tragedy of the Commons issue around block size (refer also to my posts and video in the Ethereum Paradox thread which expound on that). Dude I have been writing about that issue since 2013 when I was perhaps one of the first to nail the block size as the future issue of failure for Bitcoin and even explained it recently to smooth and ArticMine in the context of showing that Satoshi did not solve the Byzantine Generals Problem. You are not qualified to challenge me on that this issue. Please learn to respect those who have more knowledge than you do, or at least take the time to read and understand the points I have made in my 10,000+ post history which contains my research. If you think otherwise, then present your detailed technical rebuttal.

Again note that pruning has nothing to do with block size.

And again, replying with attacks on my person, just shows that you shills are incapable of debating the technical facts. The tactics of you shills is when ever I make a strong factual post, you follow it with as much noise posts attacking my person as you can, to bury the facts and never address them.

Edit: I am only operating on about 10 - 20% of my capability due to chronic illness. I am sorry but this is a fact.

From PM, because this is an important point that others might not realize:


The attacker can set the effective minimum fee (even it is multiples higher than the advertized fee due to jammed trades), by ratio of how much they attack their own (or another's) DE.

So in essence the attacker can shut down all DE, by making sure he earns just enough on his DE to offset his attack costs on other DE, but this is a moving target that eventually ends up in all users giving up and abandoning DEs. There only needs to be one attacker.

Edit: I think I offered a solution upthread.

Oh great so the mod removed all the evidence where john-conner was calling me a scammer because he claimed my illness was faked. And then I challenged John to a bet on that and John never replied. Even another user who I don't know had commented that John's post was despicable but the mod deleted his post as well. Sure seems the mod is confused or is a VNL supporter (I assume the former).

So the mods think they are helping to spread the truth when they delete evidence  

I asked the mods to deal with the tit-for-tat attacks on my person which are irrelevant to the facts I presented about Zerotime and Chainblender which haven't been rebutted.

Instead of deleting those, they deleted the evidence that incriminates John.  

Basically the situation is I presented my analysis of Zerotime and Chainblender upthread, then instead of replying on those points, the VNL shills pursued an attack on my person instead. Because they are unwilling to discuss the facts. My person is irrelevant to the facts about VNL. They think that by slandering my person, they can cause readers to think that my analysis of the facts is wrong, without ever presenting an actual rebuttal on the facts.

I told you I don't understand Bitcoin op codes, therefor I don't understand your post.

Also you said the point of cut and choose is when CLTV is not available. But then you using CLTV in your example above 

But afaics this doesn't bind Bob to release or sign with the one private key which was not revealed. So it seems the cut and choose adds nothing that just asking Bob for a single public key for the 2 of 2 multi-sig would accomplish or what am I missing  

Also fees don't work, because the attacker can run a DE as I explained upthread.

Afaics  the generative essence is inviolable. Both parties must provide a reference point at the start of a protocol by having both parties sign their hash (or public key for 2 of 2 multi-sig) as I suggested upthread.

Okay with this private message, I was able to better understand the mechanism but still I don't see what it solves.

TierNolan it would be helpful for readers to understand, if you stated the conceptual point, which is that each party is sent a challenge which they can't predict, and they release all but one of the private keys BEFORE committing to the multisig on the block chain. On the block chain they commit to the public key which corresponds to the one private key they have not yet seen (of course they can't commit to a public key for which they already know the counter party's private key because then the party that goes first to put his/her transaction on the block chain, could have his/her funds stolen as the counter party wouldn't need to reciprocate). Since each party could not predict the challenge, there is a 1/1000 probability that they have chosen a private key that was invalid.

But I still don't understand how this forces the counter party to release the private key within the timed interval?

Just because the counter party proves he knows the hash of his private key doesn't prove he will reveal or sign with it. I am totally dumbfounded as to how this solves anything.