I didn't pretend. I am frank about the challenges and I didn't ask for anyone to buy an ICO and try to fool them with a lot of bullshit like Bitshares and others do.

Rather you should just admit then that you are just here to mine the speculators and that all your idealistic bullshit (DACs, etc) is just a mirage to get other speculators to wet their pants and give up their money.

Thanks.

This is an interesting point to ponder. Could a revolutionary crypto coin succeed without the MSM (e.g. Bittorrent), or would the MSM cover something which was not helping the professional miners rape the Bitcoin investors to the tune of $300 million annually?

I think all of us are somewhat unrealistic (unless we were just here to mine the speculators).

This indeed worries me. It is difficult to justify killing myself to code in order to try to create revolution and then think it could all fail just because the MSM holds all the power.

I am not sure which way I am leaning on this issue. My gut tells me "It Is Just Time" for something revolutionary to happen. But my gut is very ill. Lol.

You are apparently highly confused. I never wrote I was excluding speculators, which is in fact impossible in any coin market. You have a quite annoying bratty abrasive method for asking questions by rather asserting that you know everything.


Bittorrent is decentralized. Bitcoin isn't. Go get an education first, then we can talk.

That is not one but rather a group of instructions. Perhaps you just typoed the missing 's'. One of those instructions was of particular focus of mine.

What is the point of selecting a coin based on which one has the best politics?

Even if you had every single speculator from the Bitcoin universe investing in your coin, it would all be useless if you didn't have the design and marketing to gain adoption.

Bitcoin was marketed by the global elite in their MSM and they are mining you the speculators taking all your money with their zero cost mining in China.

Crypto is one big corruption to take all your money. You fools. I am trying to create a fundamental innovation and a real revolution. Just keep criticizing me and handing your money over to your slave masters.

What most intelligent people have decided is that it is much easier to play along and find a way to mine you, than to attack the much more difficult problem of a true revolution. I try against all odds and have never asked for a dime from the investing public, so therefor you don't like me because I don't want to steal your money.

Insanity.

That was not smooth's point at all. His point was that no coin is yet significant relative to USD. He didn't say that Bitcoin has 0 network effect.

But personally I am delighted to hear you are 50% in Bitcoin. Hopefully you will eat some humble pie soon if my prediction of < $150 comes true. I hope you have all your life savings in crypto as well. You are young and lesson is more valuable than not losing everything. I've lost everything more than once in my life. It was a good lesson.

Yup. I will never play in that arena. It is an intentional effort to destroy politics. I detest politics with a venom. Every one of my successes was achieved without any politics whatsoever.

I believe in and want to promote meritocracy.

So all of you who are picking coins based on who is best at manipulating the others politically, I aim to destroy you. And if there is a way, I will. If there is no way, I will quit.

I may manipulate marketing wise, but not designed to siphon funds in a zero sum game. Rather to expand the pie for everyone.

Ahem what is the distinction between the two? Afaics, there is none. Martin Armstrong seems to be under some delusion that if people could vote directly on each issue of governance (i.e. each law, etc) then we would avoid the evils of the representative government we have now. Yet of course it is impossible to have a direct democracy function on anything larger than a tribe (and even for a nuclear family unit it rarely works!). And you seem to be unde some delusion that the representative government we have in the USA is functioning well. Or you have sold yourself down the river of tears that there is some rainbow of a perfect fix. Sigh. Never has been in the history of man and never will be. The Iron Law of Political Economics is immutable and insoluble. Please refute if you can (but you can't).

Or perhaps you merely accept that representative governance fails, but it is the least worst (or the only option)?

If we are just here to put some shiny new block chain ribbon on existing corruption of representative (or any other form of) democracy, then I will quit. I don't see the point. If there are efficiencies that can be gained in spite of not dealing with the fundamental issue of trustless governance, then maybe I can be convinced. But the original ideal of Satoshi's white paper was trustless governance (consensus) of the block chain.

Realize I could say the same, and I have more skills and experience than you do in technology, marketing, and hands on business experience. For example, I negotiated a $205,000 non-exclusive license sale of my CoolPage software in 2001 with Homepage.com. Inflation-adjust that.

Any way this discussion has devolved into a shouting match with a juvenile (who has some religious devolution to his cargo cult leader Dan) that is tailing off to be completely devoid of any further informational value, so I will ignore you from now on. Thanks.

Exactly. And the usership of Bitshares is of those who aren't investors? 3 people (Manny, Moe, and Curly)?


Otherwise we have the zero sum game of mining each other.

So now we are back in the sandbox like 5 years olds. I meant that you drink the KoolAid about decentralizing a corporation. Daniel Larimer has pulled the wool over your eyes with his unrealistic nonsense.

I am very critical of my own designs and I am always trying to think about in what way they are unrealistic. This is one reason it has taken me so long to finalize a design. And it is a reason I could still decide to quit. Also I am developer for decades with loads of experience and I am basing my analysis on deep experience, knowledge, research and debate with very smart people such as smooth et al. Whereas, you close your ears and declare, "I am a young idiot and you devs are the same as me".

Good luck with that.

I can see my obfuscation strategy is working well.

Perhaps you would contemplate that I not as clueless as you think I am.

Of course everyone here will be involved (if my plans succeed), but not the way it has been done up to now. I certainly won't be selling them any ICO nor providing them a way to obtain coins from mining.


I know that. Did you ignore what I wrote upthread, "But one dev does not a global coin make.".

My point above is that you can't create any great innovation for a crypto coin, because you lack the technological and economics depth and breadth. You couldn't lead the devs. Whereas I can. I am saying I can beat what ever you could do even with a lot of money, all by myself. But I am not saying I can create a successful coin all by myself. I might (just maybe but not good odds) be able to launch something by myself, if I cut some corners along the way. But I will surely need help asap if it is growing usership.


The peasants are whom I intend to help, not crush. You are the one who started off this discussion by being so boastful about how you (without the technological depth) can go beat smooth, myself and other devs just because you will have enough money to fund your effort. That is ludicrous. Any experienced software developer knows you can't lead if you don't understand the technology. And if you hire a CTO, the problem is you can't communicate effectively to the CTO and too much will be lost in the translation. This is known as the Mythical Man Month.


I try to state only facts. Any developer who hates facts is not a developer I would want to work with. If another developer stated some facts about my work, then I would endeavor to fix the problems and respect that developer for his effort and expertise.

So thus only the best developers will work with me. And the other ones who have problems with objectivity will not work with me.

But any way, I don't think it works that way at all. If someone creates something that is a revolution, then everyone has an incentive. If not revolutionary, then it is a big yawn any way.

Purposefully obfuscated from competitors. Cliff notes (white paper) come when something is shipping.

But young know-it-alls spout off at the mouth before doing their homework. And they blame their overloaded schedule on someone else, as if it is my job to do your research for you (my schedule is overloaded also).

You drink your own Koolaid. Enjoy the delusions of being a Dunning-Kruger 20-something. Someday you will respect smooth and myself and understand that age brings wisdom from experience (that being said, I suspect smooth is significantly younger than I am but I might be wrong about that).

My design is largely described publicly.

No you can't. I can easily defeat you all by myself. Because it takes vision and the coders you hire will expect the vision to come from you, but you don't have the depth and breadth to lead them. And partially because you need to understand both technology deeply and also economics and also practical business. I have done all those. Very few people can claim the skills I have. I have marketed software to what would be 10 million netizens in todays internet population size.

You see smooth has worked in corporate world where he was a contractor. So he is expert at some aspects such as for example server work. But he isn't expert at marketing nor GUIs directly to end users. I bring a skill set that is very unique. Many people don't realize that. I have been very ill and this has really limited what I could accomplish.


Ditto Bitshares, Dash, Ethereum, OBITS, etc.

There is nothing in Altcoin space that has any chance right now.

But who are we to tell them that? They might have something up their sleeve or who knows maybe their technology gets adopted for another purpose and smooth gets awarded a lucrative contract.

We are laying down experimental foundations at this time.

That is why I think we devs need to be more friendly with each other. And the speculators need to stop creating these wars and pitting us devs against each other in time wasting political discord. If speculators would stop putting 5% of their networth into altcoins, this place might be a lot more cooperative instead of combative.

I would love to see more reason and less emotion. When inexperienced speculators have significant vestment riding on an altcoin, they become irrational and combative (or let's say rational trying to pump and defend but irrational overall since that was a stupid move to become a bagholder).

Investing say 0.5% of your networth in altcoin will keep your reason intact. You can be on the lookout for better investments and obtain more if there is actual user adoption and not just a bunch of plans.

My PoW design doesn't have that flaw. I am not assuming, but you are (as you didn't know what I have designed).


Not in my PoW design.


Not in my PoW design.


Yup. And that is why I have a chance to kick ass on everyone here. Because my breadth is very polymathy (much more than the Larimer clan). But one dev does not a global coin make.


Perhaps you need to read my posts more carefully:

I think smooth was referring to DACs (the term apparently invented by Daniel Larimer), or the concept that the corporation would be somehow decentralized and yet still be a corporation. If you have voting, directors, etc, then it will still behave as (by definition) a top-down corporation and thus is not decentralized. You can't replace corporate governance with a block chain and still have a corporation.

Note I am more on herbals now (curcumim, moringa, bitter melon, and mangosteen) and VitD3 seems to have been addressing the symptoms of my conjectured bile obstruction and not the root cause. Careful with high dose VitD3, there are painful potential outcomes (kidney stones).