It is open source. Everything is with the Blocknet.

I'm away and don't have the link, but search for it and see if you can find it.

And now try avoid loading your posts with negative terms like "vaporware" and rhetorical phrases like "too bad it's...". It makes you come across like a troll.

Well here's a PM worth keeping public record of.

No news yet, other than that work is ongoing and progress has been made.

Thanks Levole. :-)

Would you do us the service of removing McHammer's quotation from your post? It's better off nonexistent.

Speaking of news:

http://bitcoinist.net/interview-dan-metcalf-lead-developer-blocknet/

Hello all. I'm back after a bit of an unplanned break.

We've not changed any places where info about the Blocknet may be garnered. Join Slack, or receive some of the news here from time to time.

To some of the detractors whose posts have been deleted: not all deceitful posts are acts of trolling, and not all "factual discussion" is either candid or constructive.

Ursay, we know quite well about you, and I am not particularly interested in engaging in discussion with you, except on the unlikely occasion that evidence surfaces linking your account with LeeWilson. RDNKJDI, Unicornfarts, IsDanDone and others seem to have been pretty adept at simulating the appearance of a group of concerned individuals, when in fact they're the efforts of a single individual to stir up as much speculatively-founded fear/uncertainty/doubt about the Blocknet as (s)he is able. Unless I become clear about your identity, continued discussion will not be on equitable grounds, since my identity is public and yours isn't. So face up and lose the multiple accounts, or find someone else to smear.

P.S. What's with the weird duplication of posts from both supporters and detractors of the Blocknet?

End of discussion UNO. Repeating yourself is of no benefit.

If you didn't like my response, don't expect a different one next time you shill. Oh, and stop shilling for SuperNET on this thread.

Please make it clear that this thread is non-official.

I also object to your copying my work for your OP, because it looks like you're trying to impersonate the official thread. I'd appreciate it if you'd remove it.

I don't think you have a monopoly on the meaning of the term "deprecate".

Neither do we want to lock this thread at the moment.

But deprecated it is.

Finally, we're not leaving Bitcointalk, as you might've guessed from the existence of this thread.

I'd encourage you again to attempt to engage constructively and critically. For example, your rejoinder to my opinion of Bitcointalk is that it has "some of the best (IE most informative and entertaining) content on the internet." The thing is, (a) I agree with that point, and (b) the point has no bearing on my statement. Its logical form would be:
I assert A
You assert B
____
Your conclusion: B, therefore, not A.

But this is an invalid inference. From the assertion of A and B follows "both A and B," not "if B, then not-A."

So your rejoinder is, ultimately, just another unconstructive post. And why bother anyway? Do you seriously want to talk about the meaning of "deprecate"? Nope. You want to try troll the Blocknet.

Continue trolling and expect to be banned.

I think I'll leave it up to you to construct what I denoted by the term "deprecate" from the following facts:
- Slack is our primary point of contact with the public (and it's free to join).
- This thread is pretty quiet.
- I view Bitcointalk as a wasteland of trolls, pumpers, and poop n' scoop scammers. It is a colossal tax on our resources to deal with these types.
- Bitcointalk is also a highly unprofessional venue to present one's project. Threads are almost always filled with idiotic conversation, trolling, and whatnot, and the site itself looks like some absurd web 1.0 dinosaur from the 90s.

As for the way you expressed yourself in your post, you attempt to frame the deprecation of this thread as if there's some kind of inconsistency involved. The problem with that approach is that it's always possible to do this with just about any post, ever. It's a cheap trick. Without *constructive* and *critical* reading, there's no hope of understanding another person. I'd encourage you to drop the vacuous fault-finding and focus on participating constructively.

Hi all

I've now removed from this thread what might have been among the top most asinine conversations on the internet.

Apologies to those caught in the crossfire. I also asked those whose posts quoted the trolls in question to remove the quotations, and have now just deleted the posts that still included those quotations.

Apologies also to those reading. No doubt the conversation was irritating in the extreme.

It's gone now, fortunately.

Now to get back to some real work...

There's a timeline on the wiki.

You are incorrect. Perhaps you missed this release.

Prototype P2P protocol enabling communication between nodes on different blockchains: https://github.com/atcsecure/xhub

Get with the program sir. Working code. Open source. Non-vaporware project.
And it was NEVER originally conceived as a pump. It was conceived as a B2B-focussed initiative. Look up Dan's posts. He's publicly stated that when Bobsurplus approached him about a pump, he turned him down and protected the Blocknet from him.

Hi all

The unconstructive conversation above is a good example of the sort of thing that led us to deprecate this thread and move to Slack.

You all have opportunity to delete or remove trolling and/or other unconstructive content from your posts.

I'll come back later and delete any nonsense that may be left remaining.

Happy new year everyone. Some exciting news:



The Blocknet’s inter-blockchain technology goes mobile



(Click to read)

Lifesaver. Sleep-saver. Tone-of-thread saver.

Bitcointalk saver?

You never know...

In due time we'll close this thread and use an announcements-only thread in Bitcointalk.

We've gone quiet here because we're talking on Slack.

In case you don't know, last week we completed an alpha-stage prototype of our P2P protocol, and successfully sent the first messages between nodes on different blockchains!

https://github.com/atcsecure/xhub

Join Slack Flashbit!

Yes I agree. I don't think that the Salamander will return redeemed. That is not within the curve of the narrative.

Also, if he were to be redeemed, he would first have to return for vengeance, only to find himself transformed - perhaps despite himself - into the other.

But I don't think that people get redeemed when someone decides to embark on a mission to redeem them. It is too difficult to contrive circumstances appropriate to the task. The protagonist has to set himself against the martyr. The martyr is not the sort of character to deceptively make himself the enemy of the protagonist, since premeditated deception is never in keeping with love. So it has to happen organically. And it probably won't.

The narrative of Christendom isn't specifically one of redemption though (that's something the Hollywood pop-pysch peddling scriptwriters got wrong). It's a narrative of death and resurrection. That's what real protagonists go through - at least metaphorically, and out of love - in narratives with any real lasting power.


You are very right about this. We are, as in many cases, at the part of the narrative where a messiah is awaited. We have ransacked Bitcointalk, and crypto is a wasteland. Thieves will certainly not bring morality to our "picnic." Until someone is prepared to die for their enemies, there will be nothing new under the sun.

Christianity transformed the Roman Empire into itself, from within.

Mandela transformed South Africa into a nation in his own image - one founded upon a narrative of humility, forgiveness, and celebration of diversity.

Incidentally, Ghandi's nonviolent protest did the same basic thing: it transformed the colonials into individuals who could do nothing but respect their victims as human beings, and in so doing see them as like each other.

Add to this the great archetype of self-sacrificial love: Jesus.

The process in each case is the same:
- treat your enemies in a self-sacrificial way
- don't oppose your enemies; don't fight them; don't hate them; give them respect and sacrifice yourself for this
- at some point the enemies start to adopt the same stance toward you that you take toward them
- henceforth, they can no longer be your enemies; you've transformed them - at your own expense
- the revolution is thus complete; the narrative concluded, leaving no fallen mighty ones to rise up again and wreak revenge.