You're advocating the policy of moving XT topics to the alt section. It is clear that the only reason why that is done is to limit the freedom of people to choose whether they want the core dev's version or the larger block's version.
Your hyperbolic whining about your "freedom" to post anything anywhere you like on another person's server is insufferable. This forum is private property. The only freedom at issue is theymos's freedom to moderate it as he sees fit. Why don't you go live in Mainland China for a year, then get back to us about what "limit the freedom of the people" really means? http://www.onlinecollege.org/2009/07/05/25-shocking-facts-about-chinese-censorship. |
|
|
|
If you haven't noticed, attempting to deflect attention from the PLA's authoritarian censorship onto other issues has no effect on me, and only makes you look defensive.  you're losing me here, what exactly would i be being defensive about? I made a point about the distinction between what theymos does ( moderation) and what Mainland China does ( censorship). Your reaction was to start ranting about "terrorists...iraq...weapons of mass destruction...osama...[and]...the world trade center." That rant was a defensive reaction, to defend censorship in Mainland China and/or smoothie the drama queen's mischaracterization of moderation. |
|
|
|
I thought his main coin was XMR. I guess I am out of date, he moves so fast.
Your OP specifically notes Smooth the Monero core-dev has now personally taken over Aeon development and then goes on to make up some unsubstantiated nonsense about how that's a massive conflict of interest(s), Because Reasons & Stuff. If you must insult us with silly conspiracy theories about evil anti-Dash cult bogymen, at least get your story straight!  |
|
|
|
Icebreaker is Smooth's loudest 'supporter' on his main coin
I don't remember posting very much about AEON. Once for sure, maybe twice.  Perhaps you are just making things up because you are a hellaciously buttburned Dash cargo cult enforcer? I don't recall having the pleasure of reading your insightful and well-informed musings on the AEON thread. But why would I, are you investing in AEON? You claimed I'm "Smooth's loudest 'supporter' on his main coin." And yet, I've only mentioned AEON once (maybe twice). Sorry Smooth so epically burned your butt, to the point where you have been reduced to wild ranting and howling. Try some aloe vera and colloidal silver. It might not even scar if you are careful.  |
|
|
|
Icebreaker is Smooth's loudest 'supporter' on his main coin
I don't remember posting very much about AEON. Once for sure, maybe twice. Perhaps you are just making things up because you are a hellaciously buttburned Dash cargo cult enforcer? |
|
|
|
What is it with dictators and checkpoints anyway? Hearn (not theymos) is the "epitome of authoritarianism."  Interestingly they come here complaining that theymos is censoring things (which he is not), but they support Hearns who proposed the idea of a benevolent dictator.  I still don't understand why people do not go with BIP 100 or 102 and our problems would be solved for now. Hearn and Gavin have caused so much unnecessary drama and problems for nothing. Since Hearn likes the idea of a 'bitcoin dictator' that can make the final decisions regardless of consensus, it can't be good. At some point in time he can tell people to either upgrade to some version containing who knows what or make their own fork. With him calling all the shots, who knows what could happen to the network (if XT = Bitcoin). It's also interesting when they confuse moderation and censorship, then vote to hide theymos' responses explaining their mistake. Which Downfall sub would be funnier? A. Hearn, in his Fuherbunker, being told XT is stuck at ~2% of the network, with no propensity for future growth B. Theymos, in his Fuherbunker, being told some Gavinista sock (IE Hearn) has created a BitcoinXT subreddit (with all of 350 users), thus defeating his mighty attempt at censorship I vote for the first one. |
|
|
|
the only bloatcoiner smart enough to see this clearly is Mike Hearn, and that is exactly why he has put in the effort to make XT. Classic controlled demolition.
Excellent (and blessedly succinct) argument by analogy. "Hostile/malicious fork" descriptive power just doesn't have the same je ne sais quoi as "controlled demolition." Does not convince many. Not here and not there. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1144606.60Bitcoin is explicitly non-democratic. Populism has no power here. Yes, the populism of the 1MBers has no power, neither in the threads of the elite nor anywhere else. That's why the limit will be raised within the next 12 month. The "populism of the 1MBers" is not your concern. Your concern is the multi-year duration and multi-billion-dollar magnitude of Bitcoin's current economic majority. Are you going to be the first brave fellow to defect from that imposing majority by accepting Gavin-tainted XTcoins? No? Then you are just a poser. In the remote possiblity XT becomes a matter of more importance than the hype, mirth, and scorn it generates at present, MPex and other 1MBer Elder Whales are prepared to use substantial (possibly exhaustive) portions of their extraordinarily massive war chests to repel 8MBer attacks. To them, this is Holy War, with barbarian Gavinista hordes clamouring for a Free Shit Junta at the gates of their bespoke civilization. They are more of a mood to impale heads atop spikes than reward with compromise Hearn's attacks on decentralization, Tor, and the consensus process. Are you still sure you want to risk your tiny stash playing Hard Fork Poker with such ultra-high-rollers? Before you answer, please take into account that nodes by default prioritize tx moving older coins, and the Royalty of La Serenissima possesses, in great quantities, very old coins. What will you do when the limit isn't raised within the next 12 months? Continue to cry wolf? Self harm? Or admit being wrong? |
|
|
|
There may be lots of skilled developers around, but when it comes to Cryptonote there are only a few who are really familiar with the code base. And I think all of those people are already preoccupied with their own projects. And having witnessed how well CZ has been able to handle emergencies and attacks, I think having one CZ is far more valuable than having even 5 outsiders come and try to start from scratch and learn this somewhat notoriously odd code base from scratch. Plus, it's not like he's disappeared or anything. He's still around here.
While there's work to be done on BBR itself, growth is more likely to come from 3rd parties building things to increase activity. It's not like anyone needs permission from CZ to keep BBR growing. We're probably at an impasse now where people who want to build things are nervous that CZ has abandoned BBR, and CZ himself is not sure if there's enough interest still in BBR to continue. So it's a chicken and egg situation.
Here's a possible base case to halt the recursive chicken and egg situation: Zoidberg recognizes a Bus Factor of One is an emergency, and begins the process of blunting the learning curve for (commenting/refactoring) BBR/CN's "notoriously odd code base." Between AEON, BBR, and XDN, there is a race on to be the Litecoin of Cryptonote. LTC got to 2nd place with ~one dev, but can any of them? OK, XDN technically/by market cap already has. But you know what I mean - CZ can't do it alone! Nobody can now, because Satoshi and coblee already did. Market leaders ETH and Ripple employ and deploy teams of executives, managers, coders, marketers, and lawyers... |
|
|
|
isn't the primary issue the absolute number of people one is mixing with in a transaction (e.g., 50), rather than the total number of users of a privacy protocol or privacy coin?
Kind of yes but mostly no, notwithstanding narrow cases of pretty much yes although perhaps no. On balance, sort of no with occasional flairs of yes highlights. It's complicated, except when it isn't. In the broad sense, both numbers are ideally maximized.  Uh, thanks for clearing that up The interrelation of the two aforementioned variable quantities is mostly, IE nearly entirely, contextual, being highly dependent upon both generalized UXTO availability and contingent mixin factors. IOW, supervenience dictates minimizing the former for sake of economy is a safe bet given (and only given) sufficient numeracy in the latter. I love the clarity! Welcome to Monero Mountain, the most scrupulously inclusive crypto-coin community ever. Be sure to pick up your t-shirt, coffee mug, and bumper sticker at the gift shop! |
|
|
|
the only bloatcoiner smart enough to see this clearly is Mike Hearn, and that is exactly why he has put in the effort to make XT. Classic controlled demolition.
Excellent (and blessedly succinct) argument by analogy. "Hostile/malicious fork" descriptive power just doesn't have the same je ne sais quoi as "controlled demolition." Does not convince many. Not here and not there. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1144606.60Bitcoin is explicitly non-democratic. Populism has no power here. |
|
|
|
Once there was a Chinese farmer who worked his poor farm together with his son and their horse. When the horse ran off one day, neighbors came to say, “How unfortunate for you!” The farmer replied, “Maybe yes, maybe no.”
When the horse returned, followed by a herd of wild horses, the neighbors gathered around and exclaimed, “What good luck for you!” The farmer stayed calm and replied, “Maybe yes, maybe no.”
While trying to tame one of wild horses, the farmer’s son fell, and broke his leg. He had to rest up and couldn’t help with the farm chores. “How sad for you,” the neighbors cried. “Maybe yes, maybe no,” said the farmer.
Shortly thereafter, a neighboring army threatened the farmer’s village. All the young men in the village were drafted to fight the invaders. Many died. But the farmer’s son had been left out of the fighting because of his broken leg. People said to the farmer, “What a good thing your son couldn’t fight!” “Maybe yes, maybe no,” was all the farmer said.
I've heard that one before...but TIL why everyone thinks Taoists (and Kabbalic Semites) are such smug assholes. |
|
|
|
I think it is unwise to taunt cryptsy for being a little late to the Monero party. Whether you like them or not they are a serious player in the altcoin scene. I for one am thankful they have decided (evidently)to finally add Monero. I will trade there in appreciation of their coming on board. And I'd urge you to stay classy.
BTC-E is "a serious player in the altcoin scene." CrapSea is only a serious player in the shitcoin alt-scam scene, and now it's too late to change that. Was CrapSea accepting bribes for a year to add Monero while doing nothing "classy?" We do not forgive. We do not forget. We are Mustangs. Expect us.  |
|
|
|
isn't the primary issue the absolute number of people one is mixing with in a transaction (e.g., 50), rather than the total number of users of a privacy protocol or privacy coin?
Kind of yes but mostly no, notwithstanding narrow cases of pretty much yes although perhaps no. On balance, sort of no with occasional flairs of yes highlights. It's complicated, except when it isn't. In the broad sense, both numbers are ideally maximized. Uh, thanks for clearing that up The interrelation of the two aforementioned variable quantities is mostly, IE nearly entirely, contextual, being highly dependent upon both generalized UXTO availability and contingent mixin factors. IOW, supervenience dictates minimizing the former for sake of economy is a safe bet given (and only given) sufficient numeracy in the latter. |
|
|
|
the only bloatcoiner smart enough to see this clearly is Mike Hearn, and that is exactly why he has put in the effort to make XT. Classic controlled demolition.
Excellent (and blessedly succinct) argument by analogy. "Hostile/malicious fork" descriptive power just doesn't have the same je ne sais quoi as "controlled demolition." |
|
|
|
no bandwidth problem. no storage problem. i would like to see mass adoption. i would like to follow satoshis view of big blocks. i would like to have a permission less and cheap blockchain (cheap transactions) for everybody in the world. look at Nielsen's Law: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/law-of-bandwidth/we dont talk about 100 MB blocks tomorrow - we talk about 6, 8 or 16 MB blocks in a few years (and it takes time to even fill them). hundreds of millions of people can support such nodes today. no problem. Nielsen's (Folk) Law is bounded by Gibson's Razor: "The future is already here - it's just not evenly distributed." See my lengthy, well-researched response to you here for Important Details. |
|
|
|
You keep using that word, i dont think you know what it means
Maybe you can go and live in China USA to understand what dictationship censorship propaganda means
Fixed it for you. fixed it for you both I have been led to believe they are not, but perhaps that's just "USA propaganda." Please correct my misapprehension and improve my understanding.  in the US there's a label for civilians standing in the way of tanks; terrorists  and iraq had weapons of mass destruction (and of course the US wouldn't be armed to the teeth itself with WMDs, but if it did it as leader of the free world has every right too )and with osama in charge iraq destroyed the world trade center ....  Let's stick to my open question and the subject of censorship, instead of wandering off into unrelated (although distracting) Dubya vs Saddam vs 9-11 melodrama. For the sake of argument, let's assume that "in the US there's a label for civilians standing in the way of tanks; terrorists." In (mainland) China, is there even a label for Tank Man and Tank Driver? Or is knowledge of their heroic, patriotic actions (and mere existence) denied to those who should most cherish and honor their memories? If you haven't noticed, attempting to deflect attention from the PLA's authoritarian censorship onto other issues has no effect on me, and only makes you look defensive. |
|
|
|
isn't the primary issue the absolute number of people one is mixing with in a transaction (e.g., 50), rather than the total number of users of a privacy protocol or privacy coin?
Kind of yes but mostly no, notwithstanding narrow cases of pretty much yes although perhaps no. On balance, sort of no with occasional flairs of yes highlights. It's complicated, except when it isn't. In the broad sense, both numbers are ideally maximized.  |
|
|
|
Still watching after 162 pages. I hope my old wallets still work though. LOL
Oh, good point! WTF was my XCN wallet p/w? It appears XCN, LTC, PPC, VIA, XPM, and the rest of the legitimate classic (Gen 1) altcoins are at this time relying on the Lindy effect for longevity. I don't entirely disagree with that 'build it and they will come' strategy, but still, with LN/SC coming... In terms of fireworks, perhaps they've already 'done their thing?' Unless there are roadmaps I've missed/neglected/forgotten... |
|
|
|
Ok finally finished the update to BitShop, was a huge update so it took some time, well worth the effort though because BitShop is now better than ever and can even be used to accept payment in XCN. I will now go back to working on this Cryptonite web wallet.
cool, great work bitfreak, XCN is my 'darkhorse' pick for the future! I still can't believe I can buy XCN so cheap But you can't buy very many without moving the price!  /first world problem |
|
|
|
You keep using that word, i dont think you know what it means
Maybe you can go and live in China USA to understand what dictationship censorship propaganda means
Fixed it for you. fixed it for you both  In (mainland) China, are the names of the two heroes in the above picture renowned and appropriately celebrated? I have been led to believe they are not, but perhaps that's just "USA propaganda." Please correct my misapprehension and improve my understanding. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
