An observation about the blockchain, that I have not seen commented elsewhere.
You are getting too close to my idea. That is good. If someone launches, it will not be certain it is me. P.S. I planted this epiphany in your subconscious. Just as smooth planted the End-to-End principle in my subconscious when he told me a pigeon could carry a Monero transaction to the network. |
|
|
|
allegations of a "better way" have a decidedly hollow ring to them.
Of course when details have been purposely withheld. I tried to give enough of a taste so I could judge the rationality of the community. This was an important marketing test for me to do, which impacts my decision process. I also tried to be vague enough that I could retain plausibly deniability. To assert that most everything being done in Bitcoin is unnecessary is going to have a hollow ring to it, absent any details. I will just add that Bitcoin is trying to do too much. Too much power was given to the mining. This appears to have been designed with forethought. There was this elaborate strawman built about the tech envy of the formerly unresolved Byzantine General's problem (which I assert Bitcoin does not solve in the context of being resistant to monopolization). |
|
|
|
I don't agree with your apathy on whether cryptographers who invent anything that truly threatens TPTB will be made into examples.
Smooth I also don't think it is viable to murder dozens of open source programmers because it would be difficult to obscure on that scale and thus the hacker community would likely rise up and retaliate (and win!). But in terms of stopping an immediate threat or making an example out of a serious threat which can be done in an obfuscated manner so as to not wake up the entire community, I think it is a realistic consideration. Perhaps avoiding outcomes below is contingent on carefully accessing the situation the potential victim has placed himself into. For example, attack the Russian oligarchs and you will be overtly assassinated. Attack the CIA or NSA and they will weigh the cost of murdering versus the risk of waking up the sheeople. Yeah its posible that one or two people could be taken out in a "suspicious" manner. So as I said earlier, open the project. Get others to participate (even if that includes giving up some measure of your anonymity to do it, and I think it does). Otherwise, as long as you remain critical to the effort, you are betting solely on your ability to actually remain anonymous for your safety. That is difficult and may even be impossible. It certainly didn't work out too well for Ross. For all we know satoshi's identity is well known to the NSA, etc. (I consider that quite likely). Likewise the developers of cryptonote are probably identifiable by the NSA too. But what difference does either really make at this point? The code is out there. Interest has been established, so the projects will continue. Agreed all. Opening a project too soon or launching with a non-anonymous dev has trade-offs: * loosing first mover advantage * regulatory threats against an ICO * no ICO then no $ to pay for development * no money to pay for development to race ahead, then another effort can leech and create an ICO to steal the work * radical design by consensus is sub-optimal. Refinement by consensus is optimal. I don't know how high to weigh your argument that an anonymous launch will cause other developers and investors to be disinterested. I find that hard to believe. An anonymous launch with all the correct attributes is not different than one with a named dev, because by your own logic, the coin should be judged on its open source merits if it is to be truly decentralized. The main killer of an altcoin is a huge premine that doesn't allow the coin to be fairly distributed or any scheme which allows a disproportionate amount of the coins to be controlled by one person or group. Ideally some percent (in the typical power law distribution) of the coins should be distributed to the users of the currency (who don't just HODL and never sell for fiat). |
|
|
|
Armstrong has stated that he will never comment in a open forum. How do you create a network topology that is decentralized at any scale?
With a design that enables the ends of the network to be autonomous (e.g. the internet), i.e. the End-to-End principle. Ideally the power (autonomy) of the ends over the center (or the group) should get stronger the more it is Sybil attacked (i.e. the attack doesn't exist). Abstractly not erroneously redefining decentralization to be centralization-by-free-will-but-no-other-choice (aka "one for all, and all for one" collectivism) as Bitcoin did: Marching in lockstep doesn't mean centralized (of course; that's the whole idea of Bitcoin in a way).
Anyone guessed my paradigm shift yet?
The goal is clear enough, and laudable. It is the path to that goal that remains occluded. Appreciated. It is time to either move forward, quit, or shut up (or both).
fiat 2.0, SDR's come on.
Hehe. Bitcoin is centralized, you are only obfuscating to yourself if you claim that it isn't. The centralization was put in the wrong place in Bitcoin's design. Move it, then the decentralization can control the centralization. do you care to explain how it's centralized again. if the idea you have is correct then it needs to spread, it wont spread if it cant be understood. can you ELI5. Because the center (the group acting in lock step) has the power to include or not include transactions (and set transaction fees). That alone is already centralization. And worse is that power (lack of autonomy of the ends of the network) can be monopolized, e.g. State regulation of mining, Larry Summer's 21 Inc economics that mine for free for the cartel, Sybil attack on pools, economies-of-scale (and fiat subsidy via the usury backstop) with ASICs, electricity costs charged to the society, Transactions Withholding Attack, etc, etc, etc. Do I need to enumerate every monopolization vector in detail again (each was already debated upthread)? The only retort is that the society will rebel against any monopoly, which is complete nonsense because we have innumerable examples in history and society never does. At least two others made a similar comment upthread. I have given my support to spreading Bitcoin knowing with complete certainty (based on my detailed posts about human nature, Logic of Collective Action, and historical evidence) that it will end up being used by the State to oppress us (and cypherdoc's Africans too), because it also has seepage and helps to grow the capital base (network effects) for crypto-currency, which can aid the process of making an ideal crypto-currency. cypherdoc is so excited to enslave the world in a fully tracked money that never existed before in history. Cash was always anonymous. He is ostensibly oblivious to the blood that is going to be on his hands. He is excited about what in effect will a euthanization of the world in the NWO global Technocracy where everything will be controlled and tracked by the State.
allegations of a "better way" have a decidedly hollow ring to them.
Of course when details have been purposely withheld. I tried to give enough of a taste so I could judge the rationality of the community. This was an important marketing test for me to do, which impacts my decision process. I also tried to be vague enough that I could retain plausibly deniability. To assert that most everything being done in Bitcoin is unnecessary is going to have a hollow ring to it, absent any details. I will just add that Bitcoin is trying to do too much. Too much power was given to the mining. This appears to have been designed with forethought. There was this elaborate strawman built about the tech envy of the formerly unresolved Byzantine General's problem (which I assert Bitcoin does not solve in the context of being resistant to monopolization).
I don't agree with your apathy on whether cryptographers who invent anything that truly threatens TPTB will be made into examples.
Smooth I also don't think it is viable to murder dozens of open source programmers because it would be difficult to obscure on that scale and thus the hacker community would likely rise up and retaliate (and win!). But in terms of stopping an immediate threat or making an example out of a serious threat which can be done in an obfuscated manner so as to not wake up the entire community, I think it is a realistic consideration. Perhaps avoiding outcomes below is contingent on carefully accessing the situation the potential victim has placed himself into. For example, attack the Russian oligarchs and you will be overtly assassinated. Attack the CIA or NSA and they will weigh the cost of murdering versus the risk of waking up the sheeople. Yeah its posible that one or two people could be taken out in a "suspicious" manner. So as I said earlier, open the project. Get others to participate (even if that includes giving up some measure of your anonymity to do it, and I think it does). Otherwise, as long as you remain critical to the effort, you are betting solely on your ability to actually remain anonymous for your safety. That is difficult and may even be impossible. It certainly didn't work out too well for Ross. For all we know satoshi's identity is well known to the NSA, etc. (I consider that quite likely). Likewise the developers of cryptonote are probably identifiable by the NSA too. But what difference does either really make at this point? The code is out there. Interest has been established, so the projects will continue. Agreed all. Opening a project too soon or launching with a non-anonymous dev has trade-offs: * loosing first mover advantage * regulatory threats against an ICO * no ICO then no $ to pay for development * no money to pay for development to race ahead, then another effort can leech and create an ICO to steal the work * radical design by consensus is sub-optimal. Refinement by consensus is optimal. I don't know how high to weigh your argument that an anonymous launch will cause other developers and investors to be disinterested. I find that hard to believe. An anonymous launch with all the correct attributes is not different than one with a named dev, because by your own logic, the coin should be judged on its open source merits if it is to be truly decentralized. The main killer of an altcoin is a huge premine that doesn't allow the coin to be fairly distributed or any scheme which allows a disproportionate amount of the coins to be controlled by one person or group. Ideally some percent (in the typical power law distribution) of the coins should be distributed to the users of the currency (who don't just HODL and never sell for fiat).
An observation about the blockchain, that I have not seen commented elsewhere.
You are getting too close to my idea. That is good. If someone launches, it will not be certain it is me. P.S. I planted this epiphany in your subconscious. Just as smooth planted the End-to-End principle in my subconscious when he told me a pigeon could carry a Monero transaction to the network.
Will be amazing if she is right, maybe she just hopes she is as it definitely makes a good speech. To say with that certainty that blockchain transactions will be part of all public financing and as ground breaking as the internet is quite a statement if we consider just how much trade is done by the markets every day. Blythe worked for JP Morgan and the banksters. I'm sure she wishes it would be so, since they plan to track and control us with public ledgers which are only decentralized in name but actually monopolized. Bitcoin can never scale as the internet did because it violates the two key scaling principles of the internet, End-to-end and Principle of Least Power. They might be able to scale it as they did Facebook to most people on earth, but it will never scale to most economic activity on earth (and note the distinction). The only way they win with Bitcoin (i.e. for it to encompass most economic activity) is by oppressing the economic freedom that will drive most of the future economic activity. Bitcoin is a (planted) ruse to entice people to agree to give up the anonymity of cash. It is leverage against governments and financial institutions that resist takeover by the NWO. |
|
|
|
fiat 2.0, SDR's come on.
Hehe. Bitcoin is centralized, you are only obfuscating to yourself if you claim that it isn't. The centralization was put in the wrong place in Bitcoin's design. Move it, then the decentralization can control the centralization. do you care to explain how it's centralized again. if the idea you have is correct then it needs to spread, it wont spread if it cant be understood. can you ELI5. Because the center (the group acting in lock step) has the power to include or not include transactions (and set transaction fees). That alone is already centralization. And worse is that power (lack of autonomy of the ends of the network) can be monopolized, e.g. State regulation of mining, Larry Summer's 21 Inc economics that mine for free for the cartel, Sybil attack on pools, economies-of-scale (and fiat subsidy via the usury backstop) with ASICs, electricity costs charged to the society, Transactions Withholding Attack, etc, etc, etc. Do I need to enumerate every monopolization vector in detail again (each was already debated upthread)? The only retort is that the society will rebel against any monopoly, which is complete nonsense because we have innumerable examples in history and society never does. At least two others made a similar comment upthread. I have given my support to spreading Bitcoin knowing with complete certainty (based on my detailed posts about human nature, Logic of Collective Action, and historical evidence) that it will end up being used by the State to oppress us (and cypherdoc's Africans too), because it also has seepage and helps to grow the capital base (network effects) for crypto-currency, which can aid the process of making an ideal crypto-currency. cypherdoc is so excited to enslave the world in a fully tracked money that never existed before in history. Cash was always anonymous. He is ostensibly oblivious to the blood that is going to be on his hands. He is excited about what in effect will a euthanization of the world in the NWO global Technocracy where everything will be controlled and tracked by the State. |
|
|
|
How do you create a network topology that is decentralized at any scale?
With a design that enables the ends of the network to be autonomous (e.g. the internet), i.e. the End-to-End principle. Ideally the power (autonomy) of the ends over the center (or the group) should get stronger the more it is Sybil attacked (i.e. the attack doesn't exist). Abstractly not erroneously redefining decentralization to be centralization-by-free-will-but-no-other-choice (aka "one for all, and all for one" collectivism) as Bitcoin did: Marching in lockstep doesn't mean centralized (of course; that's the whole idea of Bitcoin in a way).
Anyone guessed my paradigm shift yet?
The goal is clear enough, and laudable. It is the path to that goal that remains occluded. Appreciated. It is time to either move forward, quit, or shut up (or both). |
|
|
|
fiat 2.0, SDR's come on.
Hehe. Bitcoin is centralized, you are only obfuscating to yourself if you claim that it isn't. The centralization was put in the wrong place in Bitcoin's design. Move it then the decentralization can control the centralization. |
|
|
|
if one's fundamental unit is the full node andis not the user, i think you're doing it wrong
I corrected that for you to stop violating the End-to-End Principle of networks. i doubt that any cryptocoin can ever be on auto pilot as the crypto evolves as computerization advances. what is secure today won't be secure tomorrow thus requiring continual updating.
The voters are the nodes, some developers want to keep centralized control over the majority of the nodes, some developers realize this is bad, - maintaining control its either explicit, subconscious, or subverted.
this is why Satoshi talked about a slow progressive "versioning" update with the final features only being enabled after 8-12 mo or so when it's clear thru monitoring that most everyone has updated
i think it's really disingenuous for Greg to say so
if it CAN be done in 1 month, that speaks pretty negatively about decentralization... They are all marchin in step to the same drummer.
An ideal crypto-coin would not violate Tim Berners-Lee's Principle of Least Power as Bitcoin egregiously does. It would do the minimum necessary and leave as much autonomy as possible to the nodes. Ideally the nodes could even disagree about the issues you all are squabbling about and the minimum requirement would still be met. It would be decentralized at any scale. It would scale to any level of transaction volume. It would not require any specific choice of crypto algorithm (nodes would be free to choose). Anyone guessed my paradigm shift yet? |
|
|
|
if one's fundamental unit is the full node andis not the user, i think you're doing it wrong
I corrected that for you to stop violating the End-to-End Principle of networks. i doubt that any cryptocoin can ever be on auto pilot as the crypto evolves as computerization advances. what is secure today won't be secure tomorrow thus requiring continual updating.
The voters are the nodes, some developers want to keep centralized control over the majority of the nodes, some developers realize this is bad, - maintaining control its either explicit, subconscious, or subverted.
this is why Satoshi talked about a slow progressive "versioning" update with the final features only being enabled after 8-12 mo or so when it's clear thru monitoring that most everyone has updated
i think it's really disingenuous for Greg to say so
if it CAN be done in 1 month, that speaks pretty negatively about decentralization... They are all marchin in step to the same drummer.
An ideal crypto-coin would not violate Tim Berners-Lee's Principle of Least Power as Bitcoin egregiously does. It would do the minimum necessary and leave as much autonomy as possible to the nodes. Ideally the nodes could even disagree about the issues you all are squabbling about and the minimum requirement would still be met. It would be decentralized at any scale. It would scale to any level of transaction volume. It would not require any specific choice of crypto algorithm (nodes would be free to choose). Anyone guessed my paradigm shift yet? |
|
|
|
mixing does not have to be specified at the protocol level.
You apparently missed the upthread discussion about the intractable scaling problems in CoinJoin. The mixing must be supported on chain otherwise it is not viable for a few reasons. I don't want to repeat again. Search the thread for smooth's and my comments about CoinJoin. |
|
|
|
Okay I now realize one of the mistakes I made since going on the high dose vitamin D3 treatment is I introduced more bread, mayonnaise, potatoes, tomatoes, and less vegetables into my diet. Immediate change I will make is to eliminate or drastically reduce those and add back more vegetables as well as the following for carbohydrates and minerals such as magnesium: * Green boiled bananas * Camote (sweet potato) Also I will make my own mayo without soy, using olive oil and only the yokes of the eggs: http://www.choosingvoluntarysimplicity.com/make-your-own-soy-free-mayonnaise/http://brainhealthbook.com/leaky-gut-diet/The health of the gut profoundly influences the health of the brain. Studies link gut problems with depression, mood disorders, schizophrenia, Parkinson’s disease, memory loss, and brain lesions. This may come as no surprise if you have found certain foods alter your mood, personality, focus, or concentration.
Gut flora, the several pounds of bacterial organisms we carry in our intestines, affect brain chemistry and imbalances can cause depression and psychiatric disorders. Poor diets, stress, excess sugars and carbs, repeated antibiotic use, and other factors tip the balance of gut flora so that harmful bacteria outweigh the beneficial.
Intestinal permeability, or leaky gut, is a condition in which the walls of the intestine become inflamed and porous, allowing undigested food, bacteria, toxins, and other antigens into the bloodstream. This provokes the immune system and causes inflammation throughout the body. Leaky gut can also cause brain inflammation and has been linked with depression and autoimmunity. http://paleoleap.com/you-and-your-gut-flora/The importance and many functions of the gut and gut flora
Your body is the host to over 100 trillion bacteria, most of them in your gut and you have way, way more bacteria in your body than human cells. In this sense, we could say that we are more bacteria than human.
The gut is the principal area of your body where exchanges are made between you and the exterior world and where nutrient uptake takes place. Consequently, the gut is also the major area of contact with toxins and pathogens.
Since most diseases start in the gut, the present subject is extremely important to overall health. Our body understands the major role of the gut on our health and concentrates over 70% of our immune system in it.
Our gut bacteria is so intrinsically related to the health of the gut that we cannot talk of gut health without focusing on having a healthy gut flora.
For their part, autoimmune diseases first start with damage done to the tight junctions at the epithelial cell level in the gut, which inevitably leads to a leaky gut, which itself permits foreign proteins to enter the bloodstream. The body then manufactures antibodies against those foreign proteins, but the problem is that some of those proteins often mimic proteins already present in the body, like in the thyroid gland or the pancreas for example. This mimicry, coupled with the newly formed antibodies, makes the body attack its own tissues. In the case of the thyroid, we’re talking about Hashimoto’s thyroiditis or Grave’s disease and in the case of the pancreas it’s type 1 diabetes.
Finally, inflammation that starts in the gut often leads to inflammation elsewhere in the body like the joints or arteries.
You can see that maintaining a healthy gut is of much importance for the prevention and healing of many ailments and for general well-being. In maintaining a healthy gut and immune system, the gut flora has many functions, namely:
* Proper nutrient uptake
* Protection against pathogens, viruses and opportunistic bacteria
* Nutrient creation (e.g.: Biotin, vitamin K2, butyric acid, …)
* Preventing systemic and gut inflammation
* Proper metabolism and weight regulation
Here are some pointers at what leads to a disruption of the gut flora:
* NSAIDs (Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs)
* Antibiotics
* Birth control pill
* Food toxins mostly from grains and legumes
* Excess carbohydrate and fructose consumption
* Inflammation from excess total polyunsaturated and omega-6 fat consumption
* Infections
* Chronic stress
* Lack of sleep
* Improper nutrient intake and deficiency in some critical vitamins and minerals
* Weak immune system (often caused by all of the above)
Vitamin D
As discussed before, vitamin D is extremely important for proper calcium metabolism and bone structure, but it’s also very important to keep a strong immune system, to suppress autoimmune problems and to produce special antibacterial peptides that help fight off undesired bacteria, fungus and viruses.
In fact, it has even been shown that a deficiency in vitamin D alone can be the cause of the gut flora problem in the first place.
Magnesium
Magnesium is a mineral that’s important for more than 300 enzymes to work properly and is needed for proper digestion and elimination. A magnesium deficiency causes a slower bowel emptying which leads to malabsorption and constipation, and those are all contributing to gut flora problems.
Magnesium is also very important for proper and restorative sleep, vitamin D function and immune system function, three things that you want on your side when trying to heal the gut and rebuild a good gut flora.
Iodine
Iodine, a bit like magnesium, is another one of those nutrients that are pretty low in most people’s diets mainly because our soils are so poor in it nowadays, but also because a lot of what surrounds us inhibits its absorption. Some examples are chlorinated water and bromine found in fire retardants in household products, carpets and mattresses.
The problem is even worse for people on a Paleo diet who eliminated refined iodized salt from their diet. This is often the only source of iodine in one’s diet nowadays. A simple solution is to use a natural sea salt combined with seaweed flakes, which should be available at most health food stores.
Iodine deficiency is known for being a major cause of hypothyroidism as the hormones produced by the thyroid gland are composed, in major part, of iodine, but it’s also really important for proper immune function. Hypothyroidism causes a poor immune system, constipation and slows wound and tissue healing so any hypothyroidism state should be well taken care of to achieve success in healing gut flora problems and bowel diseases.
Iodine is also a very potent antifungal, antiviral and antibacterial compound and was used extensively both externally on the skin and internally before antibiotics became popular. In this sense iodine can be part of the direct arsenal against undesired gut pathogens.
Glutamine
Glutamine is an amino acid that can be really helpful to heal an inflamed and irritated gut.
Bromelain and turmeric
Bromelain is a natural compound found in pineapples that reduces inflammation and that helps digest protein. Turmeric, a spice used extensively in India, also helps soothe inflammation.
Those two supplements can help soothe inflammation, which should make it easier to absorb nutrients and in turn help heal the gut faster. Bromelain helps absorb nutrients even more because of its protease enzymatic potential. Very fragile and irritated gut barriers can become further irritated by protease enzymes though so go slow and be careful with it.
...
The first level to take care of is the nutritional one where you avoid any food that can potentially cause problems. This of course includes any grains, legumes or vegetable oils, but also egg whites, fruits, nightshade vegetables, nuts and seeds for most cases.
Then, care should be taken to obtain proper nutrition. Some of the critical nutrients are vitamin D, vitamin K2, magnesium, vitamin C and iodine. Those also happen to be low on most people’s diets, even people following a Paleo diet. Nutritious whole foods like homemade broth, liver and egg yolks should be consumed regularly.
The next step is to try to disrupt bacterial biofilms present in the gut with multiple strategies including avoiding calcium and iron, taking special enzymes on an empty stomach, chelating the minerals and heavy metals that form the biofilm’s structure and taking natural antifungal, antiviral and antibacterial agents.
Finally, it’s important to rebuild a healthy gut flora with an high dose of beneficial bacteria. The right type of bacteria to take will depend on your specific problem, but usually lactobacillus bacteria is a very good starting point. http://paleoleap.com/dealing-with-autoimmune-diseases-and-digestive-problems/Autoimmune diseases and digestive related problems (Crohn’s disease, Celiac disease, ulcerative colitis, IBD, IBS, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, interstitial cystitis, multiple sclerosis) can be very debilitating and can take over your whole life. We think that eating a Paleo diet has the potential to cure a good part of those conditions that are quite new to us.
...
It’s funny because I almost discovered the Paleo diet this way. My digestive system became so fragile that the only things I could stomach where meats, fats and well-cooked vegetables. I was then easily able to come to the conclusion that the foods that we digest the most easily are meat, fat and cooked vegetables and that focusing on those foods is a good idea for anybody.
Dealing with leaky gut
Leaky gut is a condition where your intestines become permeable and larger particles are able to enter the bloodstream. Our body then sees that those particles are foreign and attacks them while attacking regular healthy cells at the same time and compromising the immune system. This leaky gut situation also causes digestive and intestinal problems. Candida overgrowth, Celiac disease, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), inflammable bowel disease (IBS), allergies, malabsorption and loads of other autoimmune diseases are all associated with a leaky gut.
I think that dealing with leaky gut is the way to also deal with the other problems that are linked to it. Heal your gut and the rest will follow.
Some of the worst offenders that contribute to the development of a leaky gut in the first place are gluten and grains in general, NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: Advil, Motrin, ibuprofen), dairy products and plain general inflammation, chronic stress and lack of sleep. Never consume grains, dairy, vegetable oils, legumes, sugar, yeast or NSAIDs when trying to heal your gut.
Also try to limit the amount of fruit you eat. Ideally, you’d want to eat no fruits at all. It feeds Candida and if you have a leaky gut, you automatically have Candida problems. Don’t worry, you don’t really need fruits in your diet and vegetables as your only source of carbs will do just fine. If you want to take things even further, maybe try staying just out of ketosis, which means about 60g of carbs per day or more. You’ll see that it doesn’t take many vegetables to reach that 60g. |
|
|
|
<snip>
i smell Monero all over him.
Ok, as you mention it, and this is not meant as an attack on Monero, what I really don't understand is how a truly anonymous coin can survive, regardless of the tech, when the lead developers are public figures (eg Smooth, who was extremely helpful when I asked about the 21inc stuff) and they have a very public 'castle' as the home of one of their lead promoters (Risto). How does that work if/when the SHTF ?? Honestly, I have nothing against Monero, but I can't wrap my head around how something that TPTB will obviously fight against can flourish with these criteria. $5 wrench anyone ?? Please enlighten me. I say this in a truly non-confrontational manner - I am truly confused I have to correct you for a bit here, Monero can be transparant on-demand. I also agree that a fully anonymous coin will probably get into some legal trouble.  But doesn't that optional anonymity property of Monero violate its fungibility argument? (smooth apologies if we'd already had this debate and I forgot) TPTB will again use regulation and monopolization techniques to subsume Monero and force all users to turn off the anonymity else their coins don't transact. We are not getting any where. I am grateful to Monero because for the near-term it offers the only way to get somewhat reliable anonymity. I am not seeing how it survives without radically altering its mining algorithm. |
|
|
|
Smooth there is also the pragmatic reality that we are probably not anonymous any way to the Five Eyes  I don't agree with your apathy on whether cryptographers who invent anything that truly threatens TPTB will be made into examples. Monero devs don't need to worry because Monero can be easily taken over by TPTB by monopolizing the mining. Or if ever Monero scales up, then it will have the centralization morass Bitcoin has. Whereas if someone makes a breakthrough invention which can truly scale decentralized, they will have challenged the TPTB. I'd much rather see someone anonymous create something, then I'd rather contribute non-anonymously as the non-creator of that thing. I've been waiting for something I could contribute to (hopefully where the project retained some coins to pay developers until development is done and the thing runs on auto-pilot). But again I would keep my promise to not loudly announce my contribution nor push one altcoin over another. I agree with you that anything with legs will win on its merits (no need for me to shout). I'd hope to see you there too if the merits justify it. Edit: Sunny King and proof-of-stake were so close yet so far from attaining the ideal design. When one asks the wrong question, they will get the wrong answer even if the answer answers correctly. |
|
|
|
Gavin's allusion to Greg overextending himself is an example of his pragmatism and balance. Gavin made choices based on being able to deliver, not based on what is ideal. My successes have come from being more like Gavin. My failures have come from being more like Greg.
Fundamentally, Gavin has assigned himself this problem. He is diligently canvassing and curating opinions on the problems and methods of resolving them. It can be frustrating work, but it is fully necessary. He is getting a lot of help in this effort so it is not merely a contest of wills and personalities. Also...Both Greg and Gavin are on the same team and not opposed, though their weighting of the priority of tasks may differ, so it is not really so much a matter of winner/loser. My big picture is morphing. I now see that Bitcoin is approaching fragility due to reaching complexity and scaling constraints and there are no good solutions. Gavin is pushing for the simplest solution to retain scaling of transactions. Gregory is pushing for more time to develop their "solution" of pegged side chains, hoping that will offload some of the pressure on block size increases. Blockstream proponents have an incentive to keep the block size small enough that there is an incentive to try their pegged side chains. Gavin's proposal is more pragmatic and direct, but not if it requires breaking the consensus with a new full node code base (but I suspect he introduced this as an intentional Red Herring to encourage capitulation and compromise). I don't see any of it working long-term. Bitcoin is eventually falling into the lap of the corporations in the space who will take over as the decentralized morass implodes. TPTB are subsuming Bitcoin from every facet (regulation, capturing the masses in online wallets, Sybil attacking the pools, 21 Inc strategy to monopolize mining economics, etc). Perhaps Steve Jobs greatest skill was in identifying scaling constraints. Here is an example of what Steve taught my former boss. |
|
|
|
Gavin's allusion to Greg overextending himself is an example of his pragmatism and balance. Gavin made choices based on being able to deliver, not based on what is ideal. My successes have come from being more like Gavin. My failures have come from being more like Greg.
Fundamentally, Gavin has assigned himself this problem. He is diligently canvassing and curating opinions on the problems and methods of resolving them. It can be frustrating work, but it is fully necessary. He is getting a lot of help in this effort so it is not merely a contest of wills and personalities. Also...Both Greg and Gavin are on the same team and not opposed, though their weighting of the priority of tasks may differ, so it is not really so much a matter of winner/loser. My big picture is morphing. I now see that Bitcoin is approaching fragility due to reaching complexity and scaling constraints and there are no good solutions. Gavin is pushing for the simplest solution to retain scaling of transactions. Gregory is pushing for more time to develop their "solution" of pegged side chains, hoping that will offload some of the pressure on block size increases. Blockstream proponents have an incentive to keep the block size small enough that there is an incentive to try their pegged side chains. Gavin's proposal is more pragmatic and direct, but not if it requires breaking the consensus with a new full node code base (but I suspect he introduced this as an intentional Red Herring to encourage capitulation and compromise). I don't see any of it working long-term. Bitcoin is eventually falling into the lap of the corporations in the space who will take over as the decentralized morass implodes. TPTB are subsuming Bitcoin from every facet (regulation, capturing the masses in online wallets, Sybil attacking the pools, 21 Inc strategy to monopolize mining economics, etc). Perhaps Steve Jobs greatest skill was in identifying scaling constraints. Here is an example of what Steve taught my former boss. |
|
|
|
Sorry for the noise. I can't resist commenting that is simultaneously hilarious and sobering (or exciting depending...). |
|
|
|
Sorry for the noise. I can't resist commenting that is simultaneously hilarious and sobering (or exciting depending...). |
|
|
|
We're talking about building something that will disrupt a control system that's been dominant for thousands of years. I'd be astonished if it succeeded in only it's first iteration.
Especially since it was designed to disrupt those who are wanting to disrupt that control system. What do you mean by that? I am referring to the upthread discussion of 21 Inc, the potential to Sybil attack the pools, etc (which Satoshi was aware of and even advocated that the mining become centralized among corporations). Bitcoin is designed not to scale without being captured by the corporations (and thus the State). Couple that argument with the fact that the whitepaper mentions gold and is oozing with high tech BlingBling, thus it appears cleverly crafted to delude and disrupt us. Note I had edited that post after you replied: Edit: the caveat I repeat is that Bitcoin has network effects and the Butterfly effects and serving as a reserve currency of potential altcoins raises the possibility that Bitcoin is a Trojan horse on itself.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
