For a start - where is a "professor of economics" that backs your theory?
(presumably you would at least have one)

Of course - but if they don't post any trades with buy prices higher than the current then the price isn't going to rise.

If panic happens then there is simply no magic that is going to stop a collapse.

You can easily create back-dated models for trading that work perfectly on history but will fail after they work live so it isn't a valid test.

(anyone who does automated trading knows this)

Again - you are assuming that anyone actually "wants" the supply (if they don't it is just some worthless thing being created).

This is very much what BitShares says about their stuff (and it all strikes me as being rather circular logic).

The grandiose claims made by so many of these crypto projects have basically not happened (beyond Bitcoin itself) so I don't mind to be portrayed as "suspicious" (but I am not being angry nor rude so I don't know why you pick the word "animosity").

The very fact that you would label someone just questioning things as "animosity" itself is curious.

Also the fact that you haven't called out @CfB for "trinary logic" is rather surprising to myself (do really think that there is any point to it?).

Well - again - if you have done that then please give that solution to every major government in the world and collect your Nobel award (otherwise I guess we should blame you for the next GFC).

Huh?

You don't think that it is software that decides to stop the trading?
(the software might get its orders from the government but I am pretty certain that the actual decision to stop the trading is done by software)

We'll see - there are very many talented minds in China that have failed to be able to stop this "slow train-wreck" which you seem to think your system will solve.

Why not offer your services to them (am sure they'd pay you a few billion RMB if you could solve their financial woes with it)?

When it is the government that is shutting down the trading day after day (and trying to buy enough to stop the drops) then you know it isn't just a whale (they would have executed such a whale here most likely).

We are facing "the real deal" in terms of another economic crisis about to hit us.

It's hard to say - the way China has been trying to handle their share market melt down is to shut it down nearly every other day (and that isn't working if you hadn't noticed).

I would agree that there is little point in "delaying things" as you just end up with a "train-wreck in slow motion" (which is exactly what we are seeing in regards to the Chinese stock market).

But overall if the sentiment is overwhelmingly negative there is really nothing you can do to stop the downward trend.

My point is that governments such as China have tried and are failing to stop their stocks from falling (despite injecting billions of RMB per day).

No amount of manipulation will work - if it did we would never have had the GFC nor what is coming (which I think is going to be worse).

If you really have something that works better than all the other professionals in the world that do this stuff can come up with you truly deserve a Nobel prize.

Am going to have to digest your new protocol a bit but I think it is quite interesting.

BTW - if you are interested in being part of creating a decentralised exchange with this sort of protocol as the "settlement layer" then welcome to PM me (I have decided that due to the time it would take to perform such ACCTs they are only going to be good for "settlement" so order matching and general trading will be done via a separate blockchain or maybe a sidechain).

So - the point that I am making is that you are assuming that there will be demand.

But - there may not be at all (in which case your modelling isn't really very relevant IMO).

So if there is no demand then no new supply is created?

Correct?

(this kind of circular logic is exactly what BitShares uses)

That seems to imply that these new funds actually "have a value" but why do they?

(if no-one wants to buy them then their value would be nothing)

Who exactly is funding the "buffer" (and why)?

(this is starting to look more and more like BitShares to me)

Hmm... what I think you'd need to have happen is that Alice would need to be given the information about how the data was divided up and then sign a merkle tree of that information (which basically means that Alice is also doing the dividing up the same way to check the Merkle tree, however, assuming the work that determined the dividing up of the data up was much harder than processing a list of offsets then perhaps that isn't too much of a problem as Alice has all the data in the first place).

If you don't want Alice to keep the data after broadcasting it to Brian then I think you're probably SOL but if Alice can keep the information just long enough to sign off on the Merkle tree then you should be okay.

Let me see if I've understood the problem correctly:

Alice provides X amount of data which is encrypted and sent to
Brian who then takes a decrypted portion Y of this data and encrypts that and sends it to
Cathy who wants to know whether or not Alice really did send this data Y to Brian in the first place?

Assuming that I have understood this then approach that I would take would involve Alice and Cathy communicating (if you do not wish that to occur then I think it is going to be very tricky and especially if the data is being broken up arbitrarily).

If Brian gave you some meta data (such as the offset in X that Y comes from) then without revealing the data Cathy could send this meta data to Alice (along with the length of Y) who could then send back a hash of Y which Cathy verifies.

Why don't you just go ahead and do that?
(you already did that before on the Nxt forum - but I'd love the rest of this forum to see what a low-life you really are)


(do you really think that you can intimidate me?)

Be warned - if you ever use Skype with this guy he will publish anything you type!

(and for those who don't realise this is David using his old account - probably thinking he would somehow scare me with that)

Although the main point of this topic is the "slow POW" if you post (or PM) me a BTC address I'll send you a small reward for that find @watashi-kokoto.