Considering that I do homeschool, I have heard of the Singaporean method. I wasn't impressed, myself.
You have to remove the capacity for your children to feel before they can learn properly. We are also #1 in the world for lack of emotions. When asked did you have an smile, laugh, feel angry or sad yesterday, only 36% of Singaporeans report yes. That is the lowest rate of emotion in the world. We even beat out the ex-Communist countries. Your children probably still don't know how to master their emotions. How do you expect them to learn if they are always getting distracted by emotional noise? |
|
|
|
Great work.
I hope and believe that some kind of POS have to be done.
Thanks, please help spread the word. It won't get done until competent open-source developers become interested. Help make that happen! If you are a developer yourself that will really help. I have trouble communicating effectively with developers because I am an economist. |
|
|
|
|
Ummm.. no. My mother never spanked me. Ever. Nor did she use any other form of discipline at all (quiet corner time etc.). Instead she tried to persuade me to do what she wanted using words.
In fact, like a true statist, she intervened when she saw people hitting their children in public. Humorously, this once resulted in a fight between my mom and a rather large African-American lady.
I guess that intervention to help defenseless children is what you call 'selective violence.' I am all for it.
|
|
|
|
lol, wordpress needs marketing? it's only like 90% of the blogs online uses it? it's unlikely for a user to know bitcoin, but unaware of wordpress. Bitcoin is far less well known compared to wordpress.
Established brand names need marketing too. How do you think one stays on top. Here's an example. Why did Google leave China? Google left China because the Chinese government hate it, and actively ban its services, not because of any marketing reasons. Lol. Google refused to comply with the Chinese government. That refusal is marketing. You fell for it. 'If you want a free and open internet ...' How do you think they get the American public to sign petitions that help google choose the rules? |
|
|
|
Having frequent, automated, temporal checkpoints leads to exactly the same chaos and vulnerabilities that made the blockchain needed in the first place.
Bitcoin has infrequent, hardcoded checkpoints - this works. Checkpoints based on PoS (as in my proof of stake system) might work. I haven't read up the probabilistic PoS discussion yet, but that could work too.
You should definitely read the updated PoS wiki. I think my proposed probabilistic system, an elaboration of Colbee's PoA, has very nice properties. I need input from smart people. I may have made mistakes. Unless you point them out, I may not notice and fix them. Even if I didn't make mistakes, I still need feedback so I can improve the exposition (I'm bad at that). |
|
|
|
I really don't see why you have such a problem with it, since that "one law" says only "Don't bully, don't hit, and don't steal." Did your mommy not teach you these things?
Rather than being sarcastic, ask yourself: don't steal what? Property is enshrined into that law like it's an almighty "act of god", rather than something invented by the human intellect. But it seems you are too brainwashed to see it no matter what I say. My mommy taught me to emphasize with those less fortunate. She said that every rule was secondary to this. She said that a paternalistic state was best for society. She said that even though we were quite well-off, we should always vote for tax increases on affluent people like ourselves. As a scientist, she taught me to trust in induction and dismiss philosophical arguments. I guess your mommy taught you to be an AnCap? Bad mommy, very bad. It is much worse to have had a bad mommy than it is to live in a slave state. |
|
|
|
So I havent read the whole thread nor do I intend to, I went to a private christian school 7-11th grade, I was kicked out my junior year for drinking. I blew my knee out during football and had gotten fairly addicted to painkillers thanks to a generous 6x60 percocet (sp?) 30mg script. First time ever using drugs and I went overboard. All the while my sister had to drop out of school for a semester and was in the hospital for 3 months, not one person ever called and asked how I was. I was living at my buddies house because my parents were with my sister at the hospital and my coaches/teachers couldnt have cared less. Private [Christian] institutions as I know them are hypocritical, so much so I am no longer a practicing christian, not one time over the course of 4 years there did I ever feel "God's love" there were good people there and I do not intend to bash christians for the wrong doing of a few.
Now the worst part of it all is that when you sign up to go to school there both you AND your parents sign forms saying that they are allowed to discipline you in whatever manner they see fit and you are not allowed to sue them for wrong doing. In a sense I had to sign away personal rights to attend school there. Instead of getting detention for being late our football coach was informed and we were punished by at practice, our coach happened to be the dean of students and not the kind of man to fuck with.
I graduated from PLD in Lexington and while my class was 500 compared to 120 at my other school the group of friends I have are the most loyal, kind, fair and generous people you will ever know. When I have kids they will go to public school no question, of the friends I know from the private school 4 have ended up in rehab 2 are pregnant and 6 have dropped out of school that leaves 3 still on track to be successful... Now with my group of friends we are all juniors at the University of Kentucky and only one person has decided to drop out of college. I think there is no question which environment better prepares you for life. Of course the only advantage of going to private school is the networking, a guy 3 years older who went there was on Romney's campaign team first year out of college. If you live in the US you pay for education either way, but the extra $$ for private school is not at all worth it.
If you want good public school for your kids move to Singapore. #1 in the world. Year after year after year. Have you heard of the Singaporean method of teaching mathematics? We use it to pwn everyone. True, the statists in South Korea and Scandanavia are close. But we have the strongest state education system and come out on top. I can see that even in the US though, the state does better than those worthless Christian motherfuckers. |
|
|
|
Was there one except LTC that wasn't a pure scam?
LTC was either scam or folly. Remember, undisclosed ability to mine with GPUs... No other additional features except the one surrounding the scam/folly. As acknowledged by insane critics such as LukeJr, The only legitimate altcoin is PPCoin. |
|
|
|
If you spent more time searching and less time abusing developers you would realize that I build the Qt version as soon as new source code is released, and it is always released under the same location.  You can STILL find this at http://dl.dropbox.com/u/75013537/PPCoin.7z the same as you always have been able to. That looks beautiful. |
|
|
|
- Fix an issue of stake generation with large number of small coins in wallet.
Could you describe this issue? Still waiting on a description of the issue. Is this the gaming of stake by dividing coins into many tiny accounts that we discussed with Killerstorm? I assume not because that seems like a mandatory upgrade. [note: based on that discussion the effects of gaming are bounded, so this is not a showstopper. Also, it doesn't really help you earn more money so don't get excited.] Are people with a large number of small coins failing to generate stake when they could? What is the issue? |
|
|
|
If the cost of the mining operation is less than the revenue from that operation than there is profit.
If there are no miners, then no transactions will take place within the network.
If there are no more coins to mine and only live from fees then:
1. What will keep miners from imposing high fees.
2. How many people will stay with bitcoins if miners impose high fees
This is far in the future, so there is no need to plan for this eventuality. The developers will think of something... If you didn't buy that, how about this... Limit the network to a small number of transactions so that fees will always be high. Without this artificial scarcity, there is no guarantee that high fees for miners can be extracted. http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/13jj0d/in_favor_of_not_increasing_the_block_size/The developers are all behind this idea. BitPal, here we come! http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2012/11/21If you didn't buy that, they suggest charitable donations to miners, assurance contracts, and also claim to have some other vague ideas that will help. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2700 (see discussion from here onwards in this thread) If you absolutely refuse to swallow the blue pill, here is the red one: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake |
|
|
|
wont most of us be dead by then?
LOL, I guess that is the idea. But if bitcoin dies then, who do we sell the coins to? Last one holding is a sucker.  |
|
|
|
In case anyone is interested, I updated the proof of stake wiki with a new blockchain design proposal. I believe that it would be extremely secure. Explain why I am wrong. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_Stake#Cunicula.27s_NoteEven if you don't agree with me at all, perhaps something interesting is in there! |
|
|
|
I don't like p values for other reasons, mostly that almost noone understands what they actually mean or that they are not the correct tool for most of modern science. Fisher was alright, but his prophecy has come true with regards to his own work:
P-values seem necessary for any type of empirical investigation. What would you suggest instead? If you have prior information use bayes' theorem, if you do not, use p-values. If the evidence is strong enough they converge on the same result. Even Fisher says to do this in that last paper I quoted. Oh okay, I thought you were going to propose something wacky. Sorry to have misjudged you. |
|
|
|
In theory, the threat of a 51% attack is always present. At what hash rate would you guys consider the risk pretty well mitigated? I know it depends on the coin, as they're slightly different. But just looking for a ballpark number.
At proof-of-stake. I wouldn't accept any plausible hash rate as adequately safe. Wait a few years and bitcoin will start getting ravaged too. So what's the answer to the problem? The root problem is secret mining. Secret miners can replace the public chain with their own secret attack chain. A simple solution is to prohibit secret mining. Here is a basic outline: 1) Miners search for tentative blocks. Tentative blocks must meet the PoW difficulty target. 2) The PoW solution in a tentative block maps to a sequence of 5 randomly selected satoshis. (i.e. just hash the solution five times and use these five hashes to select random satoshis) 3) Miners publish their tentative blocks and holders of the 5 random satoshis are invited to sign the blocks using their private key. (there are some omitted steps to minimize bandwidth requirements here) 4) If all 5 satoshi holders sign a tentative block, it becomes a valid block and enters the blockchain. (i.e. the only feasible way to get your block into the chain is by publishing it) 5) If not, the tentative block is ignored. Go back to (1). Some other tentative block will be found and enter the blockchain. Now think about secret mining. Suppose I own 1% of all coins. In order to mine a block AND keep that secret, I need to find a PoW solution for which I own all five randomly selected satoshis. The chances of a PoW solution satisfying this criteria is 1 in [1/(0.01)]^5 or 1 in 10 billion. Therefore, mining secret blocks requires 10 billion times the hashing power of mining public blocks. With these rules, a small chain with say 1 cpu worth of hashing power protecting it (say 3 megahash) requires 30 Terahash of computing power to successfully attack. That is one single CPU would be a sufficient defense against an attacker controlling the entire bitcoin network. One GPU could defend against 100 bitcoin networks simultaneously. [Another solution is PPCoin. It is nowhere near this robust, but it might be good enough.] |
|
|
|
I don't like p values for other reasons, mostly that almost noone understands what they actually mean or that they are not the correct tool for most of modern science. Fisher was alright, but his prophecy has come true with regards to his own work:
P-values seem necessary for any type of empirical investigation. What would you suggest instead? |
|
|
|
When you said: Rassah also mentions a 3% fee, but I have no idea where this comes from so I ignore it.
I was going to reply with, "Are you serious?!" and quote this Simply demand a txn fee equal to 3% of coin-age (with age measured in years).
The linked post is about the central bank and does not mention PoS at all. Sigh, so you weren't asking questions about proof-of-stake? Do you even know what you are asking? But now that I know that you apparently are only interested in abstract concepts, instead of real concrete ones, that explains everything about your weird posts. It even (almost) explains you promoting the 1% savings reward, and saying things like even though this reward will make a $100 TV cost $99 a year later, that deflation isn't a bad thing, which is really weird coming from Mr. "Krugman is tired of trying to reason blahblahblah" Keynesian like you.
Your argument about deflation is a red herring. If the rewards are arbitrarily small, any type of deflationary effect associated with the reward system is also arbitrarily small. Regardless of whether you think deflation is bad or good, the effect can be negligible. If you want to argue that something is worthy of consideration, you need to make a case that it has a non-negligible effect. You don't seem to understand this. Also, I am a bit confused. Is your argument based on a dislike for my avatar? I understand that you are a furry. As is referenced in your avatar. I don't have a problem with that at all. More power to you. Do you think it is reasonable for me to base my argument on the picture of the cat in your avatar? |
|
|
|
1% saving reward mean that no one will want to spend their money any more ever?
I repeat. 'Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. ... Commit it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.' Yes, rewarding saving can encourage hording. But numbers are important here. Let's think about the nature of a 1% per annum reward. You could purchase a television now for $100, or you could purchase it one year from now for $99. You think that you will live in privation for the next year for the sake of a $1 discount? The $1 discount is an upper bound, it would be much lower than this if other people also save. If so, there will be inflation at up to 1% a year. At the limit, if everyone saves, I get no benefit from saving at all. There is some kind of stable equilibrium in between. I'm not sure where. As far as a deflationary spiral goes, it is really no different from bitcoin. The additional 1% per annum max is pretty trivial. We could go about analyzing it, but then you need a Keynesian model. I'm not going to do that here because it would be a charade. No one here is interested in Keynesian models (including me). [Rassah also mentions a 3% fee, but I have no idea where this comes from so I ignore it.] |
|
|
|
In theory, the threat of a 51% attack is always present. At what hash rate would you guys consider the risk pretty well mitigated? I know it depends on the coin, as they're slightly different. But just looking for a ballpark number.
At proof-of-stake. I wouldn't accept any plausible hash rate as adequately safe. Wait a few years and bitcoin will start getting ravaged too. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
