Could you elaborate?
I already did, you're getting tiresome. no, you did not. you refused to give us a normal answer and just speak from your high hillbilly horse. so you know what, keep your fucking byteball and visit us in 6 months from now. let's see if your braindamage you frequently posted here ages well. I doubt it. |
|
|
|
That is funny, since last time I checked Iota, the PoW didnt help against Sybils, and instead people were asked for social proof to join the network, that ist he Sybil prevention.  No, that is not my point that "pow is heavy", read my post again and try really try hard to see the big picture. No offense, just open your eyes. Hardware, Jinn, if you place one of these on a chip, someone will place 100 000 of them together in one big chip, call it a Specialized Processing Unit, and it would then be able to outpace and outrun at least 100 000 of other smaller chips. What I mean is, at IoT power levels, can not ever compete with a normal PC, lulz that should be obvious and clear as blue day, no matter if you place "specialized non-existent magic hardware" on it or not. Hence, PoW and IoT are oxymorons. Pick one. You cant protect your IoT devices with PoW scheme. But you can, with a signature based scheme such as Byteball, and other cryptocurrency, even DPoS works better. See IOTA developers and fans, say, "Oh but IoT will not be a full node, it will only send/sing transactions", Well duh, obviously, any fucking cryptocurrency can delegate a chip to be dumb and trust another full node. What good cryptocurrencies do is, allow the IoT chip to send/receive transactions with its own keys - by signing shit just as other full wallets, and get the protection from scammers and attackers as the rest of the network. Spicy isnt it. Of course, IOTA, bragging about IoT so much, and now we hear from its supporter "IoT will be handed differently." WHAT. OK. your first sentence is what I mean. so: "That is funny, since last time I checked Iota, the PoW didnt help against Sybils, and instead people were asked for social proof to join the network, that ist he Sybil prevention. " and " You cant protect your IoT devices with PoW scheme." Could you elaborate? |
|
|
|
|
At this point, I dont care about that feud anymore.
I want to improve, and I want to hear solid reasons for a problem if there is any.
If you "SatoNatomato", have proper facts to deliver, do it.
Tell me: what are the facts for your statement, that PoW isnt suitable for Sybil-prevention.
Lets stop with this time-wasting conversation and go to the important infos.
No one cares who is the cooler guy, who has the bigger balls.
Just write the facts if you can.
facts are defined as "scientific and empiristic statements from quote worthy literature."
I dont wanna read those useless metaphors and pictures you draw with your anus.
Only quote worthy literature!
This isnt too much to ask.
I did it for the winternitz scheme and I could certainly do it for the PoW but this is your duty to prove, not mine.
|
|
|
|
now: why does PoW NOT help against Sybil attacks, like you postulated 2 arguments before?
Because this O is smaller than o, please read the previous post again explaining the difference in power-levels of small things vs big things. Im sorry, but I cant comprehend instead of you, comprehension is something you have to do. A quick idea how to comprehend faster, if PoW was Sybil-preventing, why does IOTA still require humans to peer with each other on a slack channel? EDIT: some more, PoW, how much work do you think a 1W device with shitty CPU+"Jinn", can do and how much work can a 1 400W device do with specialized hardware? You know the answer but dont want to see it, orders of magnitude more - which means any single ASIC or FPGA, could outrun and double-spend many IoT devices. Which means, the Work that IoT controller puts into using IOTA, is wasted energy, its an oxymoron. fucking hell, is this your technical and scientific approach to explain Hashcash against sybil? U give us counterquestions and again chauvi-attitude but you still fail to deliver any proof. Your poor try to discredit me based on "O and o" is funny. Bring me a paper that explains why PoW isnt suitable against sybil and I listen. Until then, have fun in your loser-life. |
|
|
|
The last sentence requires that you understand relative sizes. Toddlers aquire said knowledge around age 2.
OK, for arguments sake: Assume that IOTA is a scam and a techonology that can never work. So just out of curiosity: What now? What is your mission here? Expose a scam and protect the gullible? Save all those involved from wasting their time and money? Make it so that all IOTA holders destroy their IOTAs and the project be shut down? Apart from spewing destructivism hinged on buzzwords, you fail to provide the logical consequence of what you are implying. This makes you appear quite deranged and sinister. Well, if you want to discuss me as a person you can start a thread about that. But as you probably will not do that, as most other IOTA scammers prefer to insult and talk about persons instead of software and ideas. As I stated previously many many times, I came with open mind both to IOTA and to Byteball. You IOTA people have something to hide and started attacking me personally and throwing insults left and right, besides not actually answering any technical questions. All reeks of scam. Now, about 1 month in, of course I am still on Byteball thread while am banned from IOTA thread. So now you are using this as a kind of attack on me personally "see fans of iota, that guy is with the *OTHER* dag-project", which is appealing to basic "us-vs-them" primitive brain of humans. You know what my mission is? To talk, this is bitcointalk after all. Understandably, scammers/IOTA people have a problem with that - people talking and asking questions about technology. We WERE talking about a technical question. Why is POW not able to withstand sybilattacks, like you told me? |
|
|
|
PoW IS against sybil. It's what gives one chain, one tx or the "healthy" majority kind of a network credibility because with the most PoW it is chosen over others. this is no guess, it's common knowledge. I mean, srsly. dont make me look for sources for basic stuff like this.
...
more ramblings without backing anything up with anything more than "because I say so and trust IOTA".
...
Really, PoW works against Sybil? How awesome, now where can I download IOTA full node software and run it and have it connect to the rest of the network? Oh right, you cant. Because pow is not protecting against sybils, and not avoiding a "clustering" of peers which then mess up your non-existent "consensus" aka monte-carlo-randomly-select-a-head algorithm so a coordinator is required. You dont "buy 100000 chips", you make one which has such power, an ASIC, or just use an off-the-shelf FPGA and program it - it would give you enough power to block any smaller IoT devices from transacting, or double-spending them. If iota becomes worth anything more than an iota of cow dung, rest assured people will develop "100000 power chips" to attack it just like they developed bitcoin miners. can we stop forming hot air? back up your arguments. that's minimum scientific requirement and necessary to fuel this conversation. google scholar, science direct, even stackoverflow could be helpful here. Well I cant "back up my arguments", that would require that you understand that 5 is bigger than 3, and that IoT means small power constrained devices which are smaller than bigger devices. The last sentence requires that you understand relative sizes. Toddlers aquire said knowledge around age 2. Maybe I can back it up like this, see this letter here, O, is big, now see it here, o, is small, and look now, its gonna be so miniscule you can hardly see it . magic isnt it? Now then, let me back this one up, IoT devices are really power-constrained and energy-constrained devices, look here https://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoard101 and here https://punchthrough.com/bean wow, 32Mhz, 196kib, all do you think that will need 150W of power to run or less than 2W of power to run, what is your guess? How many of those would you need in a network to outcompete a normal PC? Do you want it to be wasting your battery while it computed dumb proofs when you could instead just not waste power, and send a request over a trusted encrypted link to your cloud or whatever platform you have? beside ad hominem, we were at "sybil attacks can be prevented with PoW" you just keep on babbling hot air, unimportant phrases and ignore solid arguments. now: why does PoW NOT help against Sybil attacks, like you postulated 2 arguments before? and you still need to attack me in a chauvi-manner, which is fine for me, as long as you come with some solid sources. |
|
|
|
PoW IS against sybil. It's what gives one chain, one tx or the "healthy" majority kind of a network credibility because with the most PoW it is chosen over others. this is no guess, it's common knowledge. I mean, srsly. dont make me look for sources for basic stuff like this.
...
more ramblings without backing anything up with anything more than "because I say so and trust IOTA".
...
Really, PoW works against Sybil? How awesome, now where can I download IOTA full node software and run it and have it connect to the rest of the network? Oh right, you cant. Because pow is not protecting against sybils, and not avoiding a "clustering" of peers which then mess up your non-existent "consensus" aka monte-carlo-randomly-select-a-head algorithm so a coordinator is required. You dont "buy 100000 chips", you make one which has such power, an ASIC, or just use an off-the-shelf FPGA and program it - it would give you enough power to block any smaller IoT devices from transacting, or double-spending them. If iota becomes worth anything more than an iota of cow dung, rest assured people will develop "100000 power chips" to attack it just like they developed bitcoin miners. can we stop forming hot air? back up your arguments. that's minimum scientific requirement and necessary to fuel this conversation. google scholar, science direct, even stackoverflow could be helpful here. |
|
|
|
PoW is a prevention against sybil attacks. The PoW, which is necessary is not very much and will then be of minor significance, once the IRI will be changed for industrial appliances.
why PoW at all? well, you have a synchronized, soon to be decentralized system, where data-integrity needs to be established through the "confirm 2 tx before you conduct a new one" thingy. pretty solid architecture. what would you take?
for the computational power: you ever heard about JINN?
the ternary processors will conduct the necessary PoW in fractions of a second. Right now, I need just a few seconds with my CPU so that's completely fine for users. the IoT will be handled differently, but everyone was told that like a hundred times.
the consensus furthermore will be established in a decentralized manner, once the monte carlo random walk is enabled, because right now, like you know, the coordinator is centralizing it, for security and topology-reason. (the wittnesses in BB btw too)
So what is your point? that the PoW is to heavy? well it isn't very long.
That we have no decentralization? well we will have it in approx. july 2017
That it's not suitable? why not, what is still missing?
That is funny, since last time I checked Iota, the PoW didnt help against Sybils, and instead people were asked for social proof to join the network, that ist he Sybil prevention. No, that is not my point that "pow is heavy", read my post again and try really try hard to see the big picture. No offense, just open your eyes. Hardware, Jinn, if you place one of these on a chip, someone will place 100 000 of them together in one big chip, call it a Specialized Processing Unit, and it would then be able to outpace and outrun at least 100 000 of other smaller chips. What I mean is, at IoT power levels, can not ever compete with a normal PC, lulz that should be obvious and clear as blue day, no matter if you place "specialized non-existent magic hardware" on it or not. Hence, PoW and IoT are oxymorons. Pick one. You cant protect your IoT devices with PoW scheme. But you can, with a signature based scheme such as Byteball, and other cryptocurrency, even DPoS works better. See IOTA developers and fans, say, "Oh but IoT will not be a full node, it will only send/sing transactions", Well duh, obviously, any fucking cryptocurrency can delegate a chip to be dumb and trust another full node. What good cryptocurrencies do is, allow the IoT chip to send/receive transactions with its own keys - by signing shit just as other full wallets, and get the protection from scammers and attackers as the rest of the network. Spicy isnt it. Of course, IOTA, bragging about IoT so much, and now we hear from its supporter "IoT will be handed differently." WHAT. OK. PoW IS against sybil. It's what gives one chain, one tx or the "healthy" majority kind of a network credibility because with the most PoW it is chosen over others. this is no guess, it's common knowledge. I mean, srsly. dont make me look for sources for basic stuff like this. ------------- " Hardware, Jinn, if you place one of these on a chip, someone will place 100 000 of them together in one big chip, call it a Specialized Processing Unit, and it would then be able to outpace and outrun at least 100 000 of other smaller chips. What I mean is, at IoT power levels, can not ever compete with a normal PC, lulz that should be obvious and clear as blue day, no matter if you place "specialized non-existent magic hardware" on it or not. " I have no fucking idea what point you wanna proof with this. Yes, you surely can buy 100000 chips and try to compete the PoW but what for? Well first you need to make good plans, buy all those chips, either find the right neighbors or deal with the MCRW from july 2017 on but in every case you have a fuckton of costs and work to do. You say any system is hackable? yeah (including BB and BTC), kind of. but is it worth it? ------------- JINN are not "specialized non-existent magic hardware" they are "ternary, existent hardware". Just look for it, you will find the source. personal duty to find information and shit... ------------- and why the fuck do you say things like " ...and now we hear from its supporter..." everything I wrote can be read on my blog, in dozens of articles, guides, FAQ. what you can do at least is check for public info and updates before you, again, claim you found something fishy, scammy where nothing is, just to fill your badass competition-obsession with byteball. IF byteball is such a winner, why isnt it mentioned anywhere`? ah wait, they have a nice chatfunction. wow. and btw: you didn't deliver any proof, again just phrases. if you think you're a smart person, you won't be mad if we create good terms for a solid conversation. right? every phrase needs to be backed up. That's the only meaningful way. |
|
|
|
Be wary of IOTA, they don't like constructive criticism. Red flags are raised:
They dont take kindly on even asking how Iota is supposed to work. However, they do spread bullshit about Byteball on here, and in their slack forum, they are originater of "Byteball is a blockchain and DAG hybrid" lie. Iota action smell bad, like something is rotten. The whole "we'll beat quantum computing" even is a bunch of bs. How can they beat something that can compute several states at the same time almost instantaneously with regular tech that still computes things one at a time? Sounds like they are spreading a bunch of hype to uninformed individuals. I'm sure someone in their team is working under Ubuntu and somehow convinced their boss about this new fancy shmancy state of the art technology and the many moneys they will make. The guy I bought some IOTA from said he was selling all of their coins because of internal conflicts with Come-from-Beyond and hinted that the initial investors have a hard time dealing with someone who doesn't want to discuss how the project even works. To the point that they were not allowed to question iota. Like you said, smells of another BTC scam. What's new in the alt-world, same thing over and over again. you guys don't wanna get a better image of IOTA. you just stick to your opinion. This looks to me like a conditioned opinion because this isn't about IOTA. this is about byteball or whatever you invested in instead. everyone INCLUDING dom and david tried their best and talked to you guys to clear uncertain questions but you still come here to trigger everyone. and I'm asking myself why. is this just bottom-feeding or is this an honest scientific opinion based on facts? because all I can see is an ever repeating trump-argumentation with phrases and neural diarrhea. for the facts I'm willing to start an AmA. You may ask anything and I don't even give a shit about ad hominem. you insult, you ask, I answer anyway. the first question I saw is "Is quantum-proof bullshit!?" no. Winternitz one time signature scheme enables the quantum resistance. here: this for example doesn't say quantum proof or immune, but resistance. and furthermore, that "Current research suggests, that the security of hash-based signatures will not be significantly harmed by quantum computer supported attacks [12]." Side 1, bottom. https://eprint.iacr.org/2011/191.pdfIt is about "pseudo randomization" and "key one-wayness" explained on side 4. Source: "We begin by reviewing the standard definition of digital signature schemes and the security notion existential unforgeability under adaptive chosen message attacks (EU-CMA) [11]. We then define two security notions for function families required for our reduction. The first is the well known pseudo-randomness property. The second is key one-wayness which states that it is hard to find a key k such that the function fk maps a given input x to a given output y. We also state two lemmas about these notions which will be useful for the reduction of W-OTS. " This is proven. If you come up with further bullshit, Ill proof you wrong. gogo. next question! OK I will bite. What use does a scheme requiring a Proof-of-Work - which is designed to be computationally and energy-intensive process, provide for computation and energy-starved Internet-of-Things devices? Let me rephrase that, a digital currency for Internet-of-Things, it even claims to have IoT in its very name, is building its (still not actually functional but ok, can pass) consensus algorithm on Proof-of-Work. If you still fail to actually see the god damn problem, you must be blinded by marketing of Iota, as better currencies exist which are more suitable for IoT, those which dont require PoW, nor just waste compute power for no real consensus anyway. EDIT: As for the quantum marketing. At least something done somewhat OK by Iota. Even a broken clock is right 2 times per day. you haven't been part of the conversation because last time, we failed to find a shared pov ourselves, but I will answer anyway. PoW is a prevention against sybil attacks. The PoW, which is necessary is not very much and will then be of minor significance, once the IRI will be changed for industrial appliances. why PoW at all? well, you have a synchronized, soon to be decentralized system, where data-integrity needs to be established through the "confirm 2 tx before you conduct a new one" thingy. pretty solid architecture. what would you take? for the computational power: you ever heard about JINN? the ternary processors will conduct the necessary PoW in fractions of a second. Right now, I need just a few seconds with my CPU so that's completely fine for users. the IoT will be handled differently, but everyone was told that like a hundred times. the consensus furthermore will be established in a decentralized manner, once the monte carlo random walk is enabled, because right now, like you know, the coordinator is centralizing it, for security and topology-reason. (the wittnesses in BB btw too) So what is your point? that the PoW is to heavy? well it isn't very long. That we have no decentralization? well we will have it in approx. july 2017 That it's not suitable? why not, what is still missing? |
|
|
|
Neckbeard alert.
Won't bother anymore, everyone has been warned about your "high intellect". You actually do more neckbeard talk than anything.
Have fun scamming people, maybe one day you'll step out of your neckbeard shell.
Another weak troll. This is the main problem with all trolls here: they come and go and I have to find new ones to use as jokers. Luckily doing things right is enough to lure new trolls. You just can't erase my posts here, you're the weak one here. Scammer neckbeard  that leaves us with the first coward. just phrases, allegations, insults. no proof of anything. ladies and gentlemen: LemonAndFriesOne, the pride of creation |
|
|
|
So if you have balls, sir, we can set up a nice interview where you can explain in an academic manner, why and how IOTA is a scam.
Don't waste time, he is confirmed troll. like this, everyone can see how much real meaning and substance is behind these guys here. circle-jerking at its best. I give them the official opportunity to raise their voice, in a fair scientific interview, to prove whatever the fuck they believe to have read in the vodka this morning. ->with a real name. easy task if you really wanna make a statement. but I guess here is no courage involved, just talks. |
|
|
|
Where can be trading IOTA on big exchanges? Or still utopia no volume OTC trading? I don't believe the current rate, it is fake trading price to cheat noobs.
it's not fake and I bought multiple times myself this way. right now relatively cheap because bitcoin skyrocketing. whats the problem with ~120 Gi / BTC ? Better price than 6 months ago...  |
|
|
|
it's actually a quotation of a scientific journal, but as I can see, you lack the competence to understand it.
is my assumption correct, that you didnt read for yourself but just guessed that this is a scam, because you simply dont understand it? really?
I understand it perfectly, it's jargon. Don't assume anything, some of us have multiple disciplines in different science fields. Just because you post from an abstract does not make it correct. Show me where the paper was challenged and the theory proven correct many times by different institutions. You won't be able to find any verifiable evidence because we don't even have such system to test such incomplete hypothesis. Anyone with any knowledge on quantum computing can tell you we are very far from achieving it, the only way we have been able to observe this super position of quantum states has been when the quantum computing system was in sub-zero temperatures. And only then for very short periods of time. If you can't explain it simply, then you obviously are just pulling jargon and abstracts you find with google out of your a**. The alt-world is full of scams and hyped up promises, IOTA seemed ok until its emperor decided to act like a know it all and dismiss other's criticism. Get off your sock puppet account and post from your real account CfB. it's jargon!? these abstracts are scientific standard and multiple times cited, used, crosstested etc. My first look revealed 25 further subjects. I used www.sciencedirect.com (standard for scientific accepted articles, this is not google) and I needed 30s https://www.eng.tau.ac.il/~yash/Naor_Shenhav_Wool.pdfhttp://users.wpi.edu/~teisenbarth/pdf/Festschrift.pdfhttp://www.ecrypt.eu.org/csa/documents/D2.3-SmallDevices-2.1.pdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/312407396_Surnaming_Schemes_Fast_Verification_and_Applications_to_SGX_Technologyhttp://ijns.jalaxy.com.tw/contents/ijns-v17-n3/ijns-2015-v17-n3-p311-321.pdfhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4850938/... you know PQcrypto? look at it. http://pqcrypto.eu.org/official EU+scientist recommendations for post-quantum algorithms: http://pqcrypto.eu.org/docs/initial-recommendations.pdfAnd you say we are very far away from building real quantum-compuuter: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/advances/3/2/e1601540.full.pdf----------------------------------------------------------------------- you say "anyone with knowledge..." do you refer to real people, to academic results? show them and stop using phrases. The alt-world is full of scams and hyped up promises, IOTA seemed ok until its emperor decided to act like a know it all and dismiss other's criticism.
Get off your sock puppet account and post from your real account CfB. yes, the alt-world IS full of scammer, but IOTA is no scam, but you are butthurt and are too much of a coward to admit it. and BTW. it takes 3 clicks to get info who I am. I'm not CFB and I'm using my real name in the IOTA ecosystem. So if you have balls, sir, we can set up a nice interview where you can explain in an academic manner, why and how IOTA is a scam. Beside phrases. Just proof. Should be extremely easy using your brains and your mouse to show us the magic insight instead of your worthless crybaby babbling. So -> Interview on my blog, while using your real name, like I do. Agreed? BTW. fair terms. just scientific proof. |
|
|
|
Be wary of IOTA, they don't like constructive criticism. Red flags are raised:
They dont take kindly on even asking how Iota is supposed to work. However, they do spread bullshit about Byteball on here, and in their slack forum, they are originater of "Byteball is a blockchain and DAG hybrid" lie. Iota action smell bad, like something is rotten. The whole "we'll beat quantum computing" even is a bunch of bs. How can they beat something that can compute several states at the same time almost instantaneously with regular tech that still computes things one at a time? Sounds like they are spreading a bunch of hype to uninformed individuals. I'm sure someone in their team is working under Ubuntu and somehow convinced their boss about this new fancy shmancy state of the art technology and the many moneys they will make. The guy I bought some IOTA from said he was selling all of their coins because of internal conflicts with Come-from-Beyond and hinted that the initial investors have a hard time dealing with someone who doesn't want to discuss how the project even works. To the point that they were not allowed to question iota. Like you said, smells of another BTC scam. What's new in the alt-world, same thing over and over again. you guys don't wanna get a better image of IOTA. you just stick to your opinion. This looks to me like a conditioned opinion because this isn't about IOTA. this is about byteball or whatever you invested in instead. everyone INCLUDING dom and david tried their best and talked to you guys to clear uncertain questions but you still come here to trigger everyone. and I'm asking myself why. is this just bottom-feeding or is this an honest scientific opinion based on facts? because all I can see is an ever repeating trump-argumentation with phrases and neural diarrhea. for the facts I'm willing to start an AmA. You may ask anything and I don't even give a shit about ad hominem. you insult, you ask, I answer anyway. the first question I saw is "Is quantum-proof bullshit!?" no. Winternitz one time signature scheme enables the quantum resistance. here: this for example doesn't say quantum proof or immune, but resistance. and furthermore, that "Current research suggests, that the security of hash-based signatures will not be significantly harmed by quantum computer supported attacks [12]." Side 1, bottom. https://eprint.iacr.org/2011/191.pdfIt is about "pseudo randomization" and "key one-wayness" explained on side 4. Source: "We begin by reviewing the standard definition of digital signature schemes and the security notion existential unforgeability under adaptive chosen message attacks (EU-CMA) [11]. We then define two security notions for function families required for our reduction. The first is the well known pseudo-randomness property. The second is key one-wayness which states that it is hard to find a key k such that the function fk maps a given input x to a given output y. We also state two lemmas about these notions which will be useful for the reduction of W-OTS. " This is proven. If you come up with further bullshit, Ill proof you wrong. gogo. next question! This sounds like a bunch of jargon trying to sway away from the real discussion. Problem is you have underestimated users on BTCtalk and dismissed them as uneducated investors. Realize you are talking to individuals who are educated on the matter and have a descent understanding of how some of the tech works, stop trying to misdirect the original topic. it's actually a quotation of a scientific journal, but as I can see, you lack the competence to understand it. is my assumption correct, that you didnt read for yourself but just guessed that this is a scam, because you simply dont understand it? really? |
|
|
|
Be wary of IOTA, they don't like constructive criticism. Red flags are raised:
They dont take kindly on even asking how Iota is supposed to work. However, they do spread bullshit about Byteball on here, and in their slack forum, they are originater of "Byteball is a blockchain and DAG hybrid" lie. Iota action smell bad, like something is rotten. The whole "we'll beat quantum computing" even is a bunch of bs. How can they beat something that can compute several states at the same time almost instantaneously with regular tech that still computes things one at a time? Sounds like they are spreading a bunch of hype to uninformed individuals. I'm sure someone in their team is working under Ubuntu and somehow convinced their boss about this new fancy shmancy state of the art technology and the many moneys they will make. The guy I bought some IOTA from said he was selling all of their coins because of internal conflicts with Come-from-Beyond and hinted that the initial investors have a hard time dealing with someone who doesn't want to discuss how the project even works. To the point that they were not allowed to question iota. Like you said, smells of another BTC scam. What's new in the alt-world, same thing over and over again. you guys don't wanna get a better image of IOTA. you just stick to your opinion. This looks to me like a conditioned opinion because this isn't about IOTA. this is about byteball or whatever you invested in instead. everyone INCLUDING dom and david tried their best and talked to you guys to clear uncertain questions but you still come here to trigger everyone. and I'm asking myself why. is this just bottom-feeding or is this an honest scientific opinion based on facts? because all I can see is an ever repeating trump-argumentation with phrases and neural diarrhea. for the facts I'm willing to start an AmA. You may ask anything and I don't even give a shit about ad hominem. you insult, you ask, I answer anyway. the first question I saw is "Is quantum-proof bullshit!?" no. Winternitz one time signature scheme enables the quantum resistance. here: this for example doesn't say quantum proof or immune, but resistance. and furthermore, that "Current research suggests, that the security of hash-based signatures will not be significantly harmed by quantum computer supported attacks [12]." Side 1, bottom. https://eprint.iacr.org/2011/191.pdfIt is about "pseudo randomization" and "key one-wayness" explained on side 4. Source: "We begin by reviewing the standard definition of digital signature schemes and the security notion existential unforgeability under adaptive chosen message attacks (EU-CMA) [11]. We then define two security notions for function families required for our reduction. The first is the well known pseudo-randomness property. The second is key one-wayness which states that it is hard to find a key k such that the function fk maps a given input x to a given output y. We also state two lemmas about these notions which will be useful for the reduction of W-OTS. " This is proven. If you come up with further bullshit, Ill proof you wrong. gogo. next question! |
|
|
|
all I see is a bored chauvinist who has time to troll but no real interest in checking facts, which makes you a liar. I guess you heard that term before. the more people you meet, the more you trigger, it's your nature. you're a dick.
see ya, boring guy
Yeah thanks for the nice welcome to iota community bro. Great arguments you have as well, "chauvinist troll liar dick", if you want Ill give you a dictionary of adjectives and insults which you can use to describe future critics of Iota. Iota community seems to be running out of insults for me so far. a little bit of self-reflection would help "bro". you don't even see your mistakes or insults. that's what a chauvi does. Why are you even so upset? Did I call you a chauvanistic dick liar or anything at all? Dont be upset at me, be upset at IOTA devs who fooled you. Im just the messenger dude, and if you still so strongly believe in IOTA you can just say "thats like your opinion man", and be done with it, no need for personal attacks. I'm not upset, I'm bored. Have a good life man. Do something about that persecution complex. |
|
|
|
all I see is a bored chauvinist who has time to troll but no real interest in checking facts, which makes you a liar. I guess you heard that term before. the more people you meet, the more you trigger, it's your nature. you're a dick.
see ya, boring guy
Yeah thanks for the nice welcome to iota community bro. Great arguments you have as well, "chauvinist troll liar dick", if you want Ill give you a dictionary of adjectives and insults which you can use to describe future critics of Iota. Iota community seems to be running out of insults for me so far. a little bit of self-reflection would help "bro". you don't even see your mistakes or insults. that's what a chauvi does. |
|
|
|
|
all I see is a bored chauvinist who has time to troll but no real interest in checking facts, which makes you a liar. I guess you heard that term before. the more people you meet, the more you trigger, it's your nature. you're a dick.
see ya, boring guy
|
|
|
|
iotatoken=david=shit
IOTA=SCAM
so fuckin simple, just watch and learn at their moderated forum.
"scam" implies a malicious intention, Great point. Now Id say its not a real scam, its just incompetence. The scam is an opportunity, not originally planned for. IoT is very attractive, its an enterprise buzzword, so of course it attracts real people with real good skills, but the founders and leaders, are just incompetent, both technically and socially obviously, and are delivering vapor, "almost-good" "we will have it ready soon" "from day 1 we knew we have to build asics and sell that duh". The train is in full steam ahead, the crash wont be spectacular, good parts will fall out of IOTA. But it wont be the one and only machine economy infrastructure or anything like that at all. may I ask for your qualification? you seem to be better than every genius in the iota-team Let me explain like this, Even if I cannot paint like Picasso, I can still tell that your painting looks like shit and Picassos doesnt. Even you should be able to see Iota for what it is, if you had not invested in it and now your critical-thinking is malfunctioning. You just want it to happen you just want it to work. You just want the damn money. And you and I both know, IoT micro-transactions market exists, corporations are dying for it even today, they want it. They want to sell their sensors data in automated fashion. Look at it from a different perspective, if you are developer of IoT applications, from all the developer platforms out there, and all the chips, how many support the non-existent Jinn-machine/power-hungry ASIC? How many chips today need a power-hungry ASIC, extra-chip integrated on a micro-controller, in order to "broadcast txs to other nodes" for anyway not receiving any protection? I am telling you, 0, zero, none. You do not need it, in fact it is an extra cost, both in integrating it with micro controllers, and various IoT platforms, maintaining it, and in your application - all for what? "Zero-fee transactions"? For not having any more protection of your "IoT nodes" txs than SSL/TLS already today offers if you anyway talk to a full node under your trust. Byteball does it better, and it does it much better. The fees are minuscule to what you can do, if you have 1Gigabytes, you can do 826 000 txs, and if you dont want your IoT device to "run out of balance to send txs", a declarative smart contract away puts the fee of 580 bytes on the buyer of your sensor-data. That is all it takes, a declarative smart contract in Byteball, a very light wallet, put 600bytes on all your IoT devices, and sell their data at market prices. Buyer would pay 600bytes (tx fee) plus your set amount to buy say weather or such data. When you receive it, your IoT devices give that. Byteball also supports Oracles so all this can be done decentralized. If you dont want the very light wallet on IoT device (to develop it now), or to put any bytes on each device, you can use already made HTTPS API in all IoT development platforms and talk to your full node wallet. It cant get any simpler than this. But anyway, good luck with it all. And in the end, it's all a competition for you. That's the point. I don't see Byteball as a competitor. Not one iota. You reveal your intentions.  Wasted energy, srsly man. All for nothing. BB doesn't aim for the IoT. easy. It's human applications, value shifting between two people. IOTAs field is different. Why is this even discussed? Concerning your picasso: I'm in IOTA for ~one year now. I studied the tech, the people, the everyday development, which is transparent btw. There are flaws, and everyone would lie if he told otherwise, but that's the process of development. But up till now, I never saw anyone lying on purpose, no one was trying to hype IOTA and for the most time, we were told to stop hyping as IOTA wasn't interested in cryptoland but in real world application and adoption. So where are issues with credibility here? I see none, and I doubt you can judge anyone, because you're not a real part of that community. concerning your asic-example: they will use IOTA nonetheless because some things can't be done without it. ever heard about winternitz otss? the ternary system? monte carlo random walk? too many advantages NOT to use it. And once, JINN are built in a higher number, they get cheaper, the common circle of industrial processes. so, it can be done simpler with https api, but a quantum computer will take control in 0.0001 s. not to forget all advantages of a tangle as such are gone. like decentralization etc. concerning your fees: they disrupt nanopayments as such. you cannot buy sensordata for prices + fees equal to your bytes used because you would generated a GIGANTIC amount of fees. this thought is no fucking rocketscience, this is kindergarten. and last but not least: if you really like byteball but dislike IOTA, why would you, a person whos a self-appointed expert in cryptos, waste your precious time on discrediting IOTA? Do you discredit komodo, ethereum, dogecoin, fucking potcoin or any other asset? why not investing, and caring about life, like drinking beer, eating icecream and swinging your balls? you LIKE to discredit IOTA because you have personal, emotional interest in harming it, because you were banned by David for trolling and for flaming without proper reasons. I see no value in that. Not even for your own sake. my life is more important than wasting time on such a worthless bullshit like these conversations here. srsly, I'm not going to elaborate any further on bullshit like this. |
|
|
|
iotatoken=david=shit
IOTA=SCAM
so fuckin simple, just watch and learn at their moderated forum.
"scam" implies a malicious intention, where people are deliberately subjected to fraud, theft, whatever. You think all foundation-members, like mathematicians, entrepreneurs, professors from around the globe are dumb enough to participate in such a project? Get off your fucking hillbilly-high-horse and face the facts: you missed the opportunity to invest in an incredible piece of technology, or even worse, you just don't have the IQ to understand what it's about. So all you have left is trolling in the most unimportant space of the Internet, Bitcointalk. Congratulations for this masterful achievement. You are the pride of creation! If that's all, you may continue your crusade of douchebags somewhere else. Maybe at home, on the street or wherever the fuck you want because here, you are less beneficial than athlete's foot. do you understand English? you have no point. you are literally crying for no reason like a baby. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
