 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
Bitcoin is the reserve currency of crypto gambling: Re: [POLL] Should Alternative Currencies Have Their Own Forum Section ?Although philosophically I'd like to vote "yes", I voted "no" because the reality is the scams are the BTC economy: Any way, I'd like to not see altcoins dominated only by get quick rich and not some serious attempts to fix Bitcoin's flaws and create a large adoption market. But the more I think about this, the more I realize if that ever happens it will be largely outside of this forum. This forum is a gambler's paradise. I need to remind myself that I we here are in an enclave. At the moment, they don't really have any competition or at least any that markets their services very well.
Potentially another manipulated market such as the argument about Mt.Gox bubble upthread. We could be witnessing a cashing out from recent altcoin bubbles while buying from himself to create the illusion of a rising price while doing so as they ostensibly did for the ETH bubble, e.g. Vitalik using Coinbase to cash out from ETH -> BTC -> USD. Free markets = decentralized markets. When you have whales and most volume going through 1 or 2 exchanges, you don't have decentralized markets. Nobody invests into BTC or mining equipment anymore. When did you bought ASICs valued 10.000 USD last time? Aren't those USD you now use to buy BTC just been taken from former BTC sales?
Bitcoin cannot do without Alts, both built up a complete whole economy. Remember people are not buying/selling anything using BTC, they just gamble on Alts. Basically I do agree on BTC up causing Alts going down and vice verse. Enclosed system like two water tanks with a flexible tube connecting them.
I agree the two go hand in hand. Since alt coins are really the biggest thing you can purchase with BTC, ... This is true. Most people don't want to trade their BTC for a non-CC asset, because this their gambling money. They can't buy mining equipment with BTC to increase their holdings of crypto-currency. This is why ICOs have become more popular than mined distribution, with the ASIC resistant Monero as an exception. ASICs killed the mining ecosystem. This has been r0ach's point, that if the coins don't circulate, then the ecosystem dies. Bitcoin is dying. Only the altcoin circulation kept Bitcoin alive. |
|
|
|
Per vuduchyld's suggestion, I am starting a new unmoderated thread so everyone can discuss without bumping or spamming the Moderation Speculation thread wherein this discussion originated: If it weren't for a plethora of scam coins fooling newbies/newcomers and even guys with 2-3 year experience in cryptos, XMR would have had enjoyed lofty high valuations even now. It's a shame that money is always tied up chasing bad decisions and investments, crypto or otherwise.
What I don't understand is where are all the people who lost money on P&Ds? Why do we never hear from them? The problem right now is I only read in this Altcoin Discussion forum about how excited people are about having bought some altcoins low and selling them for multi-baggers. I don't ever hear from the people who lost money. Where are they? Where did they go? Without the sordid stories from the losers, everyone thinks it is silly to not try to get rich quick. Post of the Week right there. Fascinating topic. Some of it is due to the power of the anonymity of an internet forum. People simply don't interact here in the same way they would in a localized, less anonymous environment. Related to that, I suspect that people assume it negatively impacts their credibility when they admit to making mistakes about backing the wrong horse. There is no real incentive to admitting one made a mistake, especially if that makes other statements one makes (anonymously) less well-received. There may also be an element of something like a selection bias. If you're currently holding a bag, it's easy to believe that it's about to turn around. My guess, which is pure projection because I've done this, is that you keep holding some coin on which you're way underwater, not because you believe the hype you believed when you bought it, but because you HOPE for that hype to take hold again, if even for a day, so you can get out with less pain. If you haven't sold at a loss and realized those losses, again, there may be no self-admission that it's a bag you're holding. Finally, I think it's REALLY EASY to be infected by a common problem among gamblers and speculators. When you're successful, it's because you're smart. When you are not successful, it's because you were unlucky or it's due to manipulation. So our "winning" trades are due to our brilliance, which we will shout to the rooftops. Our "losing" trades are just bad luck and not worth mentioning. That totally happens IRL, as well. This would be a great thread for the Alt Discussion board! If it weren't for a plethora of scam coins fooling newbies/newcomers and even guys with 2-3 year experience in cryptos, XMR would have had enjoyed lofty high valuations even now. It's a shame that money is always tied up chasing bad decisions and investments, crypto or otherwise.
What I don't understand is where are all the people who lost money on P&Ds? Why do we never hear from them? The problem right now is I only read in this Altcoin Discussion forum about how excited people are about having bought some altcoins low and selling them for multi-baggers. I don't ever hear from the people who lost money. Where are they? Where did they go? Without the sordid stories from the losers, everyone thinks it is silly to not try to get rich quick. *raises hand* I think it is because it is a topic victims find embarrassing and would rather forget? We are males (mostly here) and I presume we don't like to be perceived as weak or having failures of judgement. Exactly my thoughts, it is mostly embarrassment and that male pride. No one is inclined to share their bad trades but tons of fake gloating goes about in the altcoin scene and crypto in general.
Without the sordid stories from the losers, everyone thinks it is silly to not try to get rich quick.
The fact that big losers often just quit and become invisible helps perpetuate the game. We're still here, and there are still plenty of P&D scams. But at the same time growth of the crypto community is limited. We chew up and spit out a lot of newcomers. Wish the CC news sites would put some effort into doing a study on this. To put some realistic sober data out there instead of the incessant prostituting of half-assed research in articles pumping shitcoins to newcomers. I made a lot (like $10k) buying Dogecoin from $300 per million all the way up to $1800 per million. Then as it fell I gave a lot of it back.
Then I moved half of that money into Nyancoin and let it sit.
Today those are both relatively worthless investments, so you could say I lost quite a bit.
Today I am happily and successfully 'bagholding' cryptonotes but I don't fault my losses from the animal-coin era. I learned a lot about crypto, and it only cost me a few thousand dollars. That's tuition well spent. Perhaps if cryptonotes take off we might even see a long awaited ROI from that tuition.
+1Well, i also thought i can stack up my stash with trading (nOOb trying to "read" the candels), lost a few €k on Monero and now i am getting back my losses by ASIC trading to make up these lost Moneroj. Time, a month or two, will tell if i succeed in doing so. I also learned it the hard way, like i always did, and i am glad to watch people sharing their knowledge and learning from them, like we all do   "Errors are there to be made, the main thing is to learn from these!"If it weren't for a plethora of scam coins fooling newbies/newcomers and even guys with 2-3 year experience in cryptos, XMR would have had enjoyed lofty high valuations even now. It's a shame that money is always tied up chasing bad decisions and investments, crypto or otherwise.
What I don't understand is where are all the people who lost money on P&Ds? Why do we never hear from them? The problem right now is I only read in this Altcoin Discussion forum about how excited people are about having bought some altcoins low and selling them for multi-baggers. I don't ever hear from the people who lost money. Where are they? Where did they go? To me this is easy to answer. They left the scene altogether. Probably, but I think it's easy to forget how few of us (real people) there are in a sea of scammers and shill accounts all trying to defraud one another. Additionally, there's a difference between people who are generally interested in cryptocurrency and its future and those who simply want to make money trading it. The latter tend to get bored and disappear after losing their shirt a couple times. If it weren't for a plethora of scam coins fooling newbies/newcomers and even guys with 2-3 year experience in cryptos, XMR would have had enjoyed lofty high valuations even now. It's a shame that money is always tied up chasing bad decisions and investments, crypto or otherwise.
What I don't understand is where are all the people who lost money on P&Ds? Why do we never hear from them? The problem right now is I only read in this Altcoin Discussion forum about how excited people are about having bought some altcoins low and selling them for multi-baggers. I don't ever hear from the people who lost money. Where are they? Where did they go? Without the sordid stories from the losers, everyone thinks it is silly to not try to get rich quick. *raises hand* I think it is because it is a topic victims find embarrassing and would rather forget? We are males (mostly here) and I presume we don't like to be perceived as weak or having failures of judgement. sometimes there are stories in other sections of btct (here too), but for the most part theres really no reward mechanism for coming here with a losing story. most people here come to make money. most people stay here to make money. i would imagine the reason that such stories are rarely heard is because typically sob stories wont make you richer here. what will provably make you more money is more money. you could try lobbying for legislation, enforcement or control if you dont have money. control is probably much easier had by scamming. and not much happens as far as enforcement unless its over a certain marketcap amount. legislation, you seem to have made the point that its on its way in two years, a while out apart from 'male ego', theres no real reason to share a sordid story. |
|
|
|
|
It is alleged that many (if not most) altcoins are P&D schemes where the float is significantly controlled by a small group of insiders and vested interests, who can buy from themselves to pump up the volume, price, and market cap.
Ranking altcoins by market caps seems to influence newbies to make irrational investments. "Hey ShitCoin#5 is worth $billion, thus I could be worth $million is I own 1/1000th of it!" But failing to account for the fact that the liquidity is fake and thus attempting to sell for $million would collapse the price.
I thus suggest an idea for a new metric for ranking altcoins.
Sqrt(M x H)
M = Mean transactions fees paid per unit time to decentralized proof-of-work miners
H = hash rate (normalized in electricity cost per hash to SHA256).
Note transaction fees paid to staked miners (e.g. proof-of-stake or Dash's masternodes) can't qualify as transaction fees, because the miner is certain to win a block and can pay himself as much transaction fees as he wants to without any true cost. While this is also true of proof-of-work, this is offset by multiplying by the hashrate, because as the hashrate increases, then the likelihood any particular miner can win a block decreases over any chosen period of time and the overall costs of controlling the mining increases (which is not true for staked miners).
Also increased hashrate implies increased security against a 50% attack, assuming the hashrate is well distributed.
The metric doesn't capture the advantage of having a very high transaction load relative to the hashrate, which is an advantageous electrical efficiency. If anyone can think of how to incorporate this into a metric, please share.
|
|
|
|
|
I paid $500 for net.cash but I will no longer use it. I am selling for best offer (even if lower than what I paid). Post your offer here or send me a PM.
Other domains I have for sale, which you can make an offer (even a bulk offer) or request to be included in your offer for net.cash:
ꙭ.net
⡵bits.ws
ḅit.net
ƀit.net
ƀits.net
ḅits.net
ƀitscoin.net
asiachat.me
asianchat.me
bitcod.es
bitcode.us
bitcodes.biz
bitcodes.us
bitcodes.click
bitcodes.me
bitcodes.org
bitoken.net
bits.cool
bitsca.sh
bitscash.biz
bitscash.net
bitscash.us
bitscoin.biz
bitscoin.org
bitscoin.us
bitz.cash
bitzcash.net
blocsync.net
blocsync.space
cha-ching.click
chan.cash
ching.cash
clic.cash
clicha.in (have many clichain.* and clickchain.* domains if you want them)
clickcod.es
clickcode.biz
clickcode.cash
clickcode.click
clickcode.me
clickcode.us
clickcodes.biz
clickcodes.cash
clickcodes.click
clickcodes.co
clickcodes.me
clickcodes.net
clickcodes.org
clickcodes.us
clickz.cash
clickz.click
clickz.site
clickz.space
clickzit.net
clicode.biz
clicode.click
clicode.co
clicode.me
clicode.net
clicode.org
clicode.us
clix.cash
clix.space
coolbits.biz
coolbits.co
coolbits.us
coolcash.biz
coolcash.co
coolcash.us
digicash.cc
digicash.click
digicash.im
dotcash.biz
dotcash.co
dotcash.us
funbits.biz
funbits.cash
funbits.co
funbits.me
funbits.org
funbits.us
godigicash.com
gonetcash.com
goucash.com
inerti.us
inertia.social
inertias.net
i-on.me
i-on.space
ka-ching.cash
lov.world
masscoin.com
metarial.net
mobicash.me
mojo.money
moola.click
netbits.biz
netbits.cash
netbits.me
netbits.click
netcash.cash
netcash.cc
netcash.click
netcash.im
netcash.io
netcash.me
netcha.in
netchain.biz
netchain.co
netchain.us
netcode.biz
netcode.cash
netcode.run
netcodes.biz
netcodes.cash
netcodes.co
netcodes.me
netcodes.org
netcodes.us
netgold.biz
netgold.me
netkeys.biz
netkeys.co
netkeys.click
netkeys.me
netkeys.us
netoken.net
shaazam.net
shazam.cash
ucash.biz
ucash.click
ucash.us
vibe.pw
vibes.cash
vibes.click
vibz.biz
vibz.us
vibescash.com
virtuals.cash
virtuals.space
vorte.ch
vybes.us
webkeys.me
webkeys.org
yoobit.biz
yoobit.cash
yoobit.co
yoobit.net
yoobit.us
yoobits.biz
yoobits.cash
yoobits.co
yoobits.net
yoobits.us
youbit.biz
youbit.us
youbits.biz
youbits.co
youbits.info
youbits.us
zing.network
|
|
|
|
Politics is stuck in the economic collapse of liberal socialism until the boomers stop vomitingA copy of an email to my mother. Note I only put about 15 minutes into writing this, because I am in rush. I don't think it is written very well and the concepts could be better organized and articulated. Also I forgot to go into the other point that had caused my mom to feel threatened and depressed, when I mentioned that the USA will fracture into regions. Here are links to the logic on the coming breakup of the USA (e.g. the southern Bible Belt will break away from the Liberals in the north, in a repeat of the Boston Tea Party "Taxation without representation" protest as the global economy goes over the cliff in 2018 ... note Europe is already going over the cliff now with Liberalism facilitated Muslim invasion compounding the sovereign debt crisis of the EU): https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aarmstrongeconomics.com+breakup+USAAnyone who thinks Eric Raymond is not a genius, read this: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=7060#more-7060And no I don't hate Muslims specifically. I merely acknowledge the impact and free market raison d’ętre of religions including the feminist variety: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1373864.msg14013907#msg14013907Mom,
Make sure you read the entire message before letting your emotions explode. Calm rationality please.
When your emotions explode (as they did on the phone yesterday evening with me), then you put words in my mouth that I did not say and you then do not allow me to speak so that I may clarify.
For example, you went off on a tirade about how I was accusing you of being in control and how you have no control, and I was trying to speak so I could not only explain the following paragraphs, but also so I could explain that it is not you specifically who has any control, but rather the irrational, intellectually dishonest, selfishness of the boomers which is in control, because there was a bubble of births after WW2 thus the boomers have the most voters. Boomers share a certain set of values which derive from their experience of being incredibly spoiled by the golden 1950s (their parents coming out of Great Depression and WW2, the USA became the strongest economically in the world) affording them the luxury of pursing intellectually dishonest liberalism, e.g. feminism and socialism:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong-in-the-media/a-vision-for-the-youth/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/what-socialism-destroyed-govt-shutdown/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/socialism-at-its-best-how-to-destroy-the-wealth-of-a-nation/
Some Iron Laws of Political Economics:
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=984
Others have stated that the boomers are the most selfish generation because it has always been about what is best for them, not what is intellectually honest and rational. The X gens are much more ruthlessly pragmatic. We question everything and we want the facts, not the political obfuscations. That doesn't mean I don't love you. It doesn't mean I want you to die. As you alleged on the phone. I am just stating facts. I prefer our generations could work together, but every time I interact with a boomer they become disingenuous when their intellectually dishonest vested interests are threatened. Another recent example is how I explained in technical detail (in a comment post to his blog) to my former boss (from Fractal Design in Aptos, CA when we made what is now Corel Painter) who was close with Steve Jobs and still works at Apple, that Apple Pay is flawed compared to a hypothetical crypto currency, he (a boomer) ostensibly changed his tune from being chatty(I didn't notice he had posted another reply) and supportive of me to ostensibly censoring my blog post(my blog comment post has appeared) and deleting me as one of his contacts on LinkedIn (perhaps it is possible that he hid or removed his profile on LinkedIn, and I haven't bothered to verify). Here is a link to a copy of what I had written at his blog:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1399040.0
And here is a link to my last comment on his blog:
http://relativisticobserver.blogspot.com/2015/11/rapidly-growing-niche.html?showComment=1458168442723#c4266073379197244313
It appears to me that you entirely lose control of your ability to have a calm, rational, discussion where both sides can present their side and not be interrupted by emotional tirade. You seem to do this on issues that do not adhere to your world view. In other words, it is your way or the highway; and you do not respect the views of others. Feminism for example is sham that is built on such analogous intellectual dishonesty. If you have any shred of ethical objectivity, then read a 160 IQ writer, mathematician, and computer scientist (i.e. an extremely rational man) who is for empowering women and sexual freedom, so you can learn something new about yourself and your intellectually dishonest politics:
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aesr.ibiblio.org+feminism
I don't support Trump because he thinks he can solve our problems with a dictatorship. Nevertheless, your irrational attack against Trump (about him denying knowing David Duke) is the analogous emotional kafkatrapping to the feminist intellectually dishonest political power trap:
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6907
Trump is handling the KKK issue politically because he understands very well that the liberals are trying to divide-and-conquer his base of supporters. The establishment politics doesn't like the fact that Trump attacks liberalism. Come on, don't tell me your IQ is too low to understand that.
My verbal IQ is not that high, but my IQ in terms of understanding the generative essence and structure of issues apparently so far above yours that we can't even have a rational conversation. Or more likely, you have the IQ, but your vested interests hindbrain blocks you from reading, learning, and using your pre-frontal cortex on issues that impact the feminist intellectually dishonest empowerment religion. Read Eric Raymond explain how the feminists are not about empowering women but rather about creating a context within which those who can manipulate the movement can steal the most from the collective (the Iron Law of Political Economics strikes again). Feminist leaders replace a meritocracy and rationality with completely dysfunctional socialism where they control the politics not according to intellectual honesty and rationality, but by hatchet jobs on males (which actually destroy females who end up all alone as you are and as Eric Raymond explains in some of his essays I linked for you above via Google search).
If you respect your fellow man, and especially your son and the X generation, why not be intellectually honest with yourself and take a few hours to read the Google linked essays above. Excuses about you have too many other priorities, are just excuses. If you don't take time to learn new things and to respect the views of others, then how do you expect anyone to respect you and have an intelligent conversation with you.
You are only lowering yourself. I refuse to be ignorant. I challenge my own values continuously. I read the logic presented by all sides. If you can refute Eric Raymond's essays, let me hear it. Hahaha. Just try! If you think you are smart.
It is not about disempowering women. Rather it is about recognizing the facts and the realities of for example hypergamy! Read Eric's analysis so you don't remain ignorant. Or remain ignorant. I don't have any more time to waste on trying to work with the boomers. It is time to route around the their cancerous politics and ignorant delusions.
And don't even get me started about 9/11 conspiracy. I am engineer. I studied the facts. The engineering analysis is irrefutable. But since you are not an engineer and not rational, it is pointless to try to explain the facts to you.
What does it take for a son to get respect for the details he knows that his mother does not know? A son who listens intently on the issues he realizes his mother knows better than him. Mutual respect is what is lacking.
|
|
|
|
|
I wrote this blog comment on my former boss's blog yesterday and it disappeared (or maybe he hasn't approved the comment yet). He works for Apple and was recruited by Steve Jobs, so perhaps he didn't like this speculation on his blog (which I suppose I can understand but it is difficult to have a discussion if only one side of the formerly jovial discussion can be shared). I am trying to reconstruct this from memory. Unfortunately we had a brownout here and so although I had the comment loaded in the browser from when I had posted it, the page was reloaded when I started the computer after the brownout.
Since my understanding of Apple Pay is only conceptual from descriptions written about and since some of the protocol may be secret, please correct me if you find any error in my analysis below.
Flaws:
1. Because Apple Pay allows tokens to be turned off at the centralized database (e.g. if the mobile device containing the token is stolen), then unlike for a crypto currency, a full node payee (a.k.a. merchant) can't validate from the public key cryptography signature whether the transaction is valid. Instead the payee must wait for the latency of roundtrip query to the centralized database. For some microtransaction applications (e.g. pay-per-download streaming), the latency can result in delays for the user which kill usability. The payee can't just serve the paid for content while awaiting for the query response, because a DDoS attacker could exploit this.
Although the crypto currency transaction isn't confirmed when validated by the payee, then absent a Finney attack, the payee is nearly certain the payer can't double-spend if the payee is the first to announce the said transaction to the block chain and thus doesn't need to wait for confirmation. Note Satoshi's (Bitcoin's) design has some significant vulnerabilities which make instant transactions risky, but an improved design can remove these flaws and enable great scaling (please don't confuse this with Vtrash's Zerotime which can't scale).
2. Afaik Apple Pay can't pay to two or more payees in the same atomic transaction. This feature will be crucially important for a mass adoption use case I will not reveal now.
3. Apple Pay can't scale because it requires users change the way they pay with credit cards, i.e. it fights against significant engrained inertia. Adopters need a smart (and secure!) mobile device. They need to choose from competing technologies. The billions can't sign up instantly in a permissionless, decentralized mannner.
4. Although Apple Pay may decrease theft of credit card numbers (although perhaps hackers may hack the users' devices to get at the tokens or the centralized databases), afaik it does nothing to fix what is paradigmatically broken about credit cards. That is uneconomic fees for doing fractional penny microtransactions, difficult to become a merchant, certain types of commerce even more difficult to become a merchant, large corporations holding the world hostage, etc..
|
|
|
|
For this thread, a scam coin is defined to be one where the insiders have hyped features which can not work as described or features which do not exist and profited on selling coins (tokens) to the market. Scam coins do not have actual usership and do nothing to help the crypto currency ecosystem grow because they are just mining the speculators and preselling hype. Having no usership is not by itself an indicator of a scam coin, for as long as there is sincere effort and realistic plans to achieve user adoption and network effects (but a year after selling $18 million in tokens for vaporware and still having only ~0 users is a strong indicator of scam), and not just predominately selling hype for insiders to sell tokens to mine the speculators. In other words, a scam coin is just using hype (and not actual technical achievements that have been well vetted by substantial and non-biased expert peer review) to pretend to be about real adoption and really just exists to create and sell tokens. Please read the following and understand it well before voting, but apparently you can't change your vote later if you realize later that I am correct below about other coins being scams.YOU MAY VOTE MORE THAN ONE CHOICE WHEN YOU SUBMIT YOUR VOTE(S), i.e. FOR EVERY COIN YOU THINK IS A SCAM. Please note the copy of the following post I made in a related thread which readers should read to gain insights as to which coins are scams: Scamcoin Education 101I am forced to post because no one addresses your post correctly. Sigh. Can't anyone learn from me and take over my former role? Pleeeeaasssseee! 1. - In a Hashocracy like bicoin, only the miners choose which future developments get implemented (which hard forks to take), and anyone is free to compete in the coin mining process. The original Bitcoin Foundation members did not like fact that they lost their ability to control the miners,
In Satoshi's design that is true and also because it is economically driven to centralized control over the hashrate; but in my redesign of proof-of-work, I posit that no user has enough hashrate to control anything and the economic forces driving centralization are eliminated. so they left to form Decred which is a:
2. - hybrid Hashocracy/Meritocracy which allows anyone to compete in the coin mining, but only coin holders get to vote on development directions (which hard fork to take).
Ignorant bullshit. I explained why that is impossible when employing Satoshi's design (<-- read the linked threads), regardless that the developers assert some BS about meritocracy. Rather there can only be centralized control. DASH is now a hybrid Hashocracy/Meritocracy like Decred Because I obviously need to be politically correct here, I formally apologize to Amanda for criticizing her explanation of the DASH governmental structure as anything but its former dictatorship because it’s obvious now that Masternode owners are in control of the DASH network, even though that was not always the case. I simply choose not to associate with former dictators, and I don’t want to lose the female vote. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQGlcLFhwE0#t=2m8s(I stand corrected Ms. Johnson) Ignorant bullshit. Come on man, don't be such a dufus. Surely could have deduced quite simply that since Dash and his whales control most of the coin supply, then they control most of the masternodes. Duh. The scam continues unabated. Amanda is articulate and quick witted, but she is not very deep on understanding technology. She has only a superficial understanding justified by her reasonably quick mind. But she totally lacks computer science and relevant experience. She is a smart journalist, not a coder. Would you ask a journalist how to rebuild your combustion engine, or a mechanic. Come on people, the abysmal level of common sense on these forums is pitiful. Hot? Somewhat attractive but the big lips and mouth are slightly resembling the vagina of a mother pig. I haven't seen her figure, but probably nothing exceptional. And I read that she is addicted to some medications. Definitely not my type, except I appreciate her quick mind, might not be boring to talk to her. But if she has any feminist leanings wrapped in Libertarian sheepskin, then fuhgeddaboudit. , but started out as a Dictatorship when Evan misrepresented the total number of shares without indemnifying the shareholders. Since the SEC has no jurisdiction over a crypto company, there can be no legal recourse for suffering through injustices experienced as a shareholder of a company ruled as a:
Ignorant bullshit. Why do people not study my research on this legal topic and other topics  Reading my 10,000+ posts should be required Bitcoin 101 reading course! 3. - Dictatorship is where a central man or entity tells the miners what to do. I pledge to avoid any investments in companies who are or have ever been ran as a Dictatorship due to the lack of legal shareholder recourse described in #3 above.
4. - In a pure Meritocracy like BitShares, shareholders determine which hard forks to take and who is allowed to mine new coins (1 BTS = 1 Vote). This type of community resembles that of a traditional company with multiple owners.
More ignorant manure. Proof-of-stake is entirely centralized. The illusion of voting is the same as in a democracy. I only came up with 8 niche crypto business sectors. Please let me know if I am overlooking any sectors. Again, I want only the largest cap company in that sector, but not if it has ever been ran a Dictatorship:
1. the largest (biggest market cap) data storage company is Maidsafe
7. the largest file swapping service company is Florincoin (The Alexandria Project)
Inoramus, don't you know that all these decentralized file storage systems (including Sia, Storj, Florincoin, etc) can't work because I explained that proof-of-storage (a.k.a. proof-of-retrievability) is nonsense because anyone can pretend to be running many nodes and keep it all stored on one node. Thus Sybil attacking the system and cheating its economics and data retention resiliency. MaidSafe is a scam. Even the claimed anonymity is technical bullshit. I am so tired of this forum and endless stream of new ignoramuses who join this forum. I am not paid to reteach all of you fools! I would never fix the problems by coding if I spent all my time teaching all of you. 2. the largest records database company is Factom
Get a fucking clue dude about this shitcoin. 3. the largest social networking company is Synereo
Get another fucking clue about this shitcoin scam that presold AMPs before shipping a technobabble hyped project which has an economically and technically flawed design: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1361721.msg13868758#msg13868758https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1344997.msg13713923#msg13713923https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1344997.msg13739210#msg137392104. the largest music monetization company is MUSE
What the fuck is that?
5. the largest public Turing complete computer is Ethereum
Have you been asleep under a rock the past few weeks? 6. the largest anonymity solution (omitting DASH) is BitShares
Learn about the End-to-End principle for anonymity before you IGNORANT AND ERRONEOUSLY claim that any coin that doesn't use on chain mixing is anonymous. Ask smooth to explain this to you. Visit the various thread where I have commented on this, such as the "Thoughts of Zcash?" thread. |
|
|
|
Sometimes we need to be reminded what top-down control does:China’s Deserts Expanding
According to statistics released by the State Forestry Administration, China has 2.6 million square km of desert that accounts for 27 percent of the country’s total land area. The desert areas are scattered among 12 provincial-level regions in north China. There is a serious problem on the horizon for China. Following the creation of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949, the Communist State attempted to alter nature. China’s forests were cut down and used for fuel, lumber, and paper production for the billions of little red books that became rather notorious. This process increased during the 1960s and had the tendency to eliminate both forests and grasslands. This led to a sharp rise in the rate of desertification.
Realizing its mistake, the government saw the desert areas expanding and embarked on an effort to reverse the damage by trying to the create a reforestation effort in 1978. They actually planted 66 billion trees. This became known as the “Green Wall of China,” which was to be completed by 2050.
However, while the intentions were good, the bottom-line result has been devastating. The government introduced fast-growing pine and poplar trees that were not native to the region. These trees needed more water and sucked the region dry. The water table in the soil dropped nearly 10 fold and most of the trees died. Only about 15% of the trees planted since 1949 have survived. Their attempt to reverse the trend had the exact opposite impact. Instead of creating a forest, it expanded the desert. China now has the second largest desert in the world – the Taklimakan desert.
This presents a political risk for the future as China is squeezed by the expanding desert.
Other threads are noticing this effect:What caused Bitshares to lose it's shine?
I've not heard much about that project lately?
Was very popular not long ago?
To everyone converting BTC to ETHRead a little about history of NXT, while jumping ship to ETH as a store of value. Compare the following two graphs... a. http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/ethereum/#chartsb. http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/nxt/#chartsCompare the following facts... i. NXT was backed by a centralized organization, just like ETH. ii. NXT was PoS, just like ETH will ultimately be. iii. NXT offered asset exchange, while ETH offers smart contract. Both of these functionality, which they claim to make them unique, are actually possible on bitcoin blockchain, which is far more secure. iv. With price rise, NXT backers sold their holding to increase liquidity in the market. With price rise, ETH backers are increasing ETH supply in the market to increase liquidity in the market. p.s. Alt coin trading is a gambling. If u wanna test your luck on some coin under pump, its fine. But, make sure to come back to BTC, when u have made enough, otherwise u'll lose all and have to be a mute spectator while the next alt wave hits. GooD Luck  Re: Proof that Proof of Stake is either extremely vulnerable or totally centralisedmax reorg depth in NXT is 720 blocks
[Proof-of-stake] Checkpoints are centralization.For a centralized coin, then anything works, you don't even need PoS nor PoW (except to fool people with).
If we don't have decentralization, then the entire plot has been lost. Do you need an example? Here you go (remember the Chinese mining cartel allegedly controls 65% of the Bitcoin hashrate): https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/48nnaw/the_truth_comes_out_core_devs_have_convinced/
|
|
|
|
Those who have followed me over the years know that I have made some prescient predictions such as the Bitcoin crash from $1000, even the collapse to $150, and even the precise timing and $320 top of the bounce before the current one. In addition the following silver prediction I made: http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article23786.htmlI have also stated that I thought that when gold crashes below $1000 (and likely below $850) this year, then Bitcoin would also likely get caught up in the contagion and sell off to below $150 perhaps back to double-digits. I had explained my reasoning in the past and the current indicators are: https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/precious-metals-march-4th-2016/https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/europes-current-economy/the-eu-going-quietly-into-the-light/https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/americas-current-economy/moodys-warns-of-30-rise-in-commodity-based-company-bankruptcies-in-2016/https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/east_asia/moodys-lowers-credit-rating-of-china-to-negative-from-stable/It is not certain that gold will elect the March 13/14 turning point to begin its collapse to the final bottom of the correction that began 2011. And it is not certain that crypto-currencies will follow. But the level of irrational pumping of altcoins tells me that we are very near to a 2013 top in crypto-currencies. The irrational speculation is off the charts again and not based in any sense of reality just as was the case for those arguing for Bitcoin to go to $1 million per BTC back in 2013. For example, Ethereum has 0 users, 0 working, scaled apps, no consensus algorithm after $18 million expended. Yet the market cap is heading towards $1 billion. I am sniffing a big collapse in the making. Not sure if it is this March or later in the summer, but I am warning you. Take some profits into US dollars. The Euro, Pound, Yuan, and other currencies will also collapse relative to the US dollar due to the carry trades and pegs to the dollars which put the rest of the world bet short against the dollar. You will need some dry powder to buy when there is blood in the streets. You've been warned. |
|
|
|
|
The Altcoin Discussion forum has become so dominated with Ethereum pump threads, that it no longer resembles any sort of rationally balanced discussion forum. It is difficult to even find altcoin discussion any more.
Also these pump threads are entirely devoid of any technological justification, as the progenitors of these threads are technologically illiterate.
Shouldn't we just make a new subforum titled "Ethereum To Da Moon" and everything related to how Ethereum is going to replace Bitcoin and is going to the moon can go there? Which should be the majority of recent thread bumps.
Then the quieter Altcoin Discussion forum can remain for the rest of the diversity of altcoin discussion.
|
|
|
|
The client is a mixture of rust
Btw, I have been looking at Ogg Opus which you were intimately involved in, and kudos on Opus! But it seems one major error was made on the container format Ogg in that it doesn't include markers so that one can't jump forward in a stream efficiently over a bounded bandwidth source such as the internet. I presume the container format was not your responsibility. Any way, I mention that because I notice Timothy B. Terriberry was your colleague on Opus and I believe he also has a connection to Mozilla and the RUST language development. This caused me to remember that I had been critical of RUST several years ago when it was conceived, because I had some complaint about the way it types invariants. I will try to locate my former criticism and add it to this post. So I guess it makes sense you would want to experiment with RUST. I am not sure if I would still agree with my former criticism, so I will try to locate it and see if it still makes sense now. Btw, I applaud the effort to develop zk-snarks for smart contracts. I believe it is absolutely necessary per the revelation in the "cut & choose" thread which if you think about actually has implications for any scripting on a block chain. |
|
|
|
Note this discussion began in the " Technology vs. Marketing. Which is more important?" thread. Please read that thread first before read this one. At least up until my last post in that thread as follows: Thank you for your comments. Same respect back to you.
Edit: I think this thread wants to be about Technology vs. Marketing and I want to discuss more in depth Technology AND Marketing, so I think a new thread is more appropriate. Also I can't tolerate the personal attacks any more (because I am losing too much time explaining about myself...which is irrelevant to my research), so I need to operate from a moderated thread. Hope you understand my reason.
I am starting a new thread because I want to discuss more in depth the technology and marketing of decentralized crypto, because I think they are inseparable and not one more important than the other. And so I want to continue the analysis of which markets and technologies are valid for decentralized crypto. This thread is self-moderated because I will delete any off-topic, time wasting trolling at my sole discretion. And that includes thus who attempt to obscure trolling in nonsense posts that don't many any sense whatsoever (which includes replying to a troll post). I won't waste time making any explanations as to why I deleted a post. Nevertheless, no one who is sincerely on topic will be censored, even if I disagree with their opinion or appraisal of the facts. I have been very tolerant in my other self-moderated thread, allowing endless trolling. This thread I will not allow any personal attacks on anyone and that applies to myself as well. Stay on topic please. If we reach a situation where a poster continues to repeat a myopia that I think should have been understood already, then after many attempts at trying to clear up a difference of viewpoint, I will ask that we stop discussing that viewpoint and that poster can create another thread and link to it. Just because we don't need to go on and on and on and on, as that won't help anyone understand. But normally we can resolve such multi-page (long-winded) misunderstandings such as this example. I will also delete posts that quote a very long prior post. Please quote the relevant snippet of a long post instead. |
|
|
|
Let's have a frank discussion about the technical realities of crypto-currency. Apologies in advance to all those who have worked so hard on trying to advance crypto currency. I am not doing this to spite you. I don't want to waste more time. If we can convince ourselves we have a solution worth working on, then let's do it. Otherwise let's be honest with ourselves.
Edit: for those who want to jump straight to understanding how Iota's DAG works, click here and also here.
Upthread in my discussion with monsterer, I mentioned that I thought I could solve the problems Satoshi's Proof-of-Work by crediting all block solutions instead of the just the first one that arrives. When I went quiet on Jan 3, it was because I realized my design was faulty because there would still be an ambiguity around when the block solutions to be credited were propagated. I was trying to rush out a first iteration when while programming, I realized the detail that wasn't clear to me before.
I went off on several days of just thinking all day. I contemplated all the possible designs (including Iota's DAG, Lightning Networks, DPOS, Proof-of-Stake, Masternodes, Raiblocks/Blocklattice, etc), and I can't think of any design that uses a block chain or a DAG (or any other form of determining the longest chain of truth) which doesn't either centralize (factoring in society's ability to regulate the consistent partition) or diverge into inconsistent truths. Due to the CAP theorem it is fundamentally impossible for there to exist any block chain or consistent DAG design that won't centralize (even without regulation once you require scaling). Worse yet, it is impossible to attain any sort of end-to-end principled, decentralized scaling of transaction processing, because consistency is lost without centralization (even Proof-of-Work centralizes economically due to the Power Law distribution of capital).
The CAP theorem is fundamental. There will be no way to solve it. You all can spend the next 1000 years fooling yourself will all sorts of designs, but they will also end up either inconsistent or centralized or unable to scale. PERIOD. PERIOD.
I realized that Bitcoin and everything else so far is destined for failure. We are only mining each other here. We are not producing any fundamental breakthrough on the problem of decentralized electronic money. I do not like to work on things that I feel are misdirected and destined for failure in the end. I don't want to get rich by fooling other people (or fooling myself). All of you including the core Bitcoin developers are fooling themselves. I've been through all the designs. It is fundamental. There won't be any solution in any of the directions being pursued by any of the current and upcoming crypto projects. It is all delusional bullshit.
I felt rather hopeless about this, and so spent a few days thinking about other potential directions for my life, work, etc..
After all that, I decided the only way to get a breakthrough on electronic money is to admit the CAP theorem and decide which of the three, Consistency, Access, Partitioning to forsake in a design. Bitcoin can't tolerate any Partitioning, thus Access is and will be centrally controlled. Iota allows Partitioning and thus forsakes Consistency (watch it blow up).
Specifically Iota forsakes Consistency in a very chaotic way, where there can be multiple Partitions of truths and so no one will know which truth is valid. Or they will have to centralize to force a consistent truth.
[...]
Edit: the idea I proposed as a solution is also flawed.
I will be starting a new unmoderated thread to discuss in detail all the flaws in crypto currency.
So this can be explained well so that everyone can understand what they are investing in.
I'm confused. One second you're stating you have the holy grails, the next you are starting a thread to point out there aren't any? :| As you wrote, temporary chargebacks (inconsistent channels a.k.a. partitions) can be allowed and resolved with a proof-of-work scheme. Any other schemes you are contemplating won't work and I will tear them apart once you detail them. They can not be resolved in a DAG scheme (e.g. Iota) without some centralized control. Proof-of-work is centralized at 51% control. This encourages the nation-states to organize into cooperation on regulation of the internet in order to regain control over money. Governments and society will not give up this control and will instead decide to cooperate so the system described below can control to move us towards the 666 system which is rapidly taking form. Bitcoin is designed to drive us towards a world governance. Centralized control is loss of permissionless principle. It means the government takes control (because the Power law distribution of capital always drives a collusion amongst government and big capital in a winner take all paradigm). There is no POW required to secure a CL (channeled ledger), nor is it a block chain, or a DAG. Neither are there any charge backs in a CL design because the state of truth never gets to a point where you have to revert to them to resolve inconsistencies...which also means the risk of any centralization required to resolve said issues is next to nil, the network can always resolve itself. If block chains or DAGs or Ripple style ledgers could do what a CL allows, well, I wouldn't of wasted 3 years reinventing the wheel and tearing it apart myself and starting over. The truth of each channel still has to be a consensus. It doesn't change the fundamental issues of how to prove consensus about double-spends within the partition. Even there are chosen nodes who are signatories for determining the truth of the channel, this then not permissionless because the government can attack those specific nodes. Detail your design and I will rip it to shreds. Not intending to be unfriendly, but I am tired of bullshit (especially bullshitting myself because I don't want to waste any programming effort). I have done all these designs in my head. If there is a design that can improve upon Bitcoin, then I want to work on programming it. If not, then I want to not waste effort. It would be better for me to make some fast transaction addon for Bitcoin than to waste effort on designs that won't improve upon what is. |
|
|
|
Join me on a technical journey to try to understand Zerocash ( not Zerocoin which is a separate project although Zerocash does name their anonymous units zerocoins), starting from first principles. I am curious and want to broaden and deepen my understanding of the technologies in Zerocash. I want to share my learning experience and perhaps also obtain collaboration with the community in learning and elucidating in layman's terms. Here is a high-level enumeration of technologies we need to understand in reverse order of what we need to understand first, i.e. where the former requires understanding of the latter: - Zerocash
- zk-SNARKS
- quadratic arithematic programs (QAPs)[1]
- quadratic span programs (QSPs)[1]
- probabilistically checked proofs (PCPs), as an alternative to QAPs or QSPs
- span programs
- computational complexity classes, e.g. P, NC, NP, E, #P, ⊕P
I recently realized that Zerocash is the only way to achieve anonymity without the (virtually impossible to guarantee) requirement to obscure our IP address. This is a technical education and discussion of technology thread, so moderation is present to be able to keep it focused on such ( because I understand there are political vested interests regarding anonymity technologies in the Altcoin arena). P.S. sometimes I need a distraction from pure coding, and learning about theories and ideas is an outlet/diversion for me to relieve the stress or mental monotony of the coding process as compared to the "grand ideas" mental process. |
|
|
|
I am nominating this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=103172.0Seems the main developers all posted (sans Satoshi, but Hal Finney posted) in a very succinct but important thread. Can anyone offer a challenger? Perhaps a thread from back during the time when Satoshi was posting? I am thinking I may learn something from any threads which are competitively succinct and contained posts from the most significant Bitcoin developers. |
|
|
|
|
