If you only have one or two nodes configured, it sometimes takes a bit to catch for a new sync. Once it does, it gathers more peers and gets faster. Never had the issue with HoboNickels, but I had a lot of nodes in my configuration file. I have with other coins, especially if I only had one node. Can't recall which, right now, but I had one that took over an hour to start downloading blocks. I had given up and left it running by mistake when it finally caught. I'm guessing something along those lines happened to you. Welcome to the brave new world

LOL. The law of unintended consequence. I meant it as an example. Have fun off grid. You'll come back to a detailed response. I think we may have gone off topic, so if it gets as long as I suspect, I'll start a new thread and PM you. I did not mean to paint you as a hypocrite, just that it can appear so if one is not rather careful of their actions.

I intend to at least try to persuade you, or others. It's what I do. My tagline, Anarchy is not chaos, is much more than a slogan to me. I'm relatively new to cryptos, but I've been an anarchist for a long while. I can back my position, and will enjoy the opportunity. Whether I convince you or not? Well, that's the question, isn't it?

Have a good day.

@ jbreher, I currently don't have time to answer point by point (and I will even concede a couple of yours when I get back to it) but I didn't want you to think I was ignoring this. I'll get back to you, in detail, as soon as I'm able. This has gotten rather involved, and I cannot properly answer you without going even more in depth.

I must say you debate quite well. I'm not easily impressed

That's not as easy to answer as it is to ask. If it's all in one block, you will probably not get as much as if it's broken up, but you'll get it faster on average.

At one time, someone, David maybe, had posted up a calculator that shows the effect of compounding a block at a certain size. I don't have a link, but I can probably set something up.

on average, you'll make just over 18 percent per block per 8.8 days, but that's not exact and the longer it takes, the more you make per block per cycle. If it goes past 30 days, it gains no more weight, but I THINK the per day interest still accrues. Presstab, please correct me if I'm wrong here.

If it were me, I'd break it up over several days. ten days, actually, with a block of 1K per day. You should then stake very 9 days with the above caveats, and gain interest on the new coins as well.

I wasn't. POS coins are the only real competition to BTC. No reason for HYP not to take a leading position. Or TEK, or a joint venture, since you were involved in both.

As I understand it, the coin will gain no further weight after that. It will still stake, but it's competitive advantage declines as newer blocks are gaining stake weight.

For TRK, I do not know what the consensus is on optimum block size, but I can tell you from several POS coins, including HYP which is descended from TRK, that it's pretty speculative. bigger blocks usually stake faster, but even that's not guaranteed. I try to follow a strategy of at first using large blocks to gain as many coins per staking period as possible, and then once they're built up a bit, split them in a manner that allows for frequent staking. Given the nine day minimum, I'd probably want to have 30 blocks a day apart (1 block created per day for a month) so that I get daily stake, or close to it. Then as they stake, recombine the newly minted coins into larger blocks to make for larger stakes.

That's MY strategy. Calling it the correct one is wrong, as there is no incorrect strategy. feel free to experiment, and if you're so inclined, share your results. We're all trying to find the optimum in this fairly new world of high staking coins

Nope.

That's down the line. Get enough people together to pledge to go there IF they accept HYPE and pay an advance in HYP. THAT would be step one. Organize it and set a tentative date, step two. Then approach them about accepting HYP.

Sorry to see you go, Tom. I hope you don't leave off developing and promoting coins, as you've done some pretty cool shit. Catch me on Skype, we'll talk. I have ideas you might be interested in.

This one works, or did two days ago. http://ppl.port-x.de/php-mpos/public/index.php?page=login

While I do not consider this a deliberate logical fallacy, I think you are conflating two different things. And that is apparent in your own words. As you noted, we have almost no choice in the use of the fiat currency. The overlords have decreed it legal currency, and for the most part you cannot legally refuse dollars. A lack of choice is not an endorsement. In truth, I'd rather not sleep, as it interrupts my busy life. But I must, or I will eventually die.

The franchise, by contrast, is directly participating in the system, not merely being subject to it. It is a claim on the right of accession, and by implication (and stated law) a promist to abide by the decision. this would be true even if the money were gold or other things like blockchain based coins that they could not control. It is by the very act of voting an endorsement of the system if not the outcome. If the system could be reformed (I would argue that it works precisely as intended), then this might be valid. But in the actual facts that we must live with, you actually have NO say in the policy, NO say in the choices presented, nor in the most hyped election, NO say in the outcome. In the presidential election, you're vote literally and legally don't count.

Participation in a rigged system will never lead to it's demise or it's reform. I completely disagree with this:
If you look to the history of the United States completely in a vacuum, without refernce to it's roots or any other nations, this still rings false. Those who have made the most impact and had the most influence never did so via the franchise, but via the pulpit. Education, Indoctrination, rallies, leaflets, pamphlets, Youtube videos, always taking a public stand against what you're opposed to ,and more importantly FOR what you believe in. These things wil gain far more traction on anything you have to say or want to change than changing the face of your kings.

This is a democracy. It was once a republic, but that was fatally shot with the 17th amendment. The loudest and most persuasive voices sway the mob, and that is where change occurs. Not the franchise itself, but CONTROL of those votes. This is the currency of the "elite" and why they truly don't care about the fate of the dollar so long as they control the electorate.

Principled resistance, and gathering sufficient numbers to sufficiently resist the edicts spewing from the legislature is far more effective. And it does not lead you to look like a hypocrite, even when you are not intentionally being one. Thus the last time I voted (I once believed as you) was in 2000. I will never do so again, but I will continue to do anything I can within and without the framework of their paradigm to subvert and trivialize their involvement. The emperor has no clothes but those he stole. But he also stole all the money, and claims all the power. This cannot be allowed to go unchallenged, and you cannot challenge it by participating in a farcical ritual designed to keep you quiet.

...and who's this "we"? I stepped out of the system almost 2 decades ago, when I realized what a horrible lie they have perpetuated. As Emma Goldman said, if voting could effect a change, it would be made illegal.

Note how much they focus (In The United States at least) on the presidential election! The one federal election that the masses have zero influence on. I cringe every time I hear some braindead milch cow saying "I voted for the other president" or some such. NO YOU DIDN'T! A shadow group of influence peddlers called an electoral college did that.

Yet there's no focus on the House of Representatives, which is elected by direct ballot, or the Senate, which only exists in name according to it's orignal function, but nevertheless by direct ballot. If the voters were serious about reform, and the media serious about elections, THESE would be the focus. If it ever happens, you'll see the truth of Ms. Goldman's words.

The truth, the ugly, horrible truth, is that the franchise is the alloy our chains are made of. By casting your vote you are accepting the system and the results. By any valid logic, you cannot bitch if you vote.

I love Larkin Rose. He and I started doing videos on anarchism about the same time on YT. Difference being, his are good and mine were not Well, I had a decent following, but I thought I could do far better.

At any rate, the only disagreement I have with your reply is that I don't see that much competition between religion and government. They tend to be symbiotes, though who is dominant changes.

I see your point. For the record, I'm a few weeks shy of 46. I also have two kids and a third on the way. I still believe as strongly as I stated above, and yes, this is the system we're currently stuck with. But it needs to go, and punishing DPR for, frankly, doing the same thing that any pharmacist is doing, does not help this nebulous "society" nor serve to protect anyone. The simple fact of the matter is that getting drugs is ridculously easy, no matter the venue, and that the silk road and similar sites existed before bitcoin, and will continue. I agree with the guys who say it probably prevented more violence than it caused trouble.

Drugs get a lot of blame. Drugs,, like guns, knives, and blunt instruments are neutral. They do nothing on their own. You can't have a war on drugs, cuz they won't fight back. The war on drugs is a war on people. I do not advocate the legalization of some drugs, we already have that. In fact, the two most deadly are available in most convenience stores. I advocate and end to ALL criminalization of personal behaviours. I know whence I speak, as I've know a lotof addicts. Most who do want help don't seek it, because they are afraid of the consequence of the law. This is counterproductive.

It also leads to massive corruption and a narrowing of focus by so called law enforcement agencies. When a drug bust carries more time than capital murder, which is often the case, you know that the system is useless. I don't have any short term solutions, other than immediate repeal of all criminal penalties for the sale and possession of drugs. That one thing would reduce the violence, stigma, and danger by so much that the rest would seem a small problem. Addicts would be able to seek help without fear. People who used and were personally responsible (in my experience, the vast majority of drug users) don't run the danger of getting shot or getting a vein full of Drano. It's the only short term solution that makes any sort of sense, and the evidence of it's success lies in Holland.

I came down harsh because the name you use would indicate some degree of thought outside of the left/right false dichotomy. My response would have been the same as the above, but he covered it.

However, to answer your latest, I would hope that people who wish to make positive changes would realize that you cannot change the system this instant. One of the problems with modern communities is no ability to delay gratification. Changing an entrenched paradigm overnight only comes about by it's sudden and utter collapse. Which is not an unlikely outcome, but it is also undesirable. Instead, the anarchist who actually wishes to implement his theories works to educate and remove the blinders that this paradigm has put upon them. There have been mulitple forms of governance over the ages, and many of them have done better at regulating the lower end of social interaction than our sociofascist pseudodemocracy. I would in fact argue that monarchy is a better form of governance, because with a well meaning king, people are helped, and with the usual kind, one man's reach is not so great. Republics, while giving a greater degree of power to the people at large, suffer from the same vulnerability as the block chain. The dreaded 51% attack.

But the idea has been extremely well marketed with more logical fallacies, half truths, and pure, unadulterated bullshit than any other form of government. This leads people to believe that it can't be any better than this. Especially the young who've never experienced anything else. I don't have that bias any more, unfortunately. I have watched this Republic devolve into the current nightmare in a very short period of time. The more the "tax supported" solutions are implemented, the more they are "needed". When people were self reliant AS AN AXIOM of how to live, there was far less addiction, dereliction, and poverty. By a lot. Even back 20 years ago you did not have the level of sheer stupidity that we have now in the United States. The masses have bought into the big mother fallacy to the point that they believe that a village can raise something other than a village idiot, and that parents are disposable.

Changing those attitudes took generations, and will probably take generations to repeal. When striving for a higher ideal, unless you are that village idiot, you accept that it's a lifelong work. You try to point out how things might be done better by small communities with decentralized leadership. You try to point out how the rule of law from a distant citadel is incapable of solving the problems it creates, and you back it up with a large body of work and evidence in the often vain hope that people will listen. Then, if you're lucky, after a decade or so, thinking people start to listen, learn, and spread the word. But the resistance to change, even when the current paradigm is a betrayal of humanity, is immense and ongoing.

For the immediate, you try to reduce your exposure and try to teach those you know how to be self reliant and well educated on what is going on. Also, if you are an anarchist, you teach people how to legally exploit the system while not being dependent on it, as the seeds of the system's destruction are the very things you complain of.

*sigh*

Ok, coppertop, listen up.

First "society" does NOTHING. It's a statistical construct, and the modern god.

Second, why should we perpetuate a system that penalizes people for voluntary choices, then try to rescue them from their choices? All of these "help" programs are exacerbating the problems. Would it not be better to educate people in things that actually matter, rather than to be nice little drones or dropouts? This prison we live in has some pretty strong invisible bars.

Third, if you endorse liberty you DO NOT endorse taxes.

There are more sides than "conservative" and "liberal" which are just faces on the same devalued coin.

Nope. Nor did I imply that. Shoddy evidence calls for acquital. The current court system is without merit. In any nation I've taken the time to look at. I will not say it's broken, because the deeper you look the more it appears injustice and spreading fear in the general populace IS it's purpose.

Yes, it does seem illogical. On it's surface, it is, because you're proceeding from the axiom that a greater degree of liberty is a good thing. They are NOT proceeding from that axiom. Govenments are parasites. They produce nothing, steal everything they have, and distribute it by whim (seemingly). A good parasite does not too quickly kill the host.

I've said for years that governents are organisms. Free men are their food. Thus, when the food gets smart or lucky, they have to work harder or change direction.

Locking in a cage is merely cruel. If they don't understand what they did is wrong, they are too dangerous to be allowed to live. If they do understand what they did was wrong, they are too dangerous to live. Which has nothing to do with the current case, save that a great many cops fall into the latter category.

Interesting choice of words

Well, I am heavily invested in several POS coins, and they are all like this. Perhaps you were just unaware of it, or others have implemented mechanisms that change this behind the scenes. (Sync does this, so I know it's possible). However, the ones I have the most experience with, TEK, HYP, FIRE and HBN, all have this same mechanism and all handle it similarly, with a custom change address available.

I normally let it split into multiple addresses and recombine as I see fit from time to time, but I can see where from the point of view of not making regular backups that could be a problem. On the other hand you can schedule a task to back up wallet.dat quite easily in all major OS's out there. I confess with pride that I'm a geek, so I fail to see the problem in this.