|
why did you put AB+ and AB- in the same option? AB- is the most rare blood type by far. The negative Rhesus factor in general is very interesting if you investigate. For reasons, I predict that the percentage of Rhesus-negative people in the Bitcoin community (at this stage) is higher than in the general population.
|
|
|
|
I disagree. The technical aspect doesn't matter for the consumer, only the ease of use and the market penetration.
In both, decentralized solution totally suck. There is no way the average user of Facebook would move on a decentralized solution if it isn't easier to use and faster. The final user tolerate no lagg, no friction and do not want to use his brain.
It is the sad reality.
That's what I've said myself basically as the hindrance to mass adoption. However, I do see the potential for p2p-architecture based networks to eventually enable easier-to-use applications than today. No more scalability problems, no need to remember dozens of accounts and passwords everywhere, you'll automatically self-authenticate with your identity in the blockchain (or in a similar system). |
|
|
|
Déjà vu. There was/is another social network with a participatory model 2-3 years ago that allowed users to own shares of that network. I don't remember its name (something with Z...?), I don't find it anymore.  They were also asked to integrate Bitcoin and embraced it enthusiastically at first. Then they ditched it (allegedly because users complained that everybody knew that Bitcoin was a scam and was unfair and unevenly distributed), and they figured they can just create their own (centralized) digital coin (with blackjack and hookers!). Apparently that went so well that they have by now become the uncontested market leader.  Long moral of the story short: Forget about such centralized social networks. We need a distributed, decentralized social network. I use Diaspora* and RedMatrix/Friendica but they're not quite there yet to gain mass adoption. It seems to me that the biggest obstacle are some of the technical implications of decentralization implemented upon the old webserver/-client model that users just don't understand. Also there are scalability problems (store all data on all pods/hubs? that becomes too expensive for the admins. or only some data? if so, which, and how, if users perform searches?) So it seems we need a network that works more in a more P2P fashion with the back-end talking to a common but distributed, redundant but de-duplicated storage layer (see storj, maidsafe). |
|
|
|
Practically all modern high-scale web sites and services let go of the "1) Consistency". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eventual_consistency is the keyword these days. It's apparently good enough. Bitcoin uses it almost by definition. The question then becomes how it can be optimized and how fast it can be designed. |
|
|
|
|
You may take a look at MaidSafe, a fully encrypted P2P file storage (think RAID over users' machines) and computing platform that claims to not require any blockchain.
Their integrated SafeCoin would work just like physical cash, i.e. instant transactions, no blockchain required, full anonymity, because their coin data-structure (just like any piece of data in the system) will be de-duplicated before distribution to users' nodes, hence *double*-spending is prevented already a-priori.
The question of course is then about the security of their over-all system. The problem at this level would appear to be mainly Sybil attacks. They claim to employ a "proof-of-resource" along with a node-ranking system. As development isn't finished, the system hasn't been proven to work in theory (3rd party academic peer reviews), let alone in practice yet.
|
|
|
|
|
yup, in the near future, the dominant pow-blockchain will only be mined where the waste heat can be used; those who can't use the waste heat will be out-competed.
|
|
|
|
Capitalism = free trade, thats all it means.
nop, that's not really what it means. Wikipedia: "Capitalism is an economic system in which trade, industry, and the means of production are largely or entirely privately owned and operated for profit." Thus, a public/private dichotomy is implied. Such a dichotomy can only exist with a state. Maybe you'd rather want to re-align your position to Markets, not Capitalism. Though anthropologists like David Graeber would argue that even those free markets would and could not exist without a state, because that's not how humans would naturally self-organize. Humans used to live together in tribes, and you don't barter tit-for-tat in your own family. |
|
|
|
I mean, wouldn't Maidsafe be REAL SLOW because it has to fetch data from many places before I can download it on to my computer? Woudln't it be as slow as the TOR network, like dialup slow?! The architecture of data fetching seems similar between the two.
No, it would even be faster than today's server-centric internet, because you'd be downloading all the fragments of your desired content from multiple sources at the same time! Tor tries to patch a broken internet that was never designed with privacy and end-to-end encryption in mind, that's why it's slow. MaidSafe is being designed from the ground up with privacy and security in mind, thus it can and will be much more efficient. The valid criticism though is indeed it might turn out to be vaporware, as mentioned. Also its security model (no blockchain, thus no scalability and tracibility problems, but rather a "proof-of-resource" mechanism along with a node-ranking system) sounds too good to be true, has not received any academic-level review yet (it might turn out to be too complex with too many moving parts to ever be able to be reviewed properly), and has not yet stood the real-world practical test of time as relatively well-understood blockchain-based approaches have. |
|
|
|
I think most of us would agree to the wishlist of OP, however, some things are not possible technologically (rewarding full nodes) or economically (profitable hobby mining). And about block size, no matter if big or small, centralization is not the problem of block size, but a matter of scale. With small block size you will have to rely more and more on off-chain features and trusted parties. So generally, the more Bitcoin scales up, the more tendency for centralization there is. It's not a issue of Bitcoin, but rather a natural circumstance. You may take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MaidSafe (a distributed storage and "decentralized internet" platform with a built-in token, its own crypto-currency) who claim to be able to function without a blockchain and thus won't have the scalability problems that come with it. They use a "proof-of-resource" mechanism and a node-ranking system instead to provide security like preventing Sybil attacks. Its internal crypto-coins cannot be double-spent by design, as just like with any piece of other kind of data, the network knows where any data is, and copies are recognized by their hashes and are de-duplicated (akin to a modern filesystem like btrfs over a distributed RAID [MAID is a play on RAID]). However, it's still in development and hasn't stood the practical real-world test yet. |
|
|
|
Arch Linux, because it's light-weight, and I like its package manager (pacman) most of all distro families. Although I can do a typical manual command-line Arch Linux installation, I've been using Antergos (which is basically Arch Linux with a graphical installer) on my main machine for half a year now. My desktop environment is the Gnome 3 Shell. In this setup it would also be very beginner-friendly. I'm very happy with it and it practically ended my distro-hopping phase.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynwnCpVjgfM |
|
|
|
yes, Gavin, please be safe with your XT fork!  |
|
|
|
ich muss gestehen, für mich hat bitcoin momentan etwas von der piratenpartei...
+1 nee, noch nich genug gender-debatten |
|
|
|
|
ich find solche artikel gut; bad news is good news, bitcoin is antifragile, etc
reißerisch aufgemacht, macht die leute neugierig, und man wird sich wundern, wenn bitcoin in einem jahr immer noch da ist, stronger than ever, irgendwann kapiern's die leute, dass er nicht totzukriegen ist.
|
|
|
|
they have been including bitcoin & crypto for a year or two already, and they have barely moved it in their graph since then |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
