Truth is a consensus among neurons. Elokane, this line bothers me because it is false. Truth is absolute, but neurons can be mistaken. Consider this: A jury trial reaches a "Guilty!" verdict (a "consensus among neurons") but in reality the accused is innocent (the Truth). He just wasn't able to convince the jury of his innocence. That's a "consensus among neurons" that is false. A philosophy debate! Hurray!  Surely you acknowledge that many disagree with the claim that truth is absolute. Either way, what YOU consider to be true - your subjective perception of what is - is entirely generated by a consensus among your neurons. Even if some absolute truth is out there, only the conception of it in your mind is accessible to you. |
|
|
|
|
Both Electrum and Omniwallet give you an interface through which you can access the bitcoin associated with your private key and create transactions using them on the bitcoin blockchain.
It's fine to have the same private key used with two different such interfaces.
|
|
|
|
I try send from omniwallet BTC to synereo address but after 5 try BTC not have move. What can be problem?
Omniwallet has issues with Firefox, unfortunately. Try using Chrome instead. |
|
|
|
You may be interested in the discussion about Ethereum's smart contracting system here - as compared to Synereo's: http://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/31rnmh/isnt_ethereum_just_a_dsl_for_the_blockchain/"Essentially, after some analysis of the Ethereum value proposition, it appears to me to be largely a domain specific language (DSL) for programmatic transactions on the blockchain. There's little in the way of background or understanding of previous work on smart contracts, or of what makes a good language design or of the basics of programming language semantics informing Ethereum."This is really my fault for introducing sloppy original language, but: when in computer science mode, it's better not to think of ethereum as being "a contract platform". Instead, think of it as a server which is simulating millions of virtual machines, where all of the virtual machines are running scripts that have the ability to read and write to their own hard drive (but not anyone else's) and send messages to other virtual machines. The only difference is that the whole thing is decentralized.
So yes, we are a DSL for the blockchain. |
|
|
|
You can see all AMPs in existence here and see exactly when and how they move. This way, you know we're operating according to our asset policies at all times. |
|
|
|
Well...I actually do not know wether I invested or not...The Omni wallet seems to be stuck after confirming "send" (what a crappy wallet...).
Edit: Tried it again with Chrome, seems to have worked now. Apparently you really can`t use Omni with Firefox...
Yeah, I'm sorry about that. We only discovered that ourselves last week. I hope they update it soon. Doesn't really offer the best user experience at the moment. |
|
|
|
How do you control all the interactions between one person and the content ?
If you do it by the network, then it will be a privacy nightmare, all your interactions with the content could be monitored !
If not monitored, you can't enforce it's trustfulness and you are susceptible to Sybil attack, or fake behavior.
That's where the DendroNET comes in, allowing a local consensus to be created. There's no one truth source (a centralized entity), but the part of the network around you can "vouch" for claims made in it. Thanks for your answers, I'll continue to shoot If there is no global consensus, how do you validate the distribution of AMPs ? The fact that I read a post is made public or not ? The only global consensus with have is for AMPs, which are a conserved quantity. That's what we use the blockchain and the Omnilayer for. And no, it will not be made public. Generally, there are very few things that people on the network have to know about you if you interact with them. You have a lot of control over who gets to see what. That doesn't explain how the network decide who get the Amp for reading content !? Your node decides based on the view of the network available to it. If it's my node, then I can corrupt it and make it so that it give me all the Amp that pass by. Your node decides this only when it's the one investing AMPs in content. So the node who is investing Amp in content knows who read it ? No. You decide how much you want to invest (and can optionally select a few parameters and "strategies" if you want to use the advanced settings) and the rest is handled outside of your control. |
|
|
|
Can i make more then one deposit to the btc adress which i got per email, or should i enter my email adress again to receive a new btc deposit adress?
You may continue using the same address. |
|
|
|
If this is true, whats going to happen with the crowdsale?
Congratulations! Your AMPs are now worth millions! |
|
|
|
How do you control all the interactions between one person and the content ?
If you do it by the network, then it will be a privacy nightmare, all your interactions with the content could be monitored !
If not monitored, you can't enforce it's trustfulness and you are susceptible to Sybil attack, or fake behavior.
That's where the DendroNET comes in, allowing a local consensus to be created. There's no one truth source (a centralized entity), but the part of the network around you can "vouch" for claims made in it. Thanks for your answers, I'll continue to shoot If there is no global consensus, how do you validate the distribution of AMPs ? The fact that I read a post is made public or not ? The only global consensus with have is for AMPs, which are a conserved quantity. That's what we use the blockchain and the Omnilayer for. And no, it will not be made public. Generally, there are very few things that people on the network have to know about you if you interact with them. You have a lot of control over who gets to see what. That doesn't explain how the network decide who get the Amp for reading content !? Your node decides based on the view of the network available to it. If it's my node, then I can corrupt it and make it so that it give me all the Amp that pass by. Your node decides this only when it's the one investing AMPs in content. |
|
|
|
How do you control all the interactions between one person and the content ?
If you do it by the network, then it will be a privacy nightmare, all your interactions with the content could be monitored !
If not monitored, you can't enforce it's trustfulness and you are susceptible to Sybil attack, or fake behavior.
That's where the DendroNET comes in, allowing a local consensus to be created. There's no one truth source (a centralized entity), but the part of the network around you can "vouch" for claims made in it. Thanks for your answers, I'll continue to shoot If there is no global consensus, how do you validate the distribution of AMPs ? The fact that I read a post is made public or not ? The only global consensus with have is for AMPs, which are a conserved quantity. That's what we use the blockchain and the Omnilayer for. And no, it will not be made public. Generally, there are very few things that people on the network have to know about you if you interact with them. You have a lot of control over who gets to see what. That doesn't explain how the network decide who get the Amp for reading content !? Your node decides based on the view of the network available to it. |
|
|
|
"AMPs will be received based on the USD value of the amount contributed as provided by CoinDesk."
So if I send BTC now, will it be automatically fixed to the actual BTC/USD price to date? Or at the end of the crowdsale?
Example: I send 4 BTC now (Coindesk's price at the time of post: 247,04 USD) = 988,16 USD = 152176,64 AMP (Is that amount fixed by the system automatically? or is it subject to change due to BTC's price volatility?)
Just a suggestion: You should fix AMP's value in BTC not in USD, say 154 AMP are worth 0.004 BTC instead of fixing it in USD.
agreed, investors are being forced to speculate on btc:usd price. many investors are not day traders. It'll be fixed to the price now, when you make the transaction. If you're not day traders, what's keeping you from participating in the crowdsale now? Some people are sending us other currencies as well and I assure you they don't try to wait until the USD/xxx rate is more in their favor. Nothing guarantees the price of BTC going up and you stand to lose from waiting just as much. We can't rely on BTC only for payment, unfortunately - most of the services we'll pay for will require USD. We are doing this to avoid the situation that has plagued other projects like MaidSafe and Ethereum who have suffered a lot from the decrease in BTC price. If we are to do this right, we have to know exactly the resources at our disposal and plan accordingly. |
|
|
|
Can I reply to a post in Synereo without Amplifiying it ?
ie : I don't like the post, I say it with a comment, but don't want it to grow stronger with my interaction.
Excellent question! Our attention model is designed such that if you dislike something, you have to make a choice whether to simply leave it be and not contribute to that message's proliferation or actively engage and discuss your dislike about it, also drawing more attention to it. It is therefore encouraged to let things go unless you think commenting can improve on the situation somehow. So the more polemic content will get promoted. People will make harassing or shocking content on purpose. And it will be passed to your friend even tho you are trying to combat it... There should be a way to post a non amplifiying comment ! How could you report or debunk a hoax or fake without propagating it ! There will be reporting mechanisms that operate outside of the logic of the attention model so that harmful content could be dealt with. There are people on social networks who already post shocking content - or any other content - just so that they can get attention. You don't have to be connected to them. We're also considering implementing a mechanism that allows people to mark something as fake. If there's a consensus in your local community that something is fake, it'll be marked as so. You could also then filter it out completely if you wish. How do you control all the interactions between one person and the content ?
If you do it by the network, then it will be a privacy nightmare, all your interactions with the content could be monitored !
If not monitored, you can't enforce it's trustfulness and you are susceptible to Sybil attack, or fake behavior.
That's where the DendroNET comes in, allowing a local consensus to be created. There's no one truth source (a centralized entity), but the part of the network around you can "vouch" for claims made in it. Thanks for your answers, I'll continue to shoot If there is no global consensus, how do you validate the distribution of AMPs ? The fact that I read a post is made public or not ? The only global consensus with have is for AMPs, which are a conserved quantity. That's what we use the blockchain and the Omnilayer for. And no, it will not be made public. Generally, there are very few things that people on the network have to know about you if you interact with them. You have a lot of control over who gets to see what. |
|
|
|
How do you control all the interactions between one person and the content ?
If you do it by the network, then it will be a privacy nightmare, all your interactions with the content could be monitored !
If not monitored, you can't enforce it's trustfulness and you are susceptible to Sybil attack, or fake behavior.
That's where the DendroNET comes in, allowing a local consensus to be created. There's no one truth source (a centralized entity), but the part of the network around you can "vouch" for claims made in it. Do you maintain a double charge counter, one that can't be amplified by money and one that can ?
So that people who don't want to be exposed to money bias, can chose so.
The portion of the charge that will be added due to AMPs being invested in a post will be discounted from that post if you don't wish to see promoted content. It'll then be placed in a lower position in your stream's queue (or not appear there at all). |
|
|
|
Can I reply to a post in Synereo without Amplifiying it ?
ie : I don't like the post, I say it with a comment, but don't want it to grow stronger with my interaction.
Excellent question! Our attention model is designed such that if you dislike something, you have to make a choice whether to simply leave it be and not contribute to that message's proliferation or actively engage and discuss your dislike about it, also drawing more attention to it. It is therefore encouraged to let things go unless you think commenting can improve on the situation somehow. |
|
|
|
I thought I read that you simply do another sale at a later time but they are not destroyed? Did you change that?
I Read it again.. oddly I don't remember the part of them being destroyed I read that another future sale would take place until they are all sold or something like that... hmm
sidhujag is right. I remember the same thing. This is a very important issue ... and they changed this - silently - and must have edited their former response to dzarmush in the thread I guess the initial sales are bad and they feel the market pressure. I just edited it, yes, in anticipation of an announcement we'll make about this shortly. I also messaged everyone who asked in the thread privately. Sorry about the confusion - we'll make it official soon. what about people who bought already under the previous rule? changing IPO rules mid stream ... dangerous In the worst case scenario, this change puts them in the exact same position they were in before. In the best case scenario, their holdings will represent a higher stake in the total amount of existing AMPs. How will the synereo network prevent people from sucking all the AMP from sponsored content without reading it ( ie with a script or bot ) ?
1) You can't know what content is sponsored before going over it. 2) If you go over all content available, your attention won't be worth investing AMPs to reach -- you attend everything anyway. These notions are explored in depth in our whitepaper and in the network dynamics presentations: Slides: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/12wZfRyF9XBMrc1ripXGfyNXCnO_MD7f2-Gc8AIa-v8o/pub?start=false&loop=false&slide=id.g4ecec4c43_30Whitepaper, relevance and importance of the attention economy ("Social agency and the attention economy" section): http://www.synereo.com/whitepapers/synereo.pdf#subsection.1.2.1Whitepaper, formulation of our model: http://www.synereo.com/whitepapers/synereo.pdf#subsection.2.2.1 |
|
|
|
If we were to go to a VC, we would get a lot more.
Yes, but not for AMPs. For shares in the company. Or am I wrong on that? For shares, yes. These shares would then represent the value of the AMPs the company has. The difference would be that they would have control over the decision making processes. So is your business/investment case basically that you hope that AMPs will be valuable because the company itself is not desigend to make profits? (I realize the question might sound snarky, but it is not meant to be. I would be a fair choice of yours imho. I just want to evaluate the investment case for myself and understand your thinking). Indeed. It's more than a hope. AMPs will be more effective the more the network grows. We'll publish a post examining this later today. Edit: here - http://blog.synereo.com/2015/03/27/how-amps-work/ |
|
|
|
I thought I read that you simply do another sale at a later time but they are not destroyed? Did you change that?
I Read it again.. oddly I don't remember the part of them being destroyed I read that another future sale would take place until they are all sold or something like that... hmm
sidhujag is right. I remember the same thing. This is a very important issue ... and they changed this - silently - and must have edited their former response to dzarmush in the thread I guess the initial sales are bad and they feel the market pressure. I just edited it, yes, in anticipation of an announcement we'll make about this shortly. I also messaged everyone who asked in the thread privately. Sorry about the confusion - we'll make it official soon. |
|
|
|
If we were to go to a VC, we would get a lot more.
Yes, but not for AMPs. For shares in the company. Or am I wrong on that? For shares, yes. These shares would then represent the value of the AMPs the company has. The difference would be that they would have control over the decision making processes.
What happens if you SYnereo doesn`t raise the full amount? What happens with the remaining coins up for presale? are they destroyed?
Yes. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
