I would appreciate any response and dialogue or even debate on the issue of why we feel Ideal Money is not relevant to bitcoin. This is a repost here, because our bitcoin community highlighted the fact that my posts get auto downvoted by bots. I hope to call attention to this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4g6wox/what_happened_to_bitcoin/It's not a question. I know now. I understand what I didn't previously.
...since we are so dependent on our use of it and so much controlled and motivated by the wish to have more of it or not to lose what we have we may become irrational in thinking about it and fail to be able to reason about it like about a technology...~John Nash
The below is from Ideal Money as well. I suspect for example /u/vbuterin might be able to explain it better, especially if I gave the context, but I want to take it further:
…the issuer of a currency also needs to be properly prepared for the possibility of speculation on the part of interests domiciled in foreign states, etc., etc.~Ideal Money
For this writing I wish to discuss something relevant but of a higher order we weren't prepared for-Speculative religious mass.
We aren't worried about preparation in regard to interests from foreign states, rather we are “worried” about the effects of hysterical speculation by ignorant masses. Do I need to explain why this bad?
Probably.
Power tends to corrupt~Acton
I've wrote about this. Relevant content. But here I explain what happened to bitcoin. A bunch of speculators and accidental early adopters got rich and powerful. Now they think it was intelligence rather than chance that brought them their success, so they are espousing false views and beliefs like a poker player that won their first tournament, but otherwise can't do basic math, doesn't know basic game theory, doesn't know basic poker strategy etc.
These players don't know what efficient market hypothesis implies.
/u/andreasma recently called out theymos, to give up his moderation powers. He states theymos unfairly moderated only in favor of his own agenda. But simultaneously AA admits he doesn't know what goes on in r/bitcoin.
I know what is going on. Andreas wants theymos' power. Andreas and the like aren't decentralizing anything. They are hoarding whatever power they can. Spreading misinformation and half-truths (Evidence:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4g4q24/andreas_antonopoulos_blows_me_away_by_probably/).
Andreas is full of nothing but rhetoric of the negative context.
I offered proof to Andreas that he is wrong, and he simply claimed I never listened to the podcast which we both clearly know I did, and I listened to it twice, and I listened to it a third time. I can't get a reasonable debate or response, from a person that suggests content shouldn't be censored.
Many posters here know I am absolutely willing to listen, engage, read, learn, and concede. All with sincerity. Andreas isn't sincere. None of these players are.
SOME content SHOULD be censored Andreas-checkmate. Your sentiments were wrong. You are power tripping. You refused to look at the proof. You refuse to confront the opposing viewpoint with sincerity. You exude irrationality and hypocrisy.
/u/evoorhees claims Shapeshift is STILL secure after a massive security exploit. This guy (
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4g1t1l/erik_voorhees_looting_of_the_fox_the_story_of/d2dze28) claims he trained his entire staff and that security is by nature insecure. He claims insecure solutions are secure. Is this what Satoshi teaches us? Is this what Szabo means when he says “Secure all things”.
Voorhees won't engage me either, he fears me, because he know he faces the truth to his lies and misgivings. Let's debate without emotion, let's use sincerity, and reason. No?
He said your ENTIRE staff was taught by this man that security solutions MUST be insecure and I believe him based on your blog post. That's a clue, not a mission statement (hint, start your investigation there).
I'd be blown away if Andreas supported this sentiment, and I'll start a branch of science if that's accepted fact.
Ya'll need to address this...
You all want to affect our money system /u/gavinandresen, Hearn, /u/luke-jr., /u/nullc, /u/petertodd all these players. Please call them ALL here; there is no one I am not calling out. I want them to address something. I have no other forum to speak to these players about this subject. Theymos (et all!) is the only protector of my content on the entire internet.
You all want to optimize bitcoin as a global currency. But I keep telling each of you, your sentiments go against the man that understood money better than all of you combined. You're all too power hungry to consider you might be wrong.
I want dialogue, bohmian dialogue, but I will settle for discussion or debate. You are each selling the world short. We are wasting energy and none of you are without fault. Someone address this, someone at least take the time to debate why I am wrong-NO ONE has ever said so to me, sincerely, in regard to Nash's thesis. I will put each of you in your place, if you give me a sincere shot at doing so.
Tell me why each of you will not comment on the subject, will not entertain the works.
You want to tell us how bitcoin can be optimized...then talk about Ideal Money. Just because Nash shows you are wrong, doesn't give you a right to ignore him. I know most of you haven't read his works, and for those that glanced, I know you didn't give it sincere intent. There is 20 years of lectures and papers on the subject and we have debated heatedly for but a few.
He is done. He out-played all of you.
None of you will give me the time of day on the subject. Yet each of you wants to tell me how the world money systems should work...
Fellow bit-redditors...these people will tell you that we need to debate to come to consensus. The truth is debate is the opposite of consensus...the dilemma is a lie...conflict is the tool of the ignorant...
TL;DR To the above mentioned...power and money corrupted you.
