|
|
StinkyLover
Sr. Member
 Offline
Activity: 454
Merit: 250
This industry is pure fiction
|
 |
July 14, 2016, 12:13:54 AM |
|
FUD ALERT
*********
I think you've taken on an unbeatable challenge. As long as the token is to be used by human beings, and used on this planet, there will always be winners and losers, whales and minnows, speculators and users (unless it's a non-tradeable entity so really has no value to any traders). I just don't see you breaking that fundamental human law no matter what you release.
The people you will code to treat fairly in distribution will sell their portion to the highest bidder (as soon as they can - as is their right). And that's when the imbalance will start to take root. The early adopters (whether they care about the new tech and concepts embedded within it or not) will be expecting massive profits, and quickly.
If they don't get that, then you are in trouble. Fact. Read the boards.
Maybe I'm just too cynical.
I wish you luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2016, 01:03:33 AM |
|
I think you've taken on an unbeatable challenge. As long as the token is to be used by human beings, and used on this planet, there will always be winners and losers, whales and minnows, speculators and users (unless it's a non-tradeable entity so really has no value to any traders). I just don't see you breaking that fundamental human law no matter what you release.
I didn't intend to write anything in this thread that is contrary to your expectation. What did you read that indicated to you otherwise? I believe in a meritocracy, so why would you think I am not expecting winners and losers? The people you will code to treat fairly in distribution will sell their portion to the highest bidder (as soon as they can - as is their right).
I didn't mention doing a coin drop. I do not agree with giving people coins for nothing. I agree they will sell immediately. I think you need to rather understand for example the problem with instant distributions versus mined distributions: PoW and Proof-of-Burn are the only way to distribute coins that doesn't centralize the expenditure of the resource to a designated set of people (as in an ICO). So in that respect, the waste of expenditure on electricity is justified by the lack of centralization of the resources expended. Also instant distributions (ICOs and coin drops) are antithetical to developing a critical mass and a successful coin (Ethereum avoidedslightly mitigated this by adding PoW mining distribution to follow their ICO).
And that's when the imbalance will start to take root. The early adopters (whether they care about the new tech and concepts embedded within it or not) will be expecting massive profits, and quickly.
If they don't get that, then you are in trouble. Fact. Read the boards.
Maybe I'm just too cynical.
I wish you luck.
I am expecting profit quickly too.  Why you don't like profit  What did I write in this thread that caused you to think that I don't like a token that rises in exchange price? |
|
|
|
|
|
MarketMagic
|
|
July 14, 2016, 08:50:30 AM |
|
I think you've taken on an unbeatable challenge. As long as the token is to be used by human beings, and used on this planet, there will always be winners and losers, whales and minnows, speculators and users (unless it's a non-tradeable entity so really has no value to any traders). I just don't see you breaking that fundamental human law no matter what you release.
I didn't intend to write anything in this thread that is contrary to your expectation. What did you read that indicated to you otherwise? I believe in a meritocracy, so why would you think I am not expecting winners and losers? The people you will code to treat fairly in distribution will sell their portion to the highest bidder (as soon as they can - as is their right).
I didn't mention doing a coin drop. I do not agree with giving people coins for nothing. I agree they will sell immediately. I think you need to rather understand for example the problem with instant distributions versus mined distributions: PoW and Proof-of-Burn are the only way to distribute coins that doesn't centralize the expenditure of the resource to a designated set of people (as in an ICO). So in that respect, the waste of expenditure on electricity is justified by the lack of centralization of the resources expended. Also instant distributions (ICOs and coin drops) are antithetical to developing a critical mass and a successful coin (Ethereum avoidedslightly mitigated this by adding PoW mining distribution to follow their ICO).
And that's when the imbalance will start to take root. The early adopters (whether they care about the new tech and concepts embedded within it or not) will be expecting massive profits, and quickly.
If they don't get that, then you are in trouble. Fact. Read the boards.
Maybe I'm just too cynical.
I wish you luck.
I am expecting profit quickly too. Why you don't like profit What did I write in this thread that caused you to think that I don't like a token that rises in exchange price? If you are doing all this work on crypto community behalf to better things you are entitled to be rewarded for your work.Many scammers have profited with hyped shitcoins and then when profit run with funds leaving community to try to rescue project but developers who are genuinely working at important ideas and innovations that will give better choices and services to all need to be properly funded and incentivised so yes profit is nescessary.Words do not feed the baby or pay the bills no matter how nice they sound. |
█████████████████████
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2016, 08:53:45 AM |
|
If you are doing all this work on crypto community behalf to better things you are entitled to be rewarded for your work.Many scammers have profited with hyped shitcoins and then when profit run with funds leaving community to try to rescue project but developers who are genuinely working at important ideas and innovations that will give better choices and services to all need to be properly funded and incentivised so yes profit is nescessary.Words do not feed the baby or pay the bills no matter how nice they sound.
Thank you. And you will not be disappointed. I was awake for 28 hours and had a lot of energy. So my health should be fine enough by now. Been having many days like this lately. I am busy first trying to figure out exactly what Bitshares/Steemit is up to. I want to see where they are headed before I get back on my work, because depending on whether they are doing some valid or not, it might impact my priorities and plans. |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
July 14, 2016, 08:07:38 PM |
|
I think you are just misdirecting your intellect, which seems above average, on a wild-goose chase.
Power distributions are a fact of nature, whichever system you will build, if it is valuable to humans, power over it will be unfairly distributed. If it isn't, that just means there is a power vacuum waiting to be claimed by someone with the means to.
But I suspect you know this already and you might be on some high level trolling or something.
Bottom-up organization is also an aspect of nature, because if it was not then it would require that a top-down omniscience was possible, which is impossible because it would require an non-finite speed-of-light, which would collapse the future and the past into nothingness (read two pages of my posts following the linked one in order to capture my complete reasoning). There are systems in nature which have successfully resisted top-down organization thus are not power vacuums, e.g. sexual reproduction. Their key trait is that they can't be top-down organized, because they have a local, real-time environment relevance that can't be managed nor captured by the top-down organizer. This was essentially the key fundamental insight of my famous essay about the Rise of Knowledge being that individually empowered (by the Internet) knowledge creation is individually serendipitous and accretive, not capable of being captured by top-down finance: Economic DevastationYou will probably need a week or two of studying the thread slowly.
I will be the first to admit I needed a week to fully absorb the following works of AnonyMint. The Rise of KnowledgeUnderstand Everything Fundamentally Together these are quite simply the most insightful piece of economic theory I have ever read. If the author is right and I think he is we are all in the midst of a tragedy of epic proportions. It is sad unstoppable and will devastate the lives of much of humanity. Edit: This thread is now over 100 pages and too long to realistically expect a reader to cover from start to finish. There have been multiple requests for a roadmap or guide. In response to the latest request I wrote the following roadmap. ... Satoshi's design was an attempt to create such a permissionless, trustless system, that unlike fiat and democracy, would not be captured by any top-down oligarchy. Unfortunately his design is a power vacuum that fails to power distribution of control (e.g. Bitcoin = ChinaCoin) due to economies-of-scale in profitable proof-of-work mining. I have conceived of a design for unprofitable proof-of-work mining which I believe has the necessary trait to not be a power vacuum. Note that even phenomena which are not currently a power vacuum, can later become one. CoinCube has been arguing that human reproduction is soon to come under the control of the State or Corporations due to advances in technology for reproduction such as In Vitro Fertilization and other factors. I don't completely recall his reasoning off the top of my head. |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
July 16, 2016, 04:04:04 PM
Last edit: July 16, 2016, 06:08:03 PM by iamnotback |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
klbax381
|
|
July 16, 2016, 07:53:46 PM |
|
No pow - i dont think it is possible.
POS is far more centralized than pow and it is not fair.
To make good decentralized coin we must solve 2 things:
1. Absolutely no pools. Pools can collude and make any changes into blockchain using free computation power(as we can see that happening with ethereum where 3 pools - dwarf,ether and f2pool controlling whole network). Algo must prevent pool creation. Such algo exists in SpreadCoint and Steem
2. Solo mining must not have big variance for small miners. We should solve this task and then our coin will be truly decentralized.
and of course no premine
|
|
|
|
|
|
brekyrself
|
|
July 16, 2016, 08:34:38 PM |
|
If you are doing all this work on crypto community behalf to better things you are entitled to be rewarded for your work.Many scammers have profited with hyped shitcoins and then when profit run with funds leaving community to try to rescue project but developers who are genuinely working at important ideas and innovations that will give better choices and services to all need to be properly funded and incentivised so yes profit is nescessary.Words do not feed the baby or pay the bills no matter how nice they sound.
Thank you. And you will not be disappointed. I was awake for 28 hours and had a lot of energy. So my health should be fine enough by now. Been having many days like this lately. I am busy first trying to figure out exactly what Bitshares/Steemit is up to. I want to see where they are headed before I get back on my work, because depending on whether they are doing some valid or not, it might impact my priorities and plans. Why not contact Dan? Crypto does not have to be you vs me mentality, I'm sure talented people can find common ground and work together... |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
July 16, 2016, 08:37:56 PM |
|
No pow - i dont think it is possible.
Who wrote "no PoW"? Did you read the OP: | 2. | No (Satoshi) Proof-of-work: Proof-of-work concentrates the money supply, economic profits, and control to the mining farms (esp. those with electricity subsidies). Meet your new central bank masters, the mining cartel. Permissionless, trustless attributes are lost, e.g. forks are possible. Since all the debasement ends up with the rich via mining, the system has no countervailing mechanism to recirculate the money supply to prevent it from losing its attribute as a unit-of-exchange for the broad public. Proof-of-work launches provide no funding for the core developers, unless they are accomplished with premine, instamine, stealthmine, or non-optimized proof-of-work function deceptions.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1524286.msg15342314#msg15342314 |
And the thread: |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
July 16, 2016, 09:38:18 PM
Last edit: July 16, 2016, 09:53:40 PM by iamnotback |
|
...
I am busy first trying to figure out exactly what Bitshares/Steemit is up to. I want to see where they are headed before I get back on my work, because depending on whether they are doing some valid or not, it might impact my priorities and plans.
Why not contact Dan? Crypto does not have to be you vs me mentality, I'm sure talented people can find common ground and work together... I wrote about that: | [1] | Dan's development group does have considerable coding production. And they have produced functional block chains, functional market driven asset pegs, apparently a functional decentralized exchange, and a DPoS innovation that has some better performance characteristics as compared to Peercoin's PoS. Frankly if they had my design skills matched with their coding production, in an ideal synergy great things could be accomplished. But unfortunately when I tried to discuss with Dan in these forums in 2013, I realized he was incorrigible. Even Charles found that out the hard way. The Mythical Man Month makes is difficult enough to get coding done when the developers are philosophically in sync, but if the developers are disagreeing over fundamental concepts such a PoS versus PoW, then working together would be a clusterfuck of arguments. This is why I haven't bothered to pursue working with them.They are headstrong young guys who want to try their own experiments. They have more raw coding resources at their disposal right now than I do. I am also stubborn about the principles of design that I think I know are valid. So it would pointless for me to work with them. I thought about it last year, then I realized "Just no".
But coding production does not equal success. Just go ask all the startups that have failed. Most startups fail, because getting all those decisions economically, marketing, psychologically, and technologically correct is difficult and requires expertise and experience. |
smooth may I ask what is the incentive for you to promote steem? Are you now affiliated with the Larimers? It is bizarre given when we first spoke about the state-of-altcoins some many moons ago in 2015, and I had stated that maybe Bitshares and Dan Larimer were credible and you tried to convince me that their mcap was all manipulation and to discourage me from taking them seriously. Now suddenly you jump on their boat and I've noted you stated some where you were able to mine 1+% of the coins during the stealth mining phase. I respected you and followed your lead to admonish ICOs, premines, instanmines, and I would assume that would include stealthmining launches. But in the end, all this did was mess up my own degrees-of-freedom to make my project come to fruition because I was trying to bend over backwards to find a way to fit into that impossible set of requirements. And now after all that, it ends up you don't even follow your own ethics. Hey I am happy with letting the altcoin market be free of Sheriffs. So more power to your newly discovered ethics. I just feel slightly jaded for receiving bad advice from you. I am sorry to bring this out in public, and I must presume you have a good explanation. So I'll await to read your take on this. Thanks. Edit: more discussion: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1513252.msg15226165#msg15226165Basically I am thinking that Dan and I would argue about everything and that he wants to always be in control. I think he would take my ideas and then kick me out of the project, same as he did to Charles. Also I do not like the type of design decisions Dan makes. For example, the decision to use a quadratic weighting in Steem was done purposefully to cause users to do more work than they would be compensated for. This was a conscious decision to cheat the users. That sort of ethics does not belong in s/w from my perspective. I want to do something to help the users. He is thinking the ends justify the means, but even his expected ends appears to me to be a miscalculation. |
|
|
|
|
|
brekyrself
|
|
July 16, 2016, 10:00:34 PM |
|
I will read the post again later with your links however:
A simple conversation with him would be worth MUCH more compared to arguing with the trolls on here. Time is a limited commodity, make the best use of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
July 16, 2016, 10:07:08 PM |
|
I will read the post again later with your links however:
A simple conversation with him would be worth MUCH more compared to arguing with the trolls on here. Time is a limited commodity, make the best use of it.
Unfortunately or not, I know inside info of what went down during Charles' ouster that would make it nearly impossible for me to trust Dan's word. I will not repeat that information to anyone, nor allude to its content. I will not mention it again. I'm almost tempted to pick up the phone, but I've never had something like that work out well. All my successes have come from my programming keyboard, not from my mouth. He doesn't need me. Why should he want to give me a large role. They are busy on Steemit. I should not interrupt their focus. Are they the only people worthy to collaborate with. I hope not. |
|
|
|
|
|
BigSirko
|
|
July 16, 2016, 10:16:00 PM |
|
I will read the post again later with your links however:
A simple conversation with him would be worth MUCH more compared to arguing with the trolls on here. Time is a limited commodity, make the best use of it.
Unfortunately or not, I know inside info of what went down during Charles' ouster that would make it nearly impossible for me to trust Dan's word. I will not repeat that information to anyone, nor allude to its content. I will not mention it again. I'm almost tempted to pick up the phone, but I've never had something like that work out well. All my successes have come from my programming keyboard, not from my mouth. He doesn't need me. Why should he want to give me a large role. They are busy on Steemit. I should not interrupt their focus. Are they the only people worthy to collaborate with. I hope not. No offense brah but you're sounding so beta. |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
July 16, 2016, 10:18:46 PM |
|
I will read the post again later with your links however:
A simple conversation with him would be worth MUCH more compared to arguing with the trolls on here. Time is a limited commodity, make the best use of it.
Unfortunately or not, I know inside info of what went down during Charles' ouster that would make it nearly impossible for me to trust Dan's word. I will not repeat that information to anyone, nor allude to its content. I will not mention it again. I'm almost tempted to pick up the phone, but I've never had something like that work out well. All my successes have come from my programming keyboard, not from my mouth. He doesn't need me. Why should he want to give me a large role. They are busy on Steemit. I should not interrupt their focus. Are they the only people worthy to collaborate with. I hope not. No offense brah but you're sounding so beta. I am probably beta w.r.t. to this at this current juncture. Not because I think Steemit will succeed (well I am still waiting to confirm the adoption data to make a final determination on that stance). If I am alpha w.r.t. this, you won't be reading any words from me. I expect that troll kiklo to come into this thread since I locked the other thread. So unfortunately I am locking this thread for now. |
|
|
|
|
|
iamnotback (OP)
|
|
July 31, 2016, 05:29:22 AM |
|
Clarification about the OP: ... think Anonymint has painted himself into a corner here with the whole "you can never fork the chain" mentality. If he actually attempts to create some social network coin like this, he's going to forget to cover numerous variables like the example I just stated. He'll then end up forking probably dozens of times to fix them. Or you'd just have to sit back and observe Steem for something like a year to see what works, but by that time, Larimer might have already forked Steem 9000 times into something that works good.
I am confident you have access to a dictionary, so your bolded phrase (emphasis added by myself) is inapplicable. i·de·al
īˈdē(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: ideal
1.
satisfying one's conception of what is perfect; most suitable.
2.
existing only in the imagination; desirable or perfect but not likely to become a reality.
noun
noun: ideal; plural noun: ideals
1.
a person or thing regarded as perfect. I was referring to IDEALS to shoot for (not a guarantee those IDEALS can be achieved in every case) and my points there were more focused on not forking w.r.t. to reverting history especially money matters such as the rearranging the balances of a crypto-currency. The ALL CAPS word "IDEALS" is the first word in the subject of that thread. Complex voting and content publishing on-the-blockchain game theory wasn't even in my mind when I started the above linked thread. |
|
|
|
|
|
