Bitcoin Forum
May 17, 2022, 03:41:43 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 23.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 [47] 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 ... 129 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Economic Totalitarianism  (Read 345642 times)
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 07:45:38 AM
 #921

Pls no more talking about my work in this thread. That is what private messages are for. Thanks.

1652802103
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1652802103

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1652802103
Reply with quote  #2

1652802103
Report to moderator
1652802103
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1652802103

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1652802103
Reply with quote  #2

1652802103
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
username18333
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 250


Knowledge could but approximate existence.


View Profile WWW
August 15, 2015, 07:46:31 AM
 #922

New coin? When well be started? Any link?

PM TPTB_need_war to find that information.

Escape the plutocrats’ zanpakutō, Flower in the Mirror, Moon on the Water: brave “the ascent which is rough and steep” (Plato).
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 01:23:35 PM
Last edit: August 15, 2015, 02:23:20 PM by TPTB_need_war
 #923

What I see people essentially saying in this thread is that Bitcoin is autonomous. They can get access to it, spend as anonymously as they take the care to obscure their IP address, and use it without any permission or without obtaining any account with some authority. In short, permission-less commerce (do what you like, no big brother with his dick up your ass!). Most of the terms above fall under the "autonomy" umbrella taxonomy.

In my case, I don't have a utility bill matching my current address because I rent. And so I can't comply with the asinine Patriot Act KYC identification requirements that exchanges and financial institutions impose. So no worries, I just go place a buy order on localbitcoins, then go deposit some cash in a local bank and I get the BTC released an hour or so later.

Later as the bankrupted Western governments start to limit more how much money you can get out per day from your ATM account (e.g. Greece is an example of what is coming to every Western nation because they are all broke), then if you are holding crypto-currency you can sidestep these restrictions.

However, do note that Bitcoin is not reliably anonymous (unless you are for example connecting via a unregistered, public WiFi connection) as your IP address can be traced back to your identity (and Tor and I2P don't really stop the national security agencies from tracking your identity on the block chain) and so the authorities will one day in the future be clawing back against you prosecuting you for violating their regulations by using Bitcoin.

This is why I (formerly username AnonyMint since 2013) support the development of altcoins with more robust built in anonymity. Many users will not appreciate the need for this until later when so many Bitcoin users are being busted for past activity all stored on the block chain.

Ease of access, constant availability and low transaction fees are my 3 picks. This is where Bitcoin would beat by far Fiat and this is why Bitcoin will survive and be competitive in the future. My money should be there when I want it and I should be able to spend it when and how I want it.

Autonomy again. Thanks.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 05:55:17 PM
Last edit: August 15, 2015, 06:07:05 PM by TPTB_need_war
 #924


This chart is so sad. What happen in the past that now we have so low compensation for increased productivity? World supposed to be evolving, not devolving.
Exactly this problem is touching every major economy. And China is trying to keep it that way.

Let's fight back and win.

I use bitcoin because I want to earn anonymously online. It's also a good investment and I like low transaction fees of bitcoin

I love you because I am formerly AnonyMint and since 2013 my goal has been to add more anonymity to cryptoland. Thanks for validating my thesis about a coming glorious, anonymous Knowledge Age.

What I see people essentially saying in this thread is that Bitcoin is autonomous. They can get access to it, spend as anonymously as they take the care to obscure their IP address, and use it without any permission or without obtaining any account with some authority. In short, permission-less commerce (do what you like, no big brother with his dick up your ass!). Most of the terms above fall under the "autonomy" umbrella taxonomy.

In my case, I don't have a utility bill matching my current address because I rent. And so I can't comply with the asinine Patriot Act KYC identification requirements that exchanges and financial institutions impose. So no worries, I just go place a buy order on localbitcoins, then go deposit some cash in a local bank and I get the BTC released an hour or so later.

Later as the bankrupted Western governments start to limit more how much money you can get out per day from your ATM account (e.g. Greece is an example of what is coming to every Western nation because they are all broke), then if you are holding crypto-currency you can sidestep these restrictions.

However, do note that Bitcoin is not reliably anonymous (unless you are for example connecting via a unregistered, public WiFi connection) as your IP address can be traced back to your identity (and Tor and I2P don't really stop the national security agencies from tracking your identity on the block chain) and so the authorities will one day in the future be clawing back against you prosecuting you for violating their regulations by using Bitcoin.

This is why I (formerly username AnonyMint since 2013) support the development of altcoins with more robust built in anonymity. Many users will not appreciate the need for this until later when so many Bitcoin users are being busted for past activity all stored on the block chain.

You should understand what this productivity is made of. If we substitute one group of machines with more productive ones, why should the increase in productivity be reflected in the increase in wages?

Because knowledge creation is where all the value is added. The manufacturing is headed towards a zero margin economy.

But knowledge creation is not the same as non-supervisory compensation, right?

Agree. Knowledge creation is being held back to some extent by a $227 trillion global debt funded socialism turning into totalitarianism as a way to prevent adjustment from the Industrial Age and force an NWO eugenics outcome so the old world fat cats can retain power, because the Knowledge Age can't be financed with usury so those bastards are trying to kill it, but they will fail.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 06:01:45 PM
 #925

Traitor! We must replace this shit company. Not with politics. With superior code.

The plutocrats are pushing for their NWO electronic (digital) currency. Yet another clue of where GavinCoin is headed.

http://blog.blockchain.com/2015/08/08/bitcoin-news-for-the-week-of-8315/

Quote
Blockchain CEO Peter Smith traveled to SE Asia with British Prime Minister David Cameron and other fintech executives to speak with senior regulators, bank CEOs, and telecommunications executives about the future we are working towards as an industry. - See more at: http://blog.blockchain.com/#sthash.ggmqlh9f.dpuf


OROBTC
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1369



View Profile
August 15, 2015, 07:27:10 PM
 #926

...

TPTB

Now that's just NASTY..., posting pictures like that on "my" thread!

Wink

But, point taken.  blockchain.info ought to not be so cozy with a .gov Chieftain.  Might make blockchain.info wallet users wonder how safe their info and BTC is.....
minor-transgression
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 263
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 09:11:10 PM
 #927

"Gold goes into hiding only if the private sector has enough power to avoid the government and continue commerce else where. "
"No hyperinflation, just deflation."

I fink u freeky. I really cannot get inside your head on this, and I
doubt I have the right to even try to get you to see things differently.
For the record, I'll clarify a few loose ends.

a)i. I recall a legend, maybe King Croesus or King Midas. He had got himself
into financial trouble. He solved the problem by asking his creditors to
bring with them the value of his debts in gold coin. When the creditors arrived
the gold was taken from them and the values of the coins over-stamped. What was
"1" became "2". What happened afterwards was not mentioned. I will explain
the relevance of this below.

b)i. Imperial Rome had a problem with debasement of its silver coinage.
b)ii. Beginning from around 225AD onwards, (and earlier, but a separate problem)
normal commerce began to be replaced by barter, and taxation was somewhat
replaced by appropriation. After an attempt at reform in 275AD matters began
to really fall apart from 300AD onwards.
b)iii. Around this time, by edict and by practice, a gold bar was worth more
than the equivalent weight in gold coins, causing the government to demand that
dues be part paid in gold.(see Prodromodidis - Nr85 p19) At that point Rome
was rejecting the legitimacy of its own "silver" currency in part, arguably a
default on its debts.
I am seeking here to distinguish between actions of the State on the one hand
to control inflation, and on the other to manage its financial obligations.
"A measure of Egyptian wheat, for example, which sold for seven to eight
drachmaes in the second century now sold for 120,000 drachmaes." Bartlett,
(incorrectly) referencing the end of the third century.
(see https://mises.org/library/price-fixing-ancient-rome for better work
on dates, their economics are at best questionable)
b)iv. Caesar crossed the Rubicon in 49BC, entered Rome, and seized the Roman
Treasury held in the Temple of Saturn. (Anyone else noticed that banks try to
emulate our folk-memory of Temples?) Temples seemed to be relatively safe from
pillage by successive Emperors, hence by the time Diocletian became Emperor,
gold had gravitated there. Hence there was a financial incentive for a new
Emperor to convert to Christianity. A conversion that would give Constantine
free rein (excuse the pun) to plunder pagan resources, something to consider
when thinking about the events 312-335AD, and the founding of the Byzantine
empire.

c)i. A notable omission from your text was mention of the 1933 executive order
criminalising "the possession of monetary gold by any individual, partnership,
association or corporation" within the continental United States. This appears
to be a modern version of a)i above. It may be more complicated than it
already appears. Allegedly in 1932 $1,233,844,000.00  of foreign gold left the
USA, and in 1937 $1,139,672,000.00 returned. (World Almanac).
Complications aside, this was a transfer of power from the citizen to the State,
or more precisely, from the citizens to the banks. I have not read up on this
criminalisation of ownership to make any further comment, but it would seem to
fall into the class of gold in hiding.

As I said above, I am not trying to change or influence thinking, I find I
cannot see the world through TPTBNW's eyes sometimes, and I find that intriguing.

Also, this is not advice on gold as an investment. DYOR.

And a couple of separate matters:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/middle_ages/henryii_law_01.shtml
"Thirdly, a frequently used test of the existence of the state is that it
should have a monopoly of legitimate violence. In the middle ages - as in
all societies - law was only one method of resolving disputes."
See also Brehon Law - the definition of "legitimate" can be surprisingly
flexible. It seems more a method of classification than a definition.

@TPTBNW - congratulations on your milestone.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 09:47:43 PM
Last edit: August 16, 2015, 07:12:43 AM by TPTB_need_war
 #928

On Aug 15, 2015, Satoshi Nakamoto publicly asked (me) to fix Bitcoin:


Quote from: Satoshi Nakamoto
However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions.  For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network.  Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution.  I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.



BTC did not move up much with gold's move up to $1117. Gold paused and BTC made a lower low (relative to recent). It appears BTC does not want to rally with gold. Thus is looking very weak.

Satoshi even spoke out on Aug 15 about the danger of GavinCoin. (Either the real Satoshi posted or someone with enough hacking skills or influence posted from his former email account, thus either way someone is expending precious resource to make a point about how serious this is)

I am not sure what to make of all this, except that overall gold and BTC are correlated and that both are headed for extreme lows by Spring 2016 (based on Armstrong's gold low prediction).

darlidada
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 723
Merit: 503


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 10:32:28 PM
 #929

On Aug 15, 2015, Satoshi Nakamoto publicly asked (me) to fix Bitcoin:


Quote from: Satoshi Nakamoto
However I acknowledge that a lot has changed since that time, and new knowledge has been gained that contradicts some of my early opinions.  For example I didn't anticipate pooled mining and its effects on the security of the network.  Making Bitcoin a competitive monetary system while also preserving its security properties is not a trivial problem, and we should take more time to come up with a robust solution.  I suspect we need a better incentive for users to run nodes instead of relying solely on altruism.

I find it stranges he doesnt mention the need for anonymity
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 10:47:06 PM
 #930

I find it stranges he doesnt mention the need for anonymity

I don't. He was specifically focused on the block size debate.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 15, 2015, 10:51:59 PM
 #931


During the lost era where physical trade was the economy, precious metals represented physical value.

No one is measuring knowledge value in units of precious metals.

Gold simply does not back anything any more because it no longer correlates to the intangible knowledge that is valuable in an era where knowledge moves the economy.

Back your lost era, knowledge was less important than land ownership, number of head of cattle, etc..

Also we are in era where digital reach is ubiquitous geographically, thus there is no place to hide from the fact that governments want to be able to tax and physical gold as untraceable cash would prevent them from doing so. Thus governments will fight gold as cash and besides for the reasons I stated above, gold is not a representation of value any more in the knowledge age.

Gold is hanging on because the physical industrial age is not quite dead yet. But gold is fading fast.

The physical economy is fading away in relative value (relative to knowledge creation value). It won't too long from now that physically manufactured items will be nearly free.

statdude
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1000


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 03:16:38 AM
 #932


So thus the proposed ICO method has been abandoned. There is an obviously simple solution. I don't think it is necessary to state it.


This is probably a dumb question, but I would be interested in hearing the solution you propose. I read through the last few pages and didn't see this clarified.

▄█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▄
█ ███████████████████████ █
█ █████     █ ▀██████████ █
█ █████     █   ▀████████ █
█ █████  ██ █     ▀██████ █

█ █████  ▀▀ █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█████ █
█ █████  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  █████ █
█ █████  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  █████ █
█ █████  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  █████ █
█ █████  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  █████ █
█ █████             █████ █
█ ███████████████████████ █
▀█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▀
  Website
    Twitter
      Gitlab
      Reddit
    Telegram
Whitepaper
  ▄█▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀█▄
█ ███████████████████████ █
█ ███████████████████████ █
█ ███▄    ███████▀   ▄███ █
█ ████▌    █████▀    ████ █
█ ████▌     ███▀     ████ █
█ ████▌▐█    █▀ █    ████ █
█ ████▌▐██     ██    ████ █
█ ████▌▐███   ███    ████ █
█ ███▀  ▀███ ███▀    ▀███ █
█ ███████████████████████ █
█ ███████████████████████ █
▀█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▀
vokain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1010


View Profile WWW
August 16, 2015, 04:07:54 AM
 #933


So thus the proposed ICO method has been abandoned. There is an obviously simple solution. I don't think it is necessary to state it.


This is probably a dumb question, but I would be interested in hearing the solution you propose. I read through the last few pages and didn't see this clarified.

That is not a dumb question   Cheesy
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 05:32:47 AM
Last edit: August 16, 2015, 06:51:43 AM by TPTB_need_war
 #934

Trickle ICO meaning sell coins on an open exchange only when you have some development you need to fund and then document where the raised funds were spent to. This thread is supposed to be about solutions, so I guess this is not too far off topic. Also when developers know there is this large body of capital ready to fund, they should hopefully be knocking on the door, especially with the global economic collapse (renewed from and worse than 2008) just around the corner.

There is an issue of follow through. Ways to deal with that are pay-for-performance, not funding repeat offenders, and prefer funding experts in their demonstrated fields.

In that way investors know their funds are not being spent on hardware and electricity and they also know there is a transparent process and the controlling group isn't hoarding coins. Hoarding is anti-distribution which is anti-currency. Power law distribution of wealth means some investors will try to accumulate. Coins need sufficiently wide distribution to drive its use as a currency while also protecting the store-of-value (and appreciation of value as adoption increases). Realize that the top altcoins have market caps roughly less than $100 million. I doubt Ethereum will hold its market cap, thus really most altcoins (Litecoin and Ripple excepted) are less than $20 million market cap. And there is a $40 trillion global economy out there. The market is wide open for growth. Apparently the ways it has been done isn't working well. In private, I have referred to a "fair launch" as sort of a circle jerk. It sounds nice but using that as a marketing crutch does not grow the coin's market cap to $1 billion and beyond. Of course, the coin should try to show it was fairly launched, but that can't be its main claim to fame. All the endless tit-for-tat verbiage between coin fanboys is useless noise. Instead I posit a coin needs to open new markets and to do that it could fund developments to kickstart its ecosystem imparting sufficient economy-of-scale (remember currency needs widespread adoption before it can get over the hump between useless and utility needed to gain momentum).

OTOH, this would make the coin somewhat centralized during the extended period in which that resource has to be managed (this was the reason I originally rejected trickle ICO but now I've returned to it). And management of a large resources can lead to politics and even attempts to capture the resource. So the tradeoff is moving the trickle ICO along fast enough. It is difficult to find qualified, trustable people to fund and also difficult to find trustworthy people to form a controlling group that won't do evil.

The goal for a coin launched this way would be to get the trickle ICO completed and get the funds dispersed into needed developments asap, and then have the coin running decentralized on auto-pilot. The best intentions ('plans') of mice and men.  Roll Eyes

P.S. It is also difficult to find team members who will ignore trolls and not create wars in Bitcointalk, but that is a separate issue to address. I've been guilty of that myself (yet you will notice I rarely go on and on and on endlessly with a troll so at least I contained myself that way .... e.g. I made peace with Cypherdoc and left his thread ... this is because I want results and I notice when I am wasting my time and stop).

P.S.S. The four letter domain name (not fuck.cum nor shit.con, lol) was not lost.  Grin

I hope this is the last public discussion of my work from me. Again I am available for private messages (at least for now).




Edit: We as a community are fighting for a mutual goal against a very well funded TPTB who control mass media and thus have annointed Bitcoin because they know they can control Bitcoin via its centralized mining and lack of anonymity. I posit we are wasting our resources by throwing our money into hardware and electricity when we could be using our resources to fund the developments for economies-of-scale needed to overcome.

Btw, I am not referring to the consensus algorithm above but rather launch distribution and network security is a related factor but I have an innovation on that. I reiterated my thoughts about proof-of-stake recently here:

Proof-of-Work vs. Proof-of-Stake

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 06:13:32 AM
Last edit: August 16, 2015, 06:38:33 AM by TPTB_need_war
 #935


Follow up:

Gold simply does not back anything any more because it no longer correlates to the intangible knowledge that is valuable in an era where knowledge moves the economy.

Semi-/precious metals and stones (e.g., rose, white, and yellow gold and diamonds) are "standard of [metallurgical and geological, respectively] beauty," and beautifulness is "intangible knowledge" (TPTB_need_war) (i.e., knowledge).

And a miniscule (and shriveling in terms of relative growth) portion of the intangible knowledge economy.

Relative size is an important concept in economics, as well as scalability and relative rates of growth.

And that 'beauty' attribute is not the attribute that historically imparted most of the value to gold. Rather gold was a more rare, compact, fungible, durable physical representation of physical value in a physical economy where trade of physical objects was the major aspect of the economy. It was like packing a bunch of land into a compact, transportable form. Whereas if you review my essay linked from the opening post of this thread, I argue that knowledge creation is accretive, spontaneous, and the property of the creator, thus it can't be tied to money or physical value. Knowledge creation is like an end-to-end principled network in that middle men (Theory of the Firm) can only obstruct it.

generalizethis
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1035


Facts are more efficient than fud


View Profile WWW
August 16, 2015, 06:42:06 AM
 #936


Follow up:

Gold simply does not back anything any more because it no longer correlates to the intangible knowledge that is valuable in an era where knowledge moves the economy.

Semi-/precious metals and stones (e.g., rose, white, and yellow gold and diamonds) are "standard of [metallurgical and geological, respectively] beauty," and beautifulness is "intangible knowledge" (TPTB_need_war) (i.e., knowledge).

A miniscule (and shriveling in terms of relative growth) portion of the intangible knowledge economy.

Relative size is an important concept in economics, as well as scalability and relative rates of growth.

And that 'beauty' attribute is not the attribute that historically imparted most of the value to gold. Rather gold was a more rare, compact, fungible, durable physical representation of physical value in a physical economy where trade of physical objects was the major aspect of the economy. It was like packing a bunch of land into a compact, transportable form. Whereas if you review my essay linked from the opening post of this thread, I argue that knowledge creation is accretive, spontaneous, and the property of the creator, thus it can't be tied to money or physical value. Knowledge creation is like an end-to-end principled network in that middle men (Theory of the Firm) can only obstruct it.

ATM CryptoKingdom gold may make more sense than actual gold. VR worlds are on the rise as the physical world can't hide its costs in blood, sweat and tears. Some woman dangles a diamond in front of me and all I see is a CIA propped warlord, death squads and Nicholas Cage asking, "How do we arm the other 11?"

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 06:56:34 AM
 #937


ATM CryptoKingdom gold may make more sense than actual gold. VR worlds are on the rise as the physical world can't hide its costs in blood, sweat and tears. Some woman dangles a diamond in front of me and all I see is a CIA propped warlord, death squads and Nicholas Cage asking, "How do we arm the other 11?"

Popular game currencies have threatened the State enough that overtly totalitarian States had to outlaw them:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2009/06/china-outlaws-use-of-virtual-currency-for-real-world-items/

And insidiously totalitarian States in the West have effectively outlawed them by forcing anyone who exchanges fiat for them to be registered money services businesses under the AML clauses in the asinine oxymoronically named Patriot Act.

So yes I agree virtual game currencies have shown promise but so far they lacked resiliency against the State (anonymity, decentralized exchanges, decentralized consensus that can't become centralized, decentralized scaling, etc).

macsga
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1002


Strange, yet attractive.


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 08:45:24 AM
 #938


ATM CryptoKingdom gold may make more sense than actual gold. VR worlds are on the rise as the physical world can't hide its costs in blood, sweat and tears. Some woman dangles a diamond in front of me and all I see is a CIA propped warlord, death squads and Nicholas Cage asking, "How do we arm the other 11?"

Popular game currencies have threatened the State enough that overtly totalitarian States had to outlaw them:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2009/06/china-outlaws-use-of-virtual-currency-for-real-world-items/

And insidiously totalitarian States in the West have effectively outlawed them by forcing anyone who exchanges fiat for them to be registered money services businesses under the AML clauses in the asinine oxymoronically named Patriot Act.

So yes I agree virtual game currencies have shown promise but so far they lacked resiliency against the State (anonymity, decentralized exchanges, decentralized consensus that can't become centralized, decentralized scaling, etc).

IMHO, TPTB will always have the excuse to get their hands into the "next gen" tech of currency. Anonymity, decentralization etc can be achieved when -atleast- one of the cryptocurrencies you can buy/sell with the rest has those characteristics. -IF it's a free market, and that's a great IF- the people will always come around problems in order to get their job done. What will they have to face, in order to achieve it, is a whole different story...

So, in any case, those ideas are not dead; and frankly they won't be dead when at least one person has the ability and will to do otherwise. It has happened before many times throughout history. I think, there's no reason at all for not happening again in cryptoworld.

Chaos could be a form of intelligence we cannot yet understand its complexity.
generalizethis
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1035


Facts are more efficient than fud


View Profile WWW
August 16, 2015, 09:02:50 AM
 #939


ATM CryptoKingdom gold may make more sense than actual gold. VR worlds are on the rise as the physical world can't hide its costs in blood, sweat and tears. Some woman dangles a diamond in front of me and all I see is a CIA propped warlord, death squads and Nicholas Cage asking, "How do we arm the other 11?"

Popular game currencies have threatened the State enough that overtly totalitarian States had to outlaw them:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2009/06/china-outlaws-use-of-virtual-currency-for-real-world-items/

And insidiously totalitarian States in the West have effectively outlawed them by forcing anyone who exchanges fiat for them to be registered money services businesses under the AML clauses in the asinine oxymoronically named Patriot Act.

So yes I agree virtual game currencies have shown promise but so far they lacked resiliency against the State (anonymity, decentralized exchanges, decentralized consensus that can't become centralized, decentralized scaling, etc).

IMHO, TPTB will always have the excuse to get their hands into the "next gen" tech of currency. Anonymity, decentralization etc can be achieved when -atleast- one of the cryptocurrencies you can buy/sell with the rest has those characteristics. -IF it's a free market, and that's a great IF- the people will always come around problems in order to get their job done. What will they have to face, in order to achieve it, is a whole different story...

So, in any case, those ideas are not dead; and frankly they won't be dead when at least one person has the ability and will to do otherwise. It has happened before many times throughout history. I think, there's no reason at all for not happening again in cryptoworld.

If you look at designer drugs, you will see the blueprint. Every time the government has one controlled, the labs (always a few moves ahead) just release the next one. One coin to rule them all is about a good a plan as one drug to rule them all. Let the mother fucker burn--survival doesn't belong to the strongest (network), the fastest (confirmation-time) or the smartest (contracts), it belongs to the most adaptable.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 16, 2015, 12:13:29 PM
Last edit: August 16, 2015, 12:56:19 PM by TPTB_need_war
 #940

Once you put unbreakable crypto technologies out in open source, TPTB can possibly filter one protocol but a 1000 others will sprout, because where there is a demand supply will go. (And with steganography and perhaps alternative wireless networks, they may not be able to filter)

The smart fork would enable spending the coins from the destroyed protocol into the new protocol, so it is a continuation of the preexisting value and distribution. TPTB can then play Whack-A-Mole.



The more the government stomps on commerce, the more demand for those technologies.

I don't think they can break the core math quickly. And we'll always be driving ahead towards stronger math. Our community hasn't been organized. We haven't been funding mathematicians.

My goal was to get the snowball rolling downhill. I sense the past tense is accurate now.

Edit: TPTB rely on something not being too popular or co-opting the popular movements. How can they convince the people they are stomping on to prefer their walled gardens and jails? The count on being able to divide-and-conquer or pick off a few from the herd at a time, so the rest of the herd doesn't react. But if you do decentralization very well, then any individual can effect his own choice. One problem with Bitcoin from my view, has been we rely so heavily on network miners being not co-opted and thus the battle over BitcoinXT (aka GavinCoin).

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 [47] 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 ... 129 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!