Economic Totalitarianism

[trollercoaster]

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/libe/dv/11_revframework_statute_/11_revframework_statute_en.pdf

[1713928702]

1713928702

[1713928702]

1713928702

[1713928702]

1713928702

[1713928702]

1713928702

[1713928702]

1713928702

[TPTB_need_war]

Hey all. I haven't been able to read the threads lately.

Hope you all have been keeping up with Armstrong's blog. I hadn't read it for past months.

I have been very busy. Hopefully I will have something to show for this not too many months from now and make you all proud.

OROBTC I don't have any spare time right now to organize any extraneous things. I will get with you on that after completing my major undertaking.

Hope 2016 is the year we make some big progress. Apologies I have been so slow.

trollercoaster who is that homeless man you put on your avatar, lol. Are you teasing me about my future.  

The Australian Tax Office (ATO) has applied for access to everything to hunt for money. They want access to phone calls, emails, posts, and SMS text messages. We have verified this with several sources. Like Rome, Australia is cannibalizing its own economy. They will succeed in destroying Western civilization and when the G20 tracks every penny in 2017, the 2017-2020 period will look like a cliff on a global scale.

Keep in mind that the bail-in becomes a formal European position on January 1, 2016, and 2017 is when G20 begins swapping info on everyone everywhere. Capital will be herded and the smart money will begin to position itself once it realizes that it is time to get off the grid.

Another evidence that instant microtransactions are potentially a huge market:

The prosecution claimed that Dotcom used a large portion of its revenues to reward users, drawing more traffic to the platform by publishing copyright-infringing material. The site made $25 million from advertisers, while its main source of revenue were small payments from the millions of users, which totaled some $150 million.

Appears the global government is going to succeed in prosecuting Kim Dotcom.

We need decentralized block chains.

[THX 1138]

Hey all. I haven't been able to read the threads lately.
Hope you all have been keeping up with Armstrong's blog. I hadn't read it for past months.

I have been very busy. Hopefully I will have something to show for this not too many months from now and make you all proud.

OROBTC I don't have any spare time right now to organize any extraneous things. I will get with you on that after completing my major undertaking.

Hope 2016 is the year we make some big progress. Apologies I have been so slow.

Have been keeping an eye on your recent activities with interest. Hope it works out, whichever path you find yourself on.

Appears the global government is going to succeed in prosecuting Kim Dotcom...

So perhaps looking less likely MegaNet will ever get off the ground, if they have their way.

***

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/the-new-way-police-are-surveilling-you-calculating-your-threat-score/2016/01/10/e42bccac-8e15-11e5-baf4-bdf37355da0c_story.html

"...The program scoured billions of data points, including arrest reports, property records, commercial databases, deep Web searches and the man’s social- media postings. It calculated his threat level as the highest of three color-coded scores: a bright red warning..."

[OROBTC]

...

You just keep on doing your thing, TPTB, we'll still be around when you are back.

*   *   *

The latest thing re totalitarianism I have been mulling is if .gov incompetence is greater or less than public incompetence (mix that in with indifference, oooh, I know: TOXIC!).  If .gov is pretty incompetent (vs. the public), then great!  If the public stays asleep, well...

They keep reaching though.  It will not be pretty in the next few years.

[TPTB_need_war]

Have been keeping an eye on your recent activities with interest. Hope it works out, whichever path you find yourself on.

Appears I finally have the very viable design. I believe I am the only person who has a viable significant improvement to Bitcoin in terms of the decentralization, permissionless attribute. How valuable is that you think.

Reading my newest thread in Altcoin Discussion reveals that none of the other designs improve upon Bitcoin in terms of the decentralization, permissionless attribute. And I strongly expect that designs without a block chain (Iota and eMunie) will be proven fundamentally flawed. Just today I got started on finding the flaws I expect in Iota (earlier than I intended because I was being pressured) and posted about a candidate flaw. Sucks I have to be the bad guy. But seems nobody else does these sort of comprehensive analyses.

Note I have stopped working on anonymity for the time being. So Monero will be the leader in that space for the foreseeable future. I will come back to it if ever have a successful coin, then can investigate adding Zerocash which would be far superior.

But the big challenge after implementation (which isn't completed) is marketing and distribution.

So perhaps looking less likely MegaNet will ever get off the ground, if they have their way.

There are many alternatives vying to offer that:

http://thehackernews.com/2015/02/meganet-decentralized-internet.html

The fundamental problem with all current attempts is economics. Once the user can pay a microtransaction to access data, then these decentralized storage mechanism will have funding and won't have to do some silly trading of bandwidth. Once you make something profitable, people will adopt it like crazy. It is not economically enticing to just run it for no profit as a sharing mechanism.

So again, my work on decentralized permissionless, instant microtransactions blockchain is critical for advancing to the next step on everything we need to fight the totalitarianism on the internet.

[THX 1138]

TPTB
While most of the detailed technical explanations you've outlined elsewhere are admittedly beyond my comprehension, as a layman, I like to believe I can appreciate the broad thrust of what you are aiming for. It is encouraging that you have found a fresh approach after the rather dispiriting news of the other day.

I'm sure many on here value being kept up to date with the project, but the continual battles you face with certain dogged egos must often make you weigh up the cost-benefit of these forays into the forum! But cheers anyway for taking the time to dip in and update us.

As OROBTC says above, keep doing your thing.

[TPTB_need_war]

The key design fact is keeping the mining unprofitable. With that, the users will always be in control. Even if masses are dumb, we could always fork off into our chain. It keeps the fight alive and doesn't allow the government to keep us in one chain due to them controlling all the hashrate.

Then I add some things to that to achieve instant, microtransactions within a block chain. So it isn't so much different than Satoshi's design. Just an evolution but apparently with revolutionary improvement. We will see. I will write layman's explanations if I get it to fruition.

Is Bitcoin really still at $450? I am afraid to google the price. I still have some I need to sell and I thought I missed the boat. (I know I can google in 1 second but I am afraid to because that is my last funding source).

[trollercoaster]

wew just became aware of that thread, I have some reading to catch up on later.

I hope you do end up releasing something, it might spawn a few hundred or thousands of copycats, maybe improvements of your design.

While they are busy attacking the grandfather bitcoin over the next couple of years, everything we can throw on the G20's plate to give those scum extra headaches is a step in the right direction.

[TPTB_need_war]

I just killed Iota. Here is the layman explanation:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13533261#msg13533261

[suda123]

I just killed Iota. Here is the layman explanation:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13533261#msg13533261

[Come-from-Beyond]

I just killed Iota. Here is the layman explanation:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13533261#msg13533261

I've just resurrected it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13536310#msg13536310

[devnu11]

Reading my newest thread in Altcoin Discussion reveals that none of the other designs improve upon Bitcoin in terms of the decentralization, permissionless attribute. And I strongly expect that designs without a block chain (Iota and eMunie) will be proven fundamentally flawed.

Open-transactions anyone? 

[TPTB_need_war]

Reading my newest thread in Altcoin Discussion reveals that none of the other designs improve upon Bitcoin in terms of the decentralization, permissionless attribute. And I strongly expect that designs without a block chain (Iota and eMunie) will be proven fundamentally flawed.

Open-transactions anyone?  

You are an idiot.

That is payback for the :rolling eyes:

[TPTB_need_war]

I just killed Iota. Here is the layman explanation:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13533261#msg13533261

I've just resurrected it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13536310#msg13536310

That was a rash statement on my part. Here is a more level-headed statement:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13542612#msg13542612

Btw, I didn't kill Iota. The fundamentals may (or maybe not and probably not in the short-term). That is not my fault nor decision. I stood ready to adopt their coin and stop my development work if it was sound to my expectations.

[Come-from-Beyond]

That was a rash statement on my part. Here is a more level-headed statement:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13542612#msg13542612

Btw, I didn't kill Iota. The fundamentals may (or maybe not and probably not in the short-term). That is not my fault nor decision. I stood ready to adopt their coin and stop my development work if it was sound to my expectations.

You mentioned Satoshi's security model in that post. Did you mean that model which is vulnerable to 25% of hashing power with 33% in the best conditions?

[smooth]

That was a rash statement on my part. Here is a more level-headed statement:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13542612#msg13542612

Btw, I didn't kill Iota. The fundamentals may (or maybe not and probably not in the short-term). That is not my fault nor decision. I stood ready to adopt their coin and stop my development work if it was sound to my expectations.

You mentioned Satoshi's security model in that post. Did you mean that model which is vulnerable to 25% of hashing power with 33% in the best conditions?

The difference between 25% and 50% is not really that significant anyway. With 25% you can easily acquire more hash rate to get to 50% or conspire with some other 25% to get to 50%.

Satoshi's method only achieves its strong security model with more highly fragmented mining (perhaps with the largest extant mining concentration at 5% or less, to choose a somewhat arbitrarily number), something that hasn't been achieved to date but not everyone rules out that the system could evolve in that manner in the future. (TPTB thinks it is impossible; I and others do not, necessarily.)

With numbers like >15% where investments in capacity comparable in magnitude to the amount already invested or small coalitions can easily attack the system, you can really only rely on Satoshi's secondary model, which is sort of proof-of-stakeish and not really very compelling.

[OROBTC]

That was a rash statement on my part. Here is a more level-headed statement:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13542612#msg13542612

Btw, I didn't kill Iota. The fundamentals may (or maybe not and probably not in the short-term). That is not my fault nor decision. I stood ready to adopt their coin and stop my development work if it was sound to my expectations.

You mentioned Satoshi's security model in that post. Did you mean that model which is vulnerable to 25% of hashing power with 33% in the best conditions?

The difference between 25% and 50% is not really that significant anyway. With 25% you can easily acquire more hash rate to get to 50% or conspire with some other 25% to get to 50%.

Satoshi's method only achieves its strong security model with more highly fragmented mining (perhaps with the largest extant mining concentration at 5% or less, to choose a somewhat arbitrarily number), something that hasn't been achieved to date but not everyone rules out that the system could evolve in that manner in the future. (TPTB thinks it is impossible; I and others do not, necessarily.)

With numbers like >15% where investments in capacity comparable in magnitude to the amount already invested or small coalitions can easily attack the system, you can really only rely on Satoshi's secondary model, which is sort of proof-of-stakeish and not really very compelling.

^^^

All of which is a weakness of Bitcoin, at least in the eyes of some (informed?) beginners.  Until I see BTC issues (including risks related to concentration of mining) relatively resolved in the eyes of experts, I cannot hold more than a fairly small amount in BTC (as an "investment", yes I know that investing (HODLing) BTC is perhaps not that smart).

But, there are valid reasons for many of us to HODL BTC.  Its use of moving large amounts of wealth in a quiet way to other places (even to other countries) has potentially great value.

I wait for a story of some rich Chinese person leaving their country with $1,000,000 or more in BTC...  

[smooth]

That was a rash statement on my part. Here is a more level-headed statement:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13542612#msg13542612

Btw, I didn't kill Iota. The fundamentals may (or maybe not and probably not in the short-term). That is not my fault nor decision. I stood ready to adopt their coin and stop my development work if it was sound to my expectations.

You mentioned Satoshi's security model in that post. Did you mean that model which is vulnerable to 25% of hashing power with 33% in the best conditions?

The difference between 25% and 50% is not really that significant anyway. With 25% you can easily acquire more hash rate to get to 50% or conspire with some other 25% to get to 50%.

Satoshi's method only achieves its strong security model with more highly fragmented mining (perhaps with the largest extant mining concentration at 5% or less, to choose a somewhat arbitrarily number), something that hasn't been achieved to date but not everyone rules out that the system could evolve in that manner in the future. (TPTB thinks it is impossible; I and others do not, necessarily.)

With numbers like >15% where investments in capacity comparable in magnitude to the amount already invested or small coalitions can easily attack the system, you can really only rely on Satoshi's secondary model, which is sort of proof-of-stakeish and not really very compelling.

^^^

All of which is a weakness of Bitcoin, at least in the eyes of some (informed?) beginners.  Until I see BTC issues (including risks related to concentration of mining) relatively resolved in the eyes of experts, I cannot hold more than a fairly small amount in BTC (as an "investment", yes I know that investing (HODLing) BTC is perhaps not that smart).

But, there are valid reasons for many of us to HODL BTC.  Its use of moving large amounts of wealth in a quiet way to other places (even to other countries) has potentially great value.

I wait for a story of some rich Chinese person leaving their country with $1,000,000 or more in BTC...   

My view (pure speculation with no evidence) is that Bitcoin's value is constrained by the relatively weak state of its mining infrastructure (and increasing hash rate does little to improve the situation because the main problem is concentration). If somehow we could magically and persistently disperse the mining, the value would increase significantly overnight, even with the current level of adoption (although the increased value would bring more adoption).

But as you say it is being used today for some things and is not completely worthless by any means despite being imperfect. Just quite small when measured by finance standards.

[TPTB_need_war]

That was a rash statement on my part. Here is a more level-headed statement:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319681.msg13542612#msg13542612

Btw, I didn't kill Iota. The fundamentals may (or maybe not and probably not in the short-term). That is not my fault nor decision. I stood ready to adopt their coin and stop my development work if it was sound to my expectations.

You mentioned Satoshi's security model in that post. Did you mean that model which is vulnerable to 25% of hashing power with 33% in the best conditions?

The difference between 25% and 50% is not really that significant anyway. With 25% you can easily acquire more hash rate to get to 50% or conspire with some other 25% to get to 50%.

Satoshi's method only achieves its strong security model with more highly fragmented mining (perhaps with the largest extant mining concentration at 5% or less, to choose a somewhat arbitrarily number), something that hasn't been achieved to date but not everyone rules out that the system could evolve in that manner in the future. (TPTB thinks it is impossible; I and others do not, necessarily.)

With numbers like >15% where investments in capacity comparable in magnitude to the amount already invested or small coalitions can easily attack the system, you can really only rely on Satoshi's secondary model, which is sort of proof-of-stakeish and not really very compelling.

^^^

All of which is a weakness of Bitcoin, at least in the eyes of some (informed?) beginners.  Until I see BTC issues (including risks related to concentration of mining) relatively resolved in the eyes of experts, I cannot hold more than a fairly small amount in BTC (as an "investment", yes I know that investing (HODLing) BTC is perhaps not that smart).

But, there are valid reasons for many of us to HODL BTC.  Its use of moving large amounts of wealth in a quiet way to other places (even to other countries) has potentially great value.

I wait for a story of some rich Chinese person leaving their country with $1,000,000 or more in BTC...  

My view (pure speculation with no evidence) is that Bitcoin's value is constrained by the relatively weak state of its mining infrastructure (and increasing hash rate does little to improve the situation because the main problem is concentration). If somehow we could magically and persistently disperse the mining, the value would increase significantly overnight, even with the current level of adoption (although the increased value would bring more adoption).

But as you say it is being used today for some things and is not completely worthless by any means despite being imperfect. Just quite small when measured by finance standards.

Note I do think there is a design that is a solution. And I agree value would increase much faster in this new design, because not only confidence, but the miners wouldn't be always dumping coins on the market (which what keeps BTC price low and siphons money away from speculators into the pockets of mining farms which have costs < $50 per BTC).

Given Bitcoin has been 51% attacked by Chinese miners now (refusing to allow an increase in the block size), Bitcoin appears to be on its death bed (but may take a while for confidence to collapse due to the  ignorance of Bitards). I wouldn't hold it long-term.



The Chinese are siphoning off our speculator money with their $50 per BTC mining costs:

Anyone know what proportion of BTC is produced in China/held in China/sold out of China ?

Without this info I don't know that I can put too much store in this theory Jorge.

There is practically no reliable info on the bitcoin economy, in particular on the flow and ownership of bitcoin by country. (This is a serious problem for would-be investors.)

We can only note that more than 67% of all new bitcoins are mined by Chinese pools, which probably comprise mostly Chinese miners; and that bitcoin has practically no use inside China, except as an instrument of speculative trading inside the exchanges.  Until last October, variations of trading volume at those exchanges did not seem to be reflected in the USD transaction volume, which may mean that there was little deposit and withdrawal at those exchanges. 

There is efficient arbitrage between the Chinese and non-Chinese exchanges. If Chinese miners sold their coins only in Chinese exchanges, that would tend to depress the price there.  Then the arbitragers would immediately move those excess coins to non-Chinese exchanges, until the prices got equalized.

So, I would guess that it does not matter where the Chinese miners sell: the net effect is that a large fraction (if not most) of the bitcoins mined in China are eventually bought and hoarded by non-Chinese investors.

[RealBitcoin]

I wait for a story of some rich Chinese person leaving their country with $1,000,000 or more in BTC...  

He wont tell anybody about that lol, that is why he choose BTC, he could end up in a gulag lol.