wpalczynski
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
|
 |
January 24, 2016, 11:02:15 PM |
|
Now what is really fucking amazing is that the link quoted above worked correctly a few days ago when I issued it. Apparently someone in the Monero thread communicated to Bittorrent folks and had the entire archive of the Bittorrent forum removed from the archive.org. I am not joking and I am not hallucinating.
What possible basis could do you have for such an accusation and how does the allegation relate to the topic of technology vs marketing? Because I viewed the linked archived content (and saw the existence of the Bittorrent forum archive going back many years even before 2008) when I made the post in the Monero Speculation thread, and now as you can see the entire archive is gone. And that was only a few days ago. So the probability that the sudden removal of that archive did not result from me pointing out that Bittorrent is in bed together with the corruption of the Net Neutrality movement is approximately Nil. I am not saying necessarily that any particular Monero community member was responsible for the removal of the archive. I am saying that someone who reads the Monero thread and/or who reads all my posts was responsible. And it is very likely that TPTB are watching very closely all my posts, because they understand (as do many astute readers) that I am one of the brighter minds on the forum who is very truly anarcho-Libertarian oriented and that I have the marketing skills to actually make something happen on a large scale. However, TPTB shouldn't fear me, because I am not going to do anything illegal. The most important point to take from the post I made is that Bittorrent is a political gimick used to fool the masses into submitting to taxation of the internet bandwidth via Net Neutrality. Bittorrent was never economic. It is a fraud and those who are stealing content deserve their fate by buying into an uneconomic lie. And this pertains to the Technology vs. Marketing thread in the context of we are discussing whether potential markets and technology are viable. It makes no sense to state marketing or technology are important, if we don't understand how delusions about each can be foisted upon us. Also I was responding to an upthread post claiming that we can replace centralized social media with decentralized variants. And to address that possibility, I must talk about the foundational issue of decentralized file storage. That should have been obvious from the post (and its context) that you are reacting to. Also for those who don't fully grasp my economics point, the point is that if we try to force ISPs to give away bandwidth for free, then we in effect socialize ISPs. And then the government can step in with Net Neutrality taxation to make it "fair" by compensating some ISPs for others or what (but in essence what we have done is attempted to steal and thus the government is called upon to take over and steal from all of us). We are fucking idiots! For those can't deduce the implications, without stealing bandwidth by doing file transfers P2P (taking the expensive upload bandwidth that ISPs have statistically allocated for client-server model paradigms) then we can't have file storage that is resistant to regulation and thus we can't steal copyrighted content (as I explained in my prior post that hosting content on servers will be regulated by the hosting provider's Terms of Service). Afaik, the reason upload bandwidth is expensive for ISPs, is because telcom "last mile" technology is focused on maximizing download bandwidth for the client-server model of HTTP. It is a natural law of physics that you would not run a main line water/gas pipe from the substation to each home, instead use multifurcation from the main to progressively smaller diameter pipes. P2P can not be a bandwidth driven paradigm! Fuhgeddaboudit. Seems to be working no? https://web.archive.org/web/*/forum.bittorrent.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a common myth that Bitcoin is ruled by a majority of miners. This is not true. Bitcoin miners "vote" on the ordering of transactions, but that's all they do. They can't vote to change the network rules.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
dEBRUYNE
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1141
|
|
January 24, 2016, 11:05:24 PM |
|
Now what is really fucking amazing is that the link quoted above worked correctly a few days ago when I issued it. Apparently someone in the Monero thread communicated to Bittorrent folks and had the entire archive of the Bittorrent forum removed from the archive.org. I am not joking and I am not hallucinating.
What possible basis could do you have for such an accusation and how does the allegation relate to the topic of technology vs marketing? Because I viewed the linked archived content (and saw the existence of the Bittorrent forum archive going back many years even before 2008) when I made the post in the Monero Speculation thread, and now as you can see the entire archive is gone. And that was only a few days ago. So the probability that the sudden removal of that archive did not result from me pointing out that Bittorrent is in bed together with the corruption of the Net Neutrality movement is approximately Nil. I am not saying necessarily that any particular Monero community member was responsible for the removal of the archive. I am saying that someone who reads the Monero thread and/or who reads all my posts was responsible. And it is very likely that TPTB are watching very closely all my posts, because they understand (as do many astute readers) that I am one of the brighter minds on the forum who is very truly anarcho-Libertarian oriented and that I have the marketing skills to actually make something happen on a large scale. However, TPTB shouldn't fear me, because I am not going to do anything illegal. The most important point to take from the post I made is that Bittorrent is a political gimick used to fool the masses into submitting to taxation of the internet bandwidth via Net Neutrality. Bittorrent was never economic. It is a fraud and those who are stealing content deserve their fate by buying into an uneconomic lie. And this pertains to the Technology vs. Marketing thread in the context of we are discussing whether potential markets and technology are viable. It makes no sense to state marketing or technology are important, if we don't understand how delusions about each can be foisted upon us. Also I was responding to an upthread post claiming that we can replace centralized social media with decentralized variants. And to address that possibility, I must talk about the foundational issue of decentralized file storage. That should have been obvious from the post (and its context) that you are reacting to. Also for those who don't fully grasp my economics point, the point is that if we try to force ISPs to give away bandwidth for free, then we in effect socialize ISPs. And then the government can step in with Net Neutrality taxation to make it "fair" by compensating some ISPs for others or what (but in essence what we have done is attempted to steal and thus the government is called upon to take over and steal from all of us). We are fucking idiots! For those can't deduce the implications, without stealing bandwidth by doing file transfers P2P (taking the expensive upload bandwidth that ISPs have statistically allocated for client-server model paradigms) then we can't have file storage that is resistant to regulation and thus we can't steal copyrighted content (as I explained in my prior post that hosting content on servers will be regulated by the hosting provider's Terms of Service). Afaik, the reason upload bandwidth is expensive for ISPs, is because telcom "last mile" technology is focused on maximizing download bandwidth for the client-server model of HTTP. It is a natural law of physics that you would not run a main line water/gas pipe from the substation to each home, instead use multifurcation from the main to progressively smaller diameter pipes. P2P can not be a bandwidth driven paradigm! Fuhgeddaboudit. Seems to be working no? https://web.archive.org/web/*/forum.bittorrent.com He is talking about the specific link he quoted, that isn't working anymore. |
|
|
|
wpalczynski
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
|
|
January 24, 2016, 11:10:15 PM |
|
Now what is really fucking amazing is that the link quoted above worked correctly a few days ago when I issued it. Apparently someone in the Monero thread communicated to Bittorrent folks and had the entire archive of the Bittorrent forum removed from the archive.org. I am not joking and I am not hallucinating.
What possible basis could do you have for such an accusation and how does the allegation relate to the topic of technology vs marketing? Because I viewed the linked archived content (and saw the existence of the Bittorrent forum archive going back many years even before 2008) when I made the post in the Monero Speculation thread, and now as you can see the entire archive is gone. And that was only a few days ago. So the probability that the sudden removal of that archive did not result from me pointing out that Bittorrent is in bed together with the corruption of the Net Neutrality movement is approximately Nil. I am not saying necessarily that any particular Monero community member was responsible for the removal of the archive. I am saying that someone who reads the Monero thread and/or who reads all my posts was responsible. And it is very likely that TPTB are watching very closely all my posts, because they understand (as do many astute readers) that I am one of the brighter minds on the forum who is very truly anarcho-Libertarian oriented and that I have the marketing skills to actually make something happen on a large scale. However, TPTB shouldn't fear me, because I am not going to do anything illegal. The most important point to take from the post I made is that Bittorrent is a political gimick used to fool the masses into submitting to taxation of the internet bandwidth via Net Neutrality. Bittorrent was never economic. It is a fraud and those who are stealing content deserve their fate by buying into an uneconomic lie. And this pertains to the Technology vs. Marketing thread in the context of we are discussing whether potential markets and technology are viable. It makes no sense to state marketing or technology are important, if we don't understand how delusions about each can be foisted upon us. Also I was responding to an upthread post claiming that we can replace centralized social media with decentralized variants. And to address that possibility, I must talk about the foundational issue of decentralized file storage. That should have been obvious from the post (and its context) that you are reacting to. Also for those who don't fully grasp my economics point, the point is that if we try to force ISPs to give away bandwidth for free, then we in effect socialize ISPs. And then the government can step in with Net Neutrality taxation to make it "fair" by compensating some ISPs for others or what (but in essence what we have done is attempted to steal and thus the government is called upon to take over and steal from all of us). We are fucking idiots! For those can't deduce the implications, without stealing bandwidth by doing file transfers P2P (taking the expensive upload bandwidth that ISPs have statistically allocated for client-server model paradigms) then we can't have file storage that is resistant to regulation and thus we can't steal copyrighted content (as I explained in my prior post that hosting content on servers will be regulated by the hosting provider's Terms of Service). Afaik, the reason upload bandwidth is expensive for ISPs, is because telcom "last mile" technology is focused on maximizing download bandwidth for the client-server model of HTTP. It is a natural law of physics that you would not run a main line water/gas pipe from the substation to each home, instead use multifurcation from the main to progressively smaller diameter pipes. P2P can not be a bandwidth driven paradigm! Fuhgeddaboudit. Seems to be working no? https://web.archive.org/web/*/forum.bittorrent.com He is talking about the specific link he quoted, that isn't working anymore. Nope. He is saying the entire bittorrent archive was removed due to some kind of collusion between people reading his posts because he is a world changing, brilliant cryptographer.  |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war (OP)
|
|
January 24, 2016, 11:18:20 PM |
|
He is talking about the specific link he quoted, that isn't working anymore. It is amazing what they have done in the past few days since I made my post. They have gone back and restructured the content in the archives before the one I linked to, so as to remove the section where I had posted my thread about the economic issue. This has occurred since I made my post. This is no accident. Also on the later dates they have removed the content and are instead pretending they were receiving an HTTP 302 error at that time. I should probably kiss my life goodbye. Nope. He is saying the entire bittorrent archive was removed due to some kind of collusion between people reading his posts because he is a world changing, brilliant cryptographer. Now I know who is likely paying you to troll me. You are likely the mole in this forum. Your resume is a paid security consultant with some weak education credentials. You are here to make sure the readers are fooled. |
|
|
|
wpalczynski
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
|
|
January 24, 2016, 11:22:51 PM |
|
He is talking about the specific link he quoted, that isn't working anymore. It is amazing what they have done. They have gone back and restructured the content in the archives before the one I linked to, so as to remove the section where I had posted my thread about the economic issue. This has occurred since I made my post. This is no accident. Also on the later dates they have removed the content and are instead pretending they were receiving an HTTP 302 error at that time. I should probably kiss my life goodbye. Nope. He is saying the entire bittorrent archive was removed due to some kind of collusion between people reading his posts because he is a world changing, brilliant cryptographer. Now I know who is paying you. You are the mole in this forum. I see you took it up a notch yet again Shelby the third. Someone really needs to crowdfund some serious psychiatric help for you and I dont mean the outpatient kind. |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war (OP)
|
|
January 24, 2016, 11:24:10 PM |
|
I see you took it up a notch yet again Shelby the third. Someone really needs to crowdfund some serious psychiatric help for you and I dont mean the outpatient kind.
Typical methods of a disinformation agent. The record of your obnoxious trolling is upthread for everyone to read. |
|
|
|
wpalczynski
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
|
|
January 24, 2016, 11:29:17 PM
Last edit: January 24, 2016, 11:49:26 PM by wpalczynski |
|
I see you took it up a notch yet again Shelby the third. Someone really needs to crowdfund some serious psychiatric help for you and I dont mean the outpatient kind.
Typical methods of a disinformation agent. Alright, you got me. You better watch yourself though, Im serious. We have your phone tapped and your internet connection logged. Ive been watching you for years since your ideas pose a great threat to the new world order. You disseminating all these brilliant cryptographic and marketing ideas to the masses on this and other forums you frequent (you know what Im talking about Shelby) is starting to put our plan in peril and our agencies wont stand for it much longer. We know about your Armstrong connection. I suggest you go underground for a while until things cool off. ___ |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war (OP)
|
|
January 25, 2016, 12:00:55 AM |
|
However, TPTB shouldn't fear me, because I am not going to do anything illegal.
The government doesn't see this way. They will take you out in the Philippines within a heartbeat if you are a really danger to TPTB. I mean that by not promulgating any illegal activity, then I can't be at odds with TPTB's control. For example, I realize now that creating any decentralized file storage technology which can't allow for protecting against illegal content is non-viable so I won't be developing that direction. They should also realize their their Bittorrent gambit is out of my influence any way, and besides I explained it has technical weaknesses which will limit Bitttorrent's applicability. Also for those who don't fully grasp my economics point, the point is that if we try to force ISPs to give away bandwidth for free, then we in effect socialize ISPs. And then the government can step in with Net Neutrality taxation to make it "fair" by compensating some ISPs for others or what (but in essence what we have done is attempted to steal and thus the government is called upon to take over and steal from all of us). We are fucking idiots!
Why the taxation is necessary and why are you talking about this? Don't ISPs charge for the service and therefore we pay for the bandwidth already? My understanding is that the taxation is considered because certain service providers like Netflix generate extra profit on the backbone of the internet infrastructure which is operated by ISPs, and those ISPs don't get a share from Netflix's profit. Sorry, I am sure you are correct, and I just try to get my head around of what you are talking about. My point to the Bittorrent developers was if we maximize the upload bandwidth we can take from any particular user, we steal from ISPs who don't throttle it in order to provide downloads to other users whose ISPs have provided less upload bandwidth. Upload bandwidth for an ISP is nearly always much less than download bandwidth. Thus no (or most) users will ever be in balance, and they will have more download capacity available than they have upload bandwidth. So the upload bandwidth is taken systemically from those who have more of it. But ISPs are not charging us based on a model of upload bandwidth. They are maximizing our download bandwidth and that is what they compute when they factor their costs. They don't expect us to use so much upload bandwidth because of the client-server architecture of HTTP (which is the most popular use of the internet). There is physics involved as to why client-server is more efficient in terms of (infrastructure) costs. Go compare the cost of a fully symmetric DSL line to an asymmetric one. Netflix is adding another wrinkle (not the client level P2P one afaik) but it is stealing bandwidth at the trunk lines infrastructure layer. But the analogous arguments can be (and are being) made that ISPs shouldn't be allowed to throttle or block client level protocols as well. This will be politically popular, yet we dig our own grave. Taxation is necessary to charge the total cost of bandwidth to the collective so no ISP or trunk level provider is at a disadvantage relative to each other. So the government can conpensate those who are a natural disadvantage. Of course once the government taxes, then of course the internet will be monopolized by an oligarchy. These issues are conceptually related to the centralization of a block chain due to the CAP theorem which I have been exploring my thread on that topic in the Altcoin Discussion forum. I will need to research more the Netflix issue and think about what might be a solution. We get back to you on that aspect. P2P can not be a bandwidth driven paradigm! Fuhgeddaboudit.
Are you saying P2P will only work if it requires a little bandwidth, because larger bandwidth usage will trigger taxation and other measures? Again, I am not disagreeing, I just want to understand what you are saying. Thanks! Yes but not in all cases. Your group's Streemo is a direct connection between two peers. Thus their upload and download bandwidth has to match (up the threshold they coordinate to use). So presumably it is economic (and I assume Streemo won't try to slam the upload bandwidth threshold and will leave some dynamic headroom as it must to avoid intermittent lags in the streaming feed). Rather what I meant is that P2P can't be a paradigm that extracts upload bandwidth from some peers and gifts it to other peers in a systemic way such as Bittorrent's optimistic unchoking algorithm without my suggested fix (which they apparently ignored). So I still wouldn't think file serving from user clients will work because it is assumed we will max out the upload bandwidth and provide it as a service to the network. In short, we can't use user clients as servers and expect not to mess up the economics. The "last mile" connections would need to violate physics in order to be economic as a servers. We can do P2P exchange between a mutual set (all uploading to each other) of users consuming some reasonable level of upload bandwidth, but any form of broadcast is going to strain the economics of P2P. |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war (OP)
|
|
January 25, 2016, 12:07:10 AM |
|
I see you took it up a notch yet again Shelby the third. Someone really needs to crowdfund some serious psychiatric help for you and I dont mean the outpatient kind.
Typical methods of a disinformation agent.
You better watch yourself though, Im serious. We have your phone tapped and your internet connection logged. Ive been watching you for years since your ideas pose a great threat to the new world order.
You disseminating all these brilliant cryptographic and marketing ideas to the masses on this and other forums you frequent (you know what Im talking about Shelby) is starting to put our plan in peril and our agencies wont stand for it much longer.
We know about your Armstrong connection.
I suggest you go underground for a while until things cool off.You've had your 15 minutes of trolling fame Mr. Monero community member. Stop posting noise and let me do my important work. Your uneducated opinion (most especially focused on personal attacks completely devoid of any technical points) is irrelevant. You do not have the relevant skills to even be commenting. Your weak credentials are certificate programs in security. Please get off my lawn. You are not in my league. Readers can clearly read the numerous instances upthread of a jealous idiot is trying to muck up the work of a more knowledgeable person. I am sincere. I don't care if you believe it or not. You are a pindot in relevance to my work. Hey do remember there are laws that penalize the hate crimes you are doing. |
|
|
|
wpalczynski
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
|
|
January 25, 2016, 12:13:22 AM |
|
I see you took it up a notch yet again Shelby the third. Someone really needs to crowdfund some serious psychiatric help for you and I dont mean the outpatient kind.
Typical methods of a disinformation agent.
You better watch yourself though, Im serious. We have your phone tapped and your internet connection logged. Ive been watching you for years since your ideas pose a great threat to the new world order.
You disseminating all these brilliant cryptographic and marketing ideas to the masses on this and other forums you frequent (you know what Im talking about Shelby) is starting to put our plan in peril and our agencies wont stand for it much longer.
We know about your Armstrong connection.
I suggest you go underground for a while until things cool off.You've had your 15 minutes of trolling fame Mr. Monero community member. Stop posting noise and let me do my important work. Your uneducated opinion (most especially focused on personal attacks completely devoid of any technical points) is irrelevant. You do not have the relevant skills to even be commenting. Your weak credentials are certificate programs in security. Please get off my lawn. You are not in my league. Readers can clearly see that an idiot is trying to muck up the work of a more knowledgeable person. I am sincere. I don't care if you believe it or not. You are a pindot in relevance to my work. Hey do remember there are laws that penalizing the hate crimes you are doing. Such as? |
|
|
|
|
|
wpalczynski
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000
|
|
January 25, 2016, 12:22:32 AM |
|
Take some medication you delusional troll. |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war (OP)
|
|
January 25, 2016, 12:54:56 AM
Last edit: January 25, 2016, 01:05:35 AM by TPTB_need_war |
|
Note that any solutions to the problem of ISPs blocking P2P apps that involve a TURN (when STUN tunneling fails or is blocked), VPN, or other server in the middle, defeat the entire point of extracting the value of the bandwidth allocation of users provided by their ISPs, because then one is paying for the bandwidth of the server to relay the shards.
If Storj and MaidSafe max out the consumption of each user's upload bandwidth (thus leeching off users with higher allocations charging the costs to those users' ISPs), they will also be blocked by ISPs. Additionally STUN tunnelling often fails and thus a TURN relay server has to be employed (or using the other peers as relays thus leeching the upload bandwidth of those ISPs who don't block tunneling).
In short, P2P for bandwidth consumption between ISP hosted user accounts is not going to be reliable. Many users will have frustrations when trying to be a storage provider. It will not be the case that every user in the system can also be a storage provider. And it will probably end up being the case that the most efficient storage providers will be hosted on dedicated servers.
In other words, it is a fantasy to think we can get decentralized file storage without paying for it.
We can try to design decentralized, permissionless file systems that correctly incentivize the storage and bandwidth providers, and the users of the system need to pay for it somehow. Whether or not these can remain permissionless given the need to host these on servers is open to further contemplation and study. Most all hosting providers include in their Terms of Sevice a restriction on hosting illegal copyrighted content, so unless one can provide a mechanism for which illegal content is removed from the system, it seems to me that hosts will be forced to ban the protocol (system).
So where I am headed with this line of thinking is that we ought to just give up on illegal content and illegal uses of anonymity. It isn't going to work. It is a fantasy.
Continuing my analysis, the other advantage of decentralized storage is durability and availability. This is a facet of permissionless in the sense that no one entity has a monopoly on the storage. It is not permissionless in the sense of allowing illegal activity as explained upthread (because the storage will hosted on servers, even those are owned/managed by different entities, they all are regulated by the law reflected in the hosts' Terms of Service). So I am envisioning the possibility to design a system for decentralized file storage where the users pay the storage providers, but the storage providers are decentralized entities (even though they are all high performance hosted providers and not ISP user clients). In this case, I think microtransactions is the only way it can be done decentralized. If we instead attempt to aggregate a monthly use plan (or similarly analogous aggregations), then some centralized party will be in charge of paying the decentralized entities, so then it is not decentralized. So therefor I have just identified a potential market for microtransactions that can't be offered by centrally owned cloud services. Alternatively, Storj and Maidsafe are paying storage providers coins for proving they are storing data, then data is exchanged in a tit-for-tat[1]. If used with ISP user clients as storage providers, this will have performance weaknesses as well as being economically a theft paradigm in support of Net Neutrality oligarchy and taxation (for the reasons I explained upthread). But a user can't do a tit-for-tax exchange if user is not also a storage provider, thus afaics Storj and Maidsafe are forcing every user to be a storage provider. Otherwise they need to use some form of upload bandwidth theft model such akin to Bittorrent's optimistic unchoking. The only way to fix Storj and Maidsafe is for them to adopt a microtransaction payment model so users can pay for the upload and storage costs to decentralized providers. So therefor I have explained why Storj and Maidsafe are fundamentally flawed. And I have explained why decentralized file storage can ONLY be done with microtransactions. Next we need to reason about the viability of the markets for decentralized file storage and also the technical viability/tradeoffs. We need to not only think about ability to prove the data has been retained by some provider, but also about how to enforce against the storage of illegal content (otherwise I have argued upthread that the entire plan is flawed since hosts' Terms of Service will likely block protocols/systems which can allow copyrighted material to be stored without recourse by injured parties). [1] Note Storj also alludes to microtransactions, so perhaps the tit-for-tat exchange only applies to Maidsafe. I will study this more. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war (OP)
|
|
January 25, 2016, 10:50:50 AM |
|
Storj, Maidsafe, Sia, and Permacoin (and any other decentralized file system that pays to store a file instead of only paying to serve the file) are all provably scams. Include Ethereum in the list of scams (although they are still trying to fix the technology) and probably most every other shitcoin on this forum. |
|
|
|
f2000
Member
Offline
Activity: 93
Merit: 10
|
|
January 25, 2016, 11:59:27 AM |
|
I saw your quick/draft logo, did you decide on a name for your project? (I might of missed you talking about it).
Yes I did and it isn't any of the names mentioned in this thread. You might be able to deduce it from the rough sketch of a brainstorming idea for a logo I did upthread. Btw, thanks for all the feedback and help on brainstorming names upthread. Yeah, it was that sketch that threw me off as it looks/sounds like the domain you recently gave away. Oh and no probs...I'm no developer but for some reason I do enjoy the whole "design/logo" process. |
|
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war (OP)
|
|
January 25, 2016, 10:44:02 PM |
|
Please put a pause on all your well-intended but rather useless (never ending) noise (drivel) about derivatives, what the government should do, evil of central banks, evil of debt, etc and all these superfluous issues that you can neither change nor which will determine the direction global society is headed. Let me have your undivided attention please. (RealBitcoin et al just please STFU for a while please since you won't grasp the relevance of the following) Getting back to my writings (written in 2010 - 2012) which were the main theme of the OP of this thread back in 2013, and based on a recent paradigm-shift revelation on the markets for the crypto currency I am working on, I have now seen the light of how specifically the Knowledge Age I've been predicting will take form. And glorious it is our future. The key insight is that I now see how Knowledge Age producers (workers) will be paid digitally directly by Knowledge Age consumers, and the middle man can't exist (because the competition will be to remove him). I am not yet going to tell you exactly why this is so and all the mechanics because I need to retain this a secret for the time being while I am implementing this. So what this means is that anonymity was never the way we were going to restructure government and fix society. Instead it is the coming social media metaphorsis of commerce such that there can't be a middle man which the government can expropriate. This is a critical distinction from the game theory in which the world operates now, because when the government can take on debt, promise everything to the masses, and then charge the costs of the taxes and/or end game regulatory capture to the large corporations (rich and upper middle class), then the majority (masses) are in no way incentivized to resist. This game theory is summarized in Some Iron Laws of Political Economics. CoinCube has also discussed this game theory upthread and I have some where in AnonyMint's archives better summarized and justified the Iron Law of Political Economics (I think the Dark Enlightenment thread and/or possibly upthread in this Economic Devastation thread). So what happens when the majority earn their income and are paid directly by the consumers of the produced Knowledge Age work, is that the government can't charge the cost of the end game collapse of debt to any one! It is when the government can steal from the minority and buy off the majority with debt financed socialism, that the government power grows without bound until the minority is depleted and a Dark Age is entered. Luckily throughout history technology usually (but not always which is why there have been 600 year Dark Ages where only food was money) rescues society and the majority is able to recover its ability to earn income more directly. Examples of such past technological innovations would be soil management technology for agriculture, the spread of knowledge via the printing press, etc.. When the majority is directly earning the lion's share of the income in society, then the government will find it politically implausible to steal from the majority to redistribute, because the majority will refuse. It is only by appeasing the majority making them dependent on socialism and then stealing from those middle men who aggregate the capital, that the elite at the top are able to fool the majority into stealing from the minority and handing all the power to a super-minority elite. Without a minority to expropriate, the governments' debt collapses (this also includes the expectation that crypto currency can be redesigned to remain decentralized and thus the government won't be able to simply turn it into fiat again and print money out of thin air which steals from everyone and this also includes that even if they could, they will no longer be able to use that funny money to aggregate middle man controls... the entire paradigm of the Iron Law of Political Economics hinges on the existence of middle men extracting rents...this was a key epiphany) Anonymity is entirely unrealistic and doesn't address the political-economic structural issue (that is why I have recently admonished Monero to look at anonymity as a way to make public block chains RELIABLY private, End-to End principled, and efficient but not for the purpose of avoiding taxation and encouraged them to look at making simple scripting private not just currency and thus I assert they need Zerocash/zk-snarks and not Cryptonote nor RingCT). Whereas a new way of thinking about social media and microtransactions does. Stay tuned for the second coming of Satoshi has arrived. And this will be the real deal. |
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war (OP)
|
|
January 25, 2016, 11:46:11 PM
Last edit: January 26, 2016, 04:56:03 AM by TPTB_need_war |
|
How butthurt are you?
I am certainly not jealous of the insoluble technological quagmire that Vital et al are stuck in. They sold the future and were never able to solve the fundamental technological issues. I warned Charles about that when he was evaluating whether to join with Vitalik and launch Ethereum. Vitalik is a smart guy and they have some other smart guys. But they don't yet seem to realize that they can't solve the impossible. They are too young and inexperienced to see this. I am older with decades of experience so I can more readily detect when something is insoluble and need to move on to more plausible pastures. Which is precisely what I am doing. You can speculate on how high the P&D will go, but just remember the majority must be bagholders in a coin which has no future means to expand the pie of adoption (due to technological clusterfuck). I am not a hater. I respect the intellect of those devs working on Ethereum. I just have to be honest that they are stuck in a technological clusterfuck and are too deep in now to admit it to themselves. Eventually they will realize they failed. I even tried to save Monero from wasting more effort implementing RingCT and tried to convince them to look seriously at zk-snarks to see if that would solve the meta-data issue and also expand the utility from currency to simple scripts for RELIABLE privacy on PUBLIC block chains (especially important for corporations but maybe also for all commerce). I am trying to get them to think about real market strategies and not the "build it and they will come for unreliable anonymity" delusion. so in this thread you're saying ETH is broken and can't be fixed, and in another you're saying its still early and it can be fixed.
I didn't say it can be fixed. I said they can continue trying to fix it and it appears to me that they are adding more layers of complexity on top going in circles like a dog chasing its tail and not knowing it. I suppose there is some 0.0001% chance they solve the implausible, but I have a deep understanding of the issue and I can see the odds are stacked against them. I say their odds of fixing it are akin to winning the Lotto. But I am not claiming 100% omniscience so we will see... I have to at least admit that I can't be 100% sure... but I am talking about my level of understanding and thus my appraisal of the probability of them solving the fundamental issues. and quit name dropping like they KNOW you...
Charles knows me very well (and he left Ethereum long ago and one might assume he pocketed some of your ICO money). The others don't. (And thankfully for that otherwise they would be reading my posts and copying my block chain technology since I have some solutions, although I still don't have a solution for Ethereum's specific problem) In particular they can't get scaling with sharding and still retain Consistency. It violates the CAP theorem. And they can't solve the economic Tragedy of the Commons on verification without centralization. One can argue they will just centralize it (and perhaps even obfuscate that it is centralized in some techno-babble that no one can understand), and then continue innovating on a centralized platform. Well that defeats the point and won't enable huge adoption markets.
Doesn't StorJ have a coin on polyonoxious? Aren't they nearing a milestrone. Again I recently explained why all those decentralized file systems (including MaidSafe and Sia) are technological nonsense, but doesn't seem to the concern of you P&D followers. Potential problem with XMR is that the coin was too well distributed and absent a premine, thus no one has the means and incentive to P&D it. Monero would seem to instead be a long-term investment (and personally I think a very poor one for the recent reasons I have explained about their UNRELIABLE anonymity having no market). Rather I would say take your profits from crypto before March and hold dollars because a major contagion is brewing in the markets that is going to wipe out Bitcoin, gold, and all markets except the US dollar and US stocks. The coming interest rate hikes from the Fed will turn up the dial pressure. Note for example OROBTC's comment today that his Peru ball bearing sales have fallen significantly since December. Martin Armstrong's model is coming true as predicted as the periphery collapses and the USA and US dollar will be the last man standing in the global economy. It does look like we have a very rocky road ahead re the financial markets. China announced that their steel companies will be firing some 400,000 employees. I have never accepted as fact that the BRICS were anything for the USA to worry about. (We have are own problems to worry about)
China does look to be leading the world into hard times.
The Baltic Dry Index is down again.
Our sales of bearings are Peru are down HARD in the past several weeks.
Europe seems to be drowning in a sea of Muslims, and they don't seem capable (now anyway) of doing anything about it...
When the liquidity dries up in the altcoin market, you can be holding a dead asset. What I don't understand about pump and dumps is where is the money coming from? It made sense when new people were entering crypto in droves but the last six months pump and dump have turned into mostly just dumps.
It can be mostly fake volume with the insiders buying from themselves. And they can then use that to sell off more of their premines to greater fools who think the pump is real volume. For me it indicates the insiders are getting out and dumping it on the greater fools. Just don't be the last man out the door when the stampede (waterfall collapse) dump starts. Remember the market caps for altcoins are lies. There isn't that amount of capital invested in them. These are just pumped prices by insiders buying from themselves. Much easier to do that when you control the float from a deceitful premine as is the case with Dash and Ethereum (buying the ICO from themselves). |
|
|
|
|
illodin
|
|
January 26, 2016, 08:40:18 AM |
|
TPTB_need_war was banned for 3 days for writing in big red letters that "Ethereum is broken and can't be fixed" and proceeded to defend this point factually.
And so the mods have now demonstrated they are involved in the pump of Ethereum.
So much for the objectivity of this forum.
They allow excessive trolling and scams no problem though. |
|
|
|
|
st0at
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
January 26, 2016, 11:55:43 PM |
|
TPTB_need_war was banned for 3 days for writing in big red letters that "Ethereum is broken and can't be fixed" and proceeded to defend this point factually.
And so the mods have now demonstrated they are involved in the pump of Ethereum.
So much for the objectivity of this forum.
They allow excessive trolling and scams no problem though. Why do you quote that spammer and the posts the moderators deleted. He insults everyone on the forum. I hope the moderators ban him permanently so we can have some peace on this forum again. Do you know what it is like to read this forum every day and see his spam bumping his numerous disinformation threads. And now the narcissistic loony begs for empathy about his faked illness over at Reddit. It is really a class act. |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
