[neㄘcash, ᨇcash, net⚷eys, or viᖚes?] Name AnonyMint's vapor coin?

[sockpuppet1]

smooth I am fairly certain we can get most of the benefits of Haskell that most programmers would want, plus extra benefits Haskell doesn't have, while forsaking all the math and obtuse crap (including the syntax) that makes Haskell unsuitable for a mainstream language.

I am surprised no one has done it. It seems they didn't have quite the right understanding of which features are important and why. I have the benefit of having looked at all the attempts and my experience, plus my very generative essence abstractions seeking IQ. Let's see soon hopefully what I (and possibly @keean) can come up with...


General health advice:

Diet is the most important thing you need to change probably. Exercise also helps to satiate appetite and improve cravings for the healthier food. For example, I buy a whole 3 kg tuna freshly caught (skin, bone, everything), have it chopped up, then boil for 5 minutes with onions, garlic, ginger, salt. Then turn off the fire and put some shallots and leafy greens on top and cover it. Eating this once a day will do wonders for you. In general munch on a raw carrot and eat salads without any dressing nor oil. No mercury issue in the small 3kg tuna, especially here in the Pacific ocean in SE Asia where I am.

Avoid farmed salmon, as they feed it GMO pellets and it is no longer healthy.

Eat oatmeal in warmed water every day. This is like a sponge and will clean out of the bad LDL while not reducing the good HDL. It is the most healthy grain you can eat by far.

Cut out all vegetable oils. They are the killer. Perhaps a little bit of coconut oil for cooking. Try to buy your bread and other foods without oil.

For fat, eat organic eggs. Also ground beef (sirloin) sometimes but with lots of salad or veggies. Goat is fine also. Try to not eat chicken nor pork, or at least not often.

The sublingually taken oregano oil is a fabulous herb and will surely help your health. You could also take curcumin capsules also, but these are expensive. I buy the powder then add it to coconut milk and is yummy (but haven't been taking it lately because apparently I don't have a problem with diabetes nor cancer). That is known to help also with diabetes.

[1715229747]

1715229747

[1715229747]

1715229747

[1715229747]

1715229747

[sockpuppet1]

Mods are deleting my factual posts from the Vcash (VanillaCoin) thread:


A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

John is a former coder of some well known p2p projects in the past.

Yes I had deduced he probably written a Bittorrent client in the past based on the way he approached designs. In any case, his technological innovations are unimpressive. We already explained that numerous times in detail.

Whether he could produce a very innovative design. I guess anything is possible.

Does it matter? Nobody is investing based on technological capability. Just buy what ever you think sounds good. It you feel technologically dazzled, your fellow n00bs will too. So buy it. Peace.

Who is ''we'' ?? The suck-puppet clan ?

I am AnonyMint aka TPTB_need_war.

John is a former coder of some well known p2p projects in the past.

... In any case, his technological innovations are unimpressive...

Uninpressive?

I already explained to you all before many times that Zerotime can't scale. Don't make me repeat myself.

It is also theoretically susceptible to Sybil attack. But the scaling issue is the most damning.

Did you already compare chainblender with other similar anon transactions?
Within minutes you can anonymize any amount of coins, unlike others who take up to 24hs to do it with 1000 units.

Last time I looked the published information on chainblender was lacking sufficient technical detail to analyze clearly.

Here is the prior analysis:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1323202.0

It is also theoretically susceptible to Sybil attack. But the scaling issue is the most damning.

Proof it instead of crying

Enjoy your pump.

I am satiated with the technical reality. It doesn't require any of your targeted victims to believe me. I only need to be sure it can't scale, so I know it can't compete with what I am working on.

Bye, bye.

[smooth]

Mods are deleting my factual posts from the Vcash (VanillaCoin) thread:


A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic.

The forum mods didn't, the Vcash scammers deleted it. Use the unmoderated thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1441959.0

Warning about self-moderated Vcash threads: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1472763.0

[sockpuppet1]

Open-sourced summary of the detailed technical progress of the discussion between @keean and myself:

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/high-order-function-with-type-parameter/3112/190

(Lambda Cube ramifications)

[killerjoegreece]

Open-sourced summary of the detailed technical progress of the discussion between @keean and myself:

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/high-order-function-with-type-parameter/3112/190

(Lambda Cube ramifications)

thank you for the link.

[sockpuppet1]

Re: POLL - Which Crypto will be the first zero fee instant microtransaction coin with GUI that can scale to 100,000 Txns/sec and remain decentralized?

ftfy

Answer: none of the CC currently envisioned. Neither will Lightning Networks nor Dash Evolution meet those specifications.

[smooth]

Re: POLL - Which Crypto will be the first zero fee instant microtransaction coin with GUI that can scale to 100,000 Txns/sec and remain decentralized?

ftfy

Answer: none of the CC currently envisioned. Neither will Lightning Networks nor Dash Evolution meet those specifications.

Lightning network could probably do 100K+ tx/sec with no problems as long as the user base is limited (so number of channels is limited and capacity spikes from mass channel closings don't need to be considered). That could have practical uses for some B2B type applications.

[sockpuppet1]

Re: POLL - Which Crypto will be the first zero fee instant microtransaction coin with GUI that can scale to 100,000 Txns/sec and remain decentralized?

ftfy

Answer: none of the CC currently envisioned. Neither will Lightning Networks nor Dash Evolution meet those specifications.

Lightning network could probably do 100K+ tx/sec with no problems as long as the user base is limited (so number of channels is limited and capacity spikes from mass channel closings don't need to be considered). That could have practical uses for some B2B type applications.

But it won't decentralized and permissionless. It will be corporate server controlled by the banksters. But that may not matter.

And it also won't enable you to transact from anyone Bitcoin address to any Bitcoin address (your original observation in our private discussion many moons ago). It has a simultaneity requirement.

[smooth]

Re: POLL - Which Crypto will be the first zero fee instant microtransaction coin with GUI that can scale to 100,000 Txns/sec and remain decentralized?

ftfy

Answer: none of the CC currently envisioned. Neither will Lightning Networks nor Dash Evolution meet those specifications.

Lightning network could probably do 100K+ tx/sec with no problems as long as the user base is limited (so number of channels is limited and capacity spikes from mass channel closings don't need to be considered). That could have practical uses for some B2B type applications.

But it won't decentralized and permissionless. It will be corporate server controlled by the banksters.

It'll be about as decentralized and permissionless as Bitcoin is, which might be a decent degree if Bitcoin itself isn't scaled up too much (the whole block size argument), and possibly something is done about ASIC strangulation.

And it also won't enable you to transact from anyone Bitcoin address to any Bitcoin address (your original observation in our private discussion many moons ago). It has a simultaneity requirement.

I haven't studied this carefully but I've been told (maybe incorrectly) that with duplex channels this is (or will be with some script improvements) possible. Party A can open a channel to party B and then party B can either close the channel and accept the payment as simple Bitcoin, or just reuse the channel to send those coins back out.

[sockpuppet1]

It'll be about as decentralized and permissionless as Bitcoin is...

Which is a future like this:

DAO crap is as crap as ETH !

"Crap I failed to buy that 1000% ROI crap."

We were crazy for ignoring what Bernie SandersMadoff was selling, until the clawbacks[1]...

Oh so you aren't aware they can come take your profits long after you've disposed of the asset. This is a clawback.[1]

[1]	http://www.businessinsider.com/the-truth-behind-how-gerald-celente-got-screwed-by-mf-global-2011-11 http://www.businessinsider.com/two-mf-global-clients-share-their-stories-2011-11

And it also won't enable you to transact from anyone Bitcoin address to any Bitcoin address (your original observation in our private discussion many moons ago). It has a simultaneity requirement.

I haven't studied this carefully but I've been told (maybe incorrectly) that with duplex channels this is (or will be with some script improvements) possible. Party A can open a channel to party B and then party B can either close the channel and accept the payment as simple Bitcoin, or just reuse the channel to send those coins back out.

Obviously in the former case, it isn't an instant microtransaction in a decentralized, 100.000 Txns/sec system, because it requires the Bitcoin block chain to handle that volume.

The entire point is that LN is a microtransaction system for a corporate behemoth controlled internet (where everyone has an account with a corporate entity), not for an internet where there are millions of artists receiving payments in a decentralized chaotic pattern.

[smooth]

And it also won't enable you to transact from anyone Bitcoin address to any Bitcoin address (your original observation in our private discussion many moons ago). It has a simultaneity requirement.

I haven't studied this carefully but I've been told (maybe incorrectly) that with duplex channels this is (or will be with some script improvements) possible. Party A can open a channel to party B and then party B can either close the channel and accept the payment as simple Bitcoin, or just reuse the channel to send those coins back out.

Obviously in the former case, it isn't an instant microtransaction in a decentralized, 100.000 Txns/sec system, because it requires the Bitcoin block chain to handle that volume.

The entire point is that LN is a microtransaction system for a corporate behemoth controlled internet, not for an internet where there are millions of artists receiving payments in a decentralized chaotic pattern.

LN isn't necessarily corporate controlled, if the usage in terms of number-of-channels is small enough and the rest of Bitcoin isn't scaled up too much where it too becomes corporate controlled. It does mean that millions or billions of active users without massive centralization is an unsolved problem. I specified "some B2B type applications" above (i.e. relatively small number of users, large number of transactions)

[sockpuppet1]

And it also won't enable you to transact from anyone Bitcoin address to any Bitcoin address (your original observation in our private discussion many moons ago). It has a simultaneity requirement.

I haven't studied this carefully but I've been told (maybe incorrectly) that with duplex channels this is (or will be with some script improvements) possible. Party A can open a channel to party B and then party B can either close the channel and accept the payment as simple Bitcoin, or just reuse the channel to send those coins back out.

Obviously in the former case, it isn't an instant microtransaction in a decentralized, 100.000 Txns/sec system, because it requires the Bitcoin block chain to handle that volume.

The entire point is that LN is a microtransaction system for a corporate behemoth controlled internet, not for an internet where there are millions of artists receiving payments in a decentralized chaotic pattern.

LN isn't necessarily corporate controlled, if the usage in terms of number-of-channels is small enough and the rest of Bitcoin isn't scaled up too much where it too becomes corporate controlled. It does mean that millions or billions of active users without massive centralization is an unsolved problem. I specified "some B2B type applications" above (i.e. relatively small number of users, large number of transactions)

Smooth you never learned. Years ago I told you Bitcoin would be centralized and you were spouting caveats.

Get a grip on how these things evolve naturally due to the economies-of-scale, power-law distribution of wealth, and the Iron Law of Political Economics.

I don't have any more time for delusions. I need to work on realistic things and fix my finances.

[AlexGR]

Re: POLL - Which Crypto will be the first zero fee instant microtransaction coin with GUI that can scale to 100,000 Txns/sec and remain decentralized?

ftfy

Answer: none of the CC currently envisioned. Neither will Lightning Networks nor Dash Evolution meet those specifications.

"In 2015, The Nilson Report, a publication that tracks the credit card industry, found that Visa’s global network (known as VisaNet) processed 100 billion transactions with a total volume of US$6.8 trillion."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Inc.

100bn / 365 days / 1440min per day / 60secs = 3170 tps.

If the global Visanet does 3k tps, why would a crypto need a spec of 100k tps in the short or mid-term future? There isn't even a need to cover that many txs because those txs don't exist.

As for zero fee, well, zero-fee use = zero-fee abuse.

[sockpuppet1]

If the global Visanet does 3k tps, why would a crypto need a spec of 100k tps in the short or mid-term future? There isn't even a need to cover that many txs because those txs don't exist.

Microtransactions.

And 6 billion people who don't have credit cards now.

[smooth]

If the global Visanet does 3k tps, why would a crypto need a spec of 100k tps in the short or mid-term future? There isn't even a need to cover that many txs because those txs don't exist.

Microtransactions.

And 6 billion people who don't have credit cards now.

Visa has about 50% global market share. So double to 6k. Now multiply by 7 if you want to expand the market. That's already 42k/sec average rate (peak is likely much higher) and you haven't even touched microtransations.

[sockpuppet1]

[...]

I think Armstrong will end up being correct about bitcoin (not surviving the other side of 2020) let's see..  

It is not clear if it will destroyed or merely turned into a tool to confiscate wealth, and a better Paypal for the masses. My bet is the totalitarian variant of the future. Click the link above to find out why. Men need a tyrant.

I very much doubt it becomes a "better" Paypal for the masses for the simple reason that it isn't better.

I would be bet on failure over widespread usage of a coopted system. In fact I'd lay significant odds on that bet. (Though failure is somewhat difficult to define precisely -- let's say significant loss of value and usage.)

I see even an oligarchy controlled Bitcoin as better than Paypal, because:

1. Bitcoin is a global politik; and thus even the Chinese mining oligarchy (cum banksters pulling the strings behind the curtain) can't do anything which isn't politically correct globally.

2. Thus Bitcoin will retain many attributes that Paypal as a corporate offering can't provide such as inability to deny any person in any account equal opportunity to access, inability to enforce holdbacks, block certain industries, and other arbitrary shit Paypal does which make my head want to explode. Bitcoin is a trojan horse launched by the global elite to subvert any localized attempt to block/control the shift to digital currency.

3. Thus I predict enormous adoption for Bitcoin, but just remember it will be owned and controlled by the global elite (aka the banksters). And the global socialism will enforce a global confiscation/expropriation of those with wealth, in the coming years. It will be a bittersweet success.

It's pretty evident from the establishment embracing Bitcoin and things like this CME news, that TPTB will use Bitcoin as a golden parachute to escape the death trap fiat system they created.  They know it's extremely hard to do business using gold, and you would need to implode civilization back to the dark ages to make gold work again, so Bitcoin is their go to play to keep the wheels turning at an above caveman level.

Ever since humans stopped being hunter gatherers and settled land, it created abundance.  That's when the predator class arose to skim the abundance.  It's in TPTB' best interests to keep a high level of civilization running in order to skim it instead of having civilization implode back to ancient Babylon.  That would likely just implode their own standard of living as well once the caviar supply lines run out.

Yes, they create catastrophes to benefit from them, but I don't think they want ones so big that they become completely unpredictable and threaten their own power structure.  They always have some type of golden parachutes in mind, and Bitcoin is seemingly the only viable thing around for digital transactions in the coming great reset.  The world supply lines are very intertwined, and if you cannot do digital transactions on an international level because nobody trusts any of the currencies, then you immediately go back to the 1800's.  Do TPTB want to live in the 1800's?  Probably not.  They have to devise something to keep the wheels of the world turning.

Agreed, but they didn't create Bitcoin as the primary escape hatch from fiat collapse (which will instead be the one world currency reserve unit basket), but rather because they want to subvert any one nation's control over the digitalization of currency. They don't want a bastardized fragmentation of the digitalized commerce world. That is all good. The bad part is they control the global politik, and thus they control Bitcoin. They can easily incorporate capital controls and expropriation into the politics of regulation of Bitcoin and then they can easily implement it since they are funding and arranging the Chinese mining cartel and Blockstream's $74 million funding.

I reckon the global elite do not care how they reach their goal, as long as they can attain the following goals:

1. The result achieved can't be controlled by any nation and can be controlled by them through their control over the global politik and their control over fiat banking.

2. It scales.

3. It is a traceable block chain so they can institute their planned Technocracy (smart meters, digging tagging of humans like chattel, etc).

LN is flawed in that it doesn't really scale ideally. It is fraught with technical complexity and likely to have serious corner cases and failure modes. Centralization is a failure mode and surely the global elite must understand this.

Thus I think the ability to provide what the global elite want, will be a very, very successful and profitable project.

I remain committed to my design which I think better fulfils their (and our!) goals.

None of us are going to stop the world from enslaving itself. Sorry. Impossible delusions are a waste of my life.

My best hope is that I can provide a way for the system to be more decentralized.

Anonymity well I tried. It is rather impractical to try to hide from the NSA but let's see what Zcash and Monero end up with. Privacy is important, so that is what they are really vying for, not anonymous and not hiding from the global elite. The viewkey aspect is going to be crucial.

[Dink]

"Anonymity well I tried"

Maybe anonmity is not that important for your average user.  But, the ability to keep what is yours from being taken by thebanksters, TPTB, your local hacker, is an absolute.  The unconditional control of any CC must remain with the individual.

[sockpuppet1]

"Anonymity well I tried"

Maybe anonmity is not that important for your average user.  But, the ability to keep what is yours from being taken by thebanksters, TPTB, your local hacker, is an absolute.  The unconditional control of any CC must remain with the individual.

Mass privacy is very important. That is why Monero and Zcash matter. We'll never have mass anonymity. Fuhgeddaboudit.

Privacy doesn't mean privacy from the authorities. Sorry. Politics and technology will never allow it. I tried to search for the absolute technology for anonymity and I can promise you it does not exist to be found. I promise you.

The control over an individual's CC will remain with the individual, but the control over the CC protocol will remain with the global elite. This will always be the case. Accept it. This is the reality of the world we exist in.

[Fuserleer]

If the global Visanet does 3k tps, why would a crypto need a spec of 100k tps in the short or mid-term future? There isn't even a need to cover that many txs because those txs don't exist.

Microtransactions.

And 6 billion people who don't have credit cards now.

Visa has about 50% global market share. So double to 6k. Now multiply by 7 if you want to expand the market. That's already 42k/sec average rate (peak is likely much higher) and you haven't even touched microtransations.

And that's just domestic consumer payments.

Throw in various other financial markets and products (b2b, insurance, futures, etc) and 100k tps soon becomes quite limiting.

Some financial products and markets need more than just raw throughput though.  I don't think we'll see fortune 500 stocks traded on crypto-platforms as that requires a HFT capable solution (< 1ms trades), which after spending some time looking at various tricks to achieve it, I struggled to get even < 1 sec reliably without implementing some forms of centralization. Ergo its likely impossible in a truly decentralized manner due to CAP and other information theories.

Of course there is also an adoption period, so by the time you're hitting 100k tps, the technology available can probably do 200-300k tps.

Bottom line though, I'm yet to see any tech around here actually achieve anything even close to 10k tps in a real world testing environment, let alone 100k tps.  Right now there isn't anything that could absorb the transactional load should one of the current crop of platforms get some serious mainstream traction and take off.

I find that quite worrying, because it could happen and all of that transactional load will perform poorly and put the users off immediately.....then they'll never come back.

Probably the most vocal regarding supposed load capability other than myself is BitShares.  They claimed (and still do) 100k tps, but that was in a controlled test with a super computer  In reality when it came to the crunch the best the could do in their test network was 1000 tps, and it crashed the network IIRC, so it was throttled to 100 tps.  They may have fixed that specific problem now and are able to squeeze out some more, but I doubt its anywhere like the 100k tps they claim.  

IOTA has the ability to handle quite a lot of load though.  I was looking at similar structures to a DAG/Tangle over 2 years ago now and the performance was promising.  Ultimately though we discarded that tech as it wasn't able to support some of our additional critical requirements other than outright speed.  IOTA doesn't have all the requirements we do, so it can probably utilize the DAG in a less stressing manner and see possibly more performance than we did  (lets leave the Iota POW debate where it is ).

Quite a few other projects also have claimed 10k+ tps speeds but have never actually shown any evidence of anything at all.....so....yeah

Pretty much everything so far in terms of "claimed speed" has been total hot air, in most cases < 1% of actual claimed speeds has been attainable with regular commodity hardware.

I myself am also guilty to some degree of that, some might remember about 6 months ago there was quite a lot of noise about what eMunie is able to do in theory with the channels and partitions.  In theory we should be able to support in excess of 100k tps quite easily, but as of yet we haven't performed any test to try and hit it.  Part of that comes from the fact that actually generating 100k tps is a pretty tall order unto itself, and to do it in a way that simulates real world to some degree (not just 1 huge box in a room spitting out transactions to a 2 node network) is more of a logistical challenge.

That said, I think the eMunie platform is still the fastest on the block at the moment, as we've done a number of speed tests in our beta network and posted the results with our fastest so far being ~2500 tps.  

Still a long way off the theoretical 100k+ though....hopefully I wont have to eat too much of my hat like everyone else so far

[Dink]

"Anonymity well I tried"

Maybe anonmity is not that important for your average user.  But, the ability to keep what is yours from being taken by thebanksters, TPTB, your local hacker, is an absolute.  The unconditional control of any CC must remain with the individual.

Mass privacy is very important. That is why Monero and Zcash matter. We'll never have mass anonymity. Fuhgeddaboudit.

Privacy doesn't mean privacy from the authorities. Sorry. Politics and technology will never allow it. I tried to search for the absolute technology for anonymity and I can promise you it does not exist to be found. I promise you.

The control over an individual's CC will remain with the individual, but the control over the CC protocol will remain with the global elite. This will always be the case. Accept it. This is the reality of the world we exist in.

You say the protocol will remain with the global elite ... will that include your version of a CC, should it ever come to fruition?