DECENTRALIZED crypto currency (including Bitcoin) is a delusion (any solutions?)

[iamnotback]

https://github.com/tromp/cuckoo/blob/master/doc/cuckoo.pdf?raw=true makes me think that being ASIC-resistant helps avoid centralization.

Actually the opposite, it makes it more vulnerable to centralized control because renting a 50% attack becomes feasible. My whitepaper will explain the pitfalls.

Mining farms on "the chain that rules them all" (i.e. Bitcoin) have huge sunk costs and thus will never rent out a 50% attack.

Also note that tromp and I publicly discussed his Cuckoo (in the Ethereum Paradox thread) and came to the conclusion that there can't be any ASIC-resistant algorithm. We can possible lower the relative efficiency of the ASIC, but we will never get it to lower than a couple orders-of-magnitude (or maybe one order compared to best of breed GPUs).

Also mining farms have another multiple of economy-of-scale efficiency w.r.t. to datacenter cost and electricity.

I have also totally refuted ArticMine's arguments about PoW as space heaters. That is all in my whitepaper.

Also repurposable mining equipment is fundamentally insecure because miners don't have any sunk costs:

https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos/issues/47#issuecomment-270437435

[iamnotback]

Following up on why Cosmos is insolubly broken:

https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos/issues/47#issuecomment-270377327

Well they banned me because they don't want to hear the truth that bonded validators can't ever work (not in Casper, Tendermint, Cosmos, or any other).

Any way, here is what I was going to post there next:

and added the ability to attribute blame to 1/3+ in the case of double spend forks, no matter the % of Byzantine voting power.

And that is your error as I have stated twice already. You can't assign blame in Byzantine agreement. Study it fundamentally, then will realize your mistake. Reading my whitepaper will provide the necessary understanding of the error in what you added.

P.S. What is this with open source projects banning those who want to report fatal flaws? Censorship is the antithesis of open source.

[David Rabahy]

Ok, I just didn't stop researching waiting for your breakthrough to be revealed.  A lot of activity in crypto makes it feel like we are getting somewhere but if it all stands on faulty footing then it'll be ugly when it comes down.  Is there any version of this that is "good enough"?  Bitcoin appears to "good enough" for now.  I personally am not hot on Ethereum but plenty of folks are and I do see the appeal.  Monero is coming on strong.  If the emperor is wearing no clothes and you've got an outfit ready then for goodness sakes say so as soon as possible.

[iamnotback]

Reading the following thread can give some insight into the knowledge I have gained from organizing the whitepaper:

https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos/issues/47

Following up on why Cosmos is insolubly broken:

https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos/issues/47#issuecomment-270377327

Well they banned me because they don't want to hear the truth that bonded validators can't ever work (not in Casper, Tendermint, Cosmos, or any other).

Any way, here is what I was going to post there next:

and added the ability to attribute blame to 1/3+ in the case of double spend forks, no matter the % of Byzantine voting power.

And that is your error as I have stated twice already. You can't assign blame in Byzantine agreement. Study it fundamentally, then will realize your mistake. Reading my whitepaper will provide the necessary understanding of the error in what you added.

P.S. What is this with open source projects banning those who want to report fatal flaws? Censorship is the antithesis of open source.

You can't possibly know wether or not casper is flawed

Yes I can. It is a fundamental taxonomy of possible workarounds to the FLP impossibility result. Read my whitepaper when it is released (although I don't think you will understand it but it is written to be comprehensible for those with reasonable analytical skills).

What @jaekwon (Cosmos/Tendermint) and others may not realize is that the fundamental limitations of Byzantine agreement can't be structured around with protocol. It is a fundamental limitation (due to physics of asynchrony). So they can obfuscate as much as they want with heapings of protocol complexity, so as to hide the fundamentals from themselves. But I understand the essence of genius.

So Casper is hiding the bonding collateral in the notion of betting from collateral, but they won't escape from the fundamental limitation which is that blame can't be objective (it is always ambiguous) in Byzantine agreement. The only alternative to Byzantine agreement is probabilitistic, asymptotic (e.g. PoW and my design which is not PoW but something new). But probabilitistic, asymptotic can't assign blame to malfeasance either (for example you can't prove that Bitcoin miners are censoring transactions from blockchain data objectively, you need external social information which is not objective).

I will double-check my logic on this again when I do the comprehensive re-read of my paper. Will report back here, if I find any flaw in my analysis.

My opinion, if you really want to do something, anything, then you should join others. You have nobody to debate and you'll apply your knowledge and logic on what is already known

I engage others in debate as I did with @jaekwon but he just banned me and shut down the Github issue when he decided he didn't want to let me explain further how his project is broken and can't be fixed. He expect me to unravel the obfuscation they have done with protocol and that is not my job. I already understand the fundamental reason blame is impossible. It is their job to find out how they obfuscated this fundamental in their understanding of their design. Or later I can take the time to write or hire someone to write a formal refutation of their Proof of Accountability. Why should I encourage them to stop working on their project and wasting their time? Much better for me to have one less potential competitor and not to lose my precious time doing their work for them. At the right time, we can make it 100% proven that their projects are a total failure. And that will best done when my project is already released. Don't wake up a sleeping dog prematurely.

I decided to take a quick look at Tendermint/Cosmos's Proof of Accountability again:

Proof of Fork Accountability

...


As a corollary, when there is a fork, an external process can determine the blame by requiring each validator to justify all of its round votes. Either we will find 1/3+ who cannot justify at least one of their votes, and/or, we will find 1/3+ who had double-signed.

I explain in my whitepaper why their assumption above is incorrect. Here is the quote from my white paper:

1.2 Byzantine Agreement

The proof of the non-asymptotic form of BFT is intuitive in the example scenario where every node is a voter and each candidate blockchain block is an election epoch. If every vote is correct, BFT only applies to faults which are unresponsive nodes; thus a quorum of only a majority of votes is required to obtain an unambiguous result because any ordering of blocks is always non-conflicting (or equivalently if the coordination of voting is synchronized such that conflicting order can’t exist, but then BFT isn’t applicable per the ^* footnote of prior section). For example, if validators of transactions never vote for a conflicting transaction such as a double-spend, then given two attempted elections for a pair of consecutive blocks of transactions, the minimum number of voters which commit to both elections is fₛ = 2T - N - 1, where T is the minimum quorum size for each election. Thus T ≥ (N + 1)/2 where 2T - N - 1 ≥ 0 because 0 safety is required given every vote is non-conflicting. But in the Byzantine agreement case wherein malevolent^† and/or asynchronous (i.e. caused by random, ambiguous propagation ordering) validators can vote for blocks that contain conflicting transactions, the minimum number of voters which commit to both elections fₛ = 2T - N - 1 must be greater than the number of excess voters not needed to form a quorum fₗ = N - T, so that a quorum for a conflicting pair of blocks can’t exist because there aren’t enough uncommitted voters to vote for it, i.e. T ≥ N - fₛ.^{[^Tendermint-safety]}  Thus T ≥ (2N + 1)/3 where 2T - N - 1 ≥ N - T, fₛ is the safety margin, and fₗ is liveness.^{[^BFT-derivation]} This result which is mathematically equivalent to N = 3f + 1 where f = fₛ = fₗ, is analogous to the N = 3m + 1 generals for m traitors result for the Byzantine Generals Problem (aka “BGP”).^{[^BGP]}

Liveness fₗ in this context is the maximum number of unresponsive and/or malevolent nodes allowed for the system to not stall all quorums and/or censor for which blocks quorums are allowed. Safety margin fₛ is the minimum number of voters which must commit to a pair of blocks to prevent ambiguous ordering of blocks. Even if only a single election would ever be held for a set of signing keys which represent the voters,  applies in any nonsynchronous (aka “asynchronous”) case when there isn’t trust of a designated centralized tally, because voters can irrefutably claim that an epoch expired and they signed a new vote for a new epoch. It is even irrefutable that a trusted centralized tally did not receive a vote.^{[^he-said-she-said] [^ambiguous-fault]}

Some systems may opt for more safety margin at the detriment of reduced liveness by choosing a larger minimum quorum size T.^{[^BFT-derivation]}

Marbles in Jars Example

The proof in the Byzantine agreement case is easy to visualize with 3 voters who can each vote with marbles of one color representing their signing key: red, white, and blue. Given 3 jars representing ballot boxes for 3 elections on the consensus ordering of any two of them (wherein the jars could represent blockchain blocks), two marbles can be placed in each jar without any color voting more than twice― i.e. no voter has cheated yet the consensus is ambiguous. Declaring any of the jars as the first, results in two choices (aka “forks”) for which jar is the next. One jar has red and white, another red and blue, and another white and blue. This is why the proof requires that the excess of the quorum be less than ¹/₃ (aka “-¹/₃”). So by adding a voter with green marbles so that smallest minority reduces from ¹/₃ to ¹/₄ which is thus -¹/₃, the ambiguity is resolved because the green marble can only be placed in 2 of the 3 jars― again presuming no voter cheated to vote more than twice. Thus +²/₃ instead of ¹/₂+ is required for quorums in the presence of possible malevolence (and/or honest ambiguity due to random propagation delays) given an asynchronous network, otherwise the ordering of the quorums can’t be proven.

Note if any 3 of the 4 marbles are colluding, i.e. ²/₃ or more (aka “+²/₃”) of the voters are malevolent, they can vote for as many conflicting quorums (forks) as they wish and it will be ambiguous which of the 4 marbles is cheating, because given 3 sets of 3 jars, a different one of the 3 cheaters can vote in each set. And the honest voter has to vote on the fork which the quorum is extending, because otherwise not voting is indistinguishable from unresponsive. It can’t be irrefutably proven that the 3 malevolent marbles were cheating and colluding because they can each claim that other one became unresponsive; thus voting for more than two quorums became necessary. And the honest marble voted more than twice also. Propagation order and responsiveness can’t be proven nor disproven in an asynchronous network.

† _{The adjectives “malevolent” or “attacking” applied to nodes means a colluding or centralized controlled group of nodes.}

[^Tendermint-safety]  _{Jae Kwon, Ethan Buchman. Tendermint Wiki, Tendermint Github project, §Byzantine Consensus Algorithm: Proof of Safety, Jun 18, 2014.}

[^BFT-derivation] _{David Mazieres. The Stellar Consensus Protocol: A Federated Model for Internet-level Consensus. Stellar Development Foundation, §5.4.3. Comparison to centralized voting, Feb 25, 2016.}

[^BGP] _{Leslie Lamport, Robert Shostak, and Marshall Pease. The Byzantine Generals Problem. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, Vol. 4, No. 3, , pp. 382–401, July 1982. Mark Nelson. The Byzantine Generals Problem. Dr. Dobb’s (drdobbs.com), Mar 18, 2008.}

[^he-said-she-said] _{Andreas Haeberlen, Petr Kuznetsov, and Peter Druschel. Practical Accountability for Distributed Systems. Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Future Directions in Distributed Computing (FuDiCo III), Bertinoro, Italy, §2.2 Proofs and verifiable evidence, p. 2, June 2007.}

[^ambiguous-fault] _{Shelby Moore III, Unprovable accountability for network communication, Bitcointalk.org, “Transactions as Proof of Stake White Paper” thread, post #19, Dec 4, 2013.}

[iamnotback]

Armstrong on bitcoin again

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/bitcoin-is-it-sustainable/

Doesn't really get into it in any depth. Seems convinced govt will ban it if it grows.

Armstrong doesn't understand that it is technically implausible to ban Bitcoin.

He doesn't understand that is why Bitcoin is the new escape valve, i.e. the new gold per my discussion with CoinCube. Bitcoin is transportable and gold no longer is.

We will need a world government and complete totalitarian control over every server that connects to the Internet via every host in the world in order to regulate crypto-currency and blockchains. We need absolute global totalitarianism in order to relegate crypto-currency to the new uselessness of gold, and that won't happen during this global collapse (that is for a future time as the Bible predicts). It isn't only Bitcoin, there are many altcoins.

Please send this rebuttal to Armstrong.

The reserve currency is a narrow phenomenon that has more to do with the dying Industrial Age (see my comments in the Economic Devastation thread for more insights).

Bitcoin is serving a purpose in this evolution but it is not the be-all or end-all of this technological transformation.

Make sure you read this:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1082909.msg17458485#msg17458485

As you've stated, Bitcoin could become the world's reserve currency - the institutional playground.

I have never said that and have instead argued that it won't be the reserve currency. Perhaps you are confusing where I have written that Bitcoin is the reserve currency of the altcoin ecosystem.

Yes, my mistake - altcoin reserve.

Would it be possible for Bitcoin to become a global reserve currency at all? I'm assuming competitive collusion among major governments along with addition of control and tracking sufficient to enable AML/KYC for those governments.

The coming SDRs reserve currency will be a compromise by all the nations to fix the coming strong dollar vortex global collapse. That reserve currency is for the Industrial Age economy (the one built with huge fixed capital investment and huge fractional reserve banking leverage). The leftists (collectivists) are enslaving themselves in that dying, but huge albatross monolith. Gold is dying along with that physical economy. We will still have a physical economy, but it will provide no real economic growth and it will become very small in terms of profit relative to the Knowledge Age economy over the coming decades.

Bitcoin, blockchains, and altcoins are the decentralization technology of the fledgling Knowledge Age which rises to replace the dying Industrial Age, as a network effect of the decentralized Internet. Bitcoin is the reserve currency of that new nascent economy.

The economy and society are bifurcating. I predicted this years ago and have been using that term bifurcation.

[iamnotback]

Shelby, what about POS coins? Don`t you think they are totally immune from government controls?

Expect they are always controlled by a few whales, and thus the authorities can target those whales.

Centralization is always the weak point.

[Dink]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

 

[hv_]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

Stabilitiy is a state of equilibrium that can only happen with a critical mass of bids and ask...

Btw first adoption happens from traders liking exactly the high volatility.

[sidhujag]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

Stabilitiy is a state of equilibrium that can only happen with a critical mass of bids and ask...

Btw first adoption happens from traders liking exactly the high volatility.

Exactly.. btc should see usd like stability in terms of pip ranges per day at about 10k or 100k usd.. anything under will see big changes from fear and greed

[Fuserleer]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

This guy knows what he's talking about and that is almost exactly what we are doing

Elastic supply gives the resources required to do said market making.

If you are wondering it works VERY well!

[hv_]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

This guy knows what he's talking about and that is almost exactly what we are doing

Elastic supply gives the resources required to do said market making.

If you are wondering it works VERY well!

... Said the FED and Keynsyman.

I believe in open markets and selfregulation. The less but genius rules the better. Who are you try to get control over complex systems? God?

[Fuserleer]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

This guy knows what he's talking about and that is almost exactly what we are doing

Elastic supply gives the resources required to do said market making.

If you are wondering it works VERY well!

... Said the FED and Keynsyman.

I believe in open markets and selfregulation. The less but genius rules the better. Who are you try to get control over complex systems? God?

Just because one attempt failed spectacularly due to a number of issues such as a biased distribution, delay in economic information propagation, abuse of money creation, greed and corruption; doesn't mean it can't work if managed and regulated properly.

If an economic system is void of the above issues, which decentralized technology now allows us to do, then at the macro scale it simply comes down to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand.

[iamnotback]

After I get some sleep when I am back home, I will explain what I think we need in terms of crypto-currency and blockchains in order for them to play this role that gold used to have but no longer can fulfill.

The governments are getting organized so as to prevent anyone from having assets for which they can't show a paper trail indicating that they have paid all their taxes and that the wealth was not ill gotten such as money laundering.

It is possible that in a Marxist global collapse (or even only your own country which claims you as a tax slave for a wealth tax), the governments go bezerk and basically confiscate all wealth. This would be a Dark Age if it were global.

This problem was quite easy to solve with cash, you would open a business then spend you cash as a customer at your own business thus laundering the cash and making it legit. (note I am not advocating illegal activity, but rather just stating what others did)

But governments are eliminating cash.

And gold can't serve this function, because nobody pays for anything with gold any more.

This is why a crypto-currency that has a high amount of use for payments on the Internet for the Knowledge Age (think of micropayments for example) can serve a function that gold used to provide (but no longer does) as being a way to preserve assets. Decentralization will be a crucial feature of such a crypto-currency and nobody has shown such a technology yet.

Until the world government has a 666 id on every human on the planet, then there is no way they are practically going to be able track every micropayment. We are still some decades away from that 666 result.

Remember my thesis is the monetary systems of the world will bifurcate into a usurious fiat system seving the dying Industrial Age and a crypto-currency system serving the fledgling Knowledge Age. Let the Marxists have their dying system with SDRs and national currencies enslaved to the SDRs. That is not for us. We are moving forward. It is very likely that the Marxists are going to cull themselves. We should not subscribe to their system.

Tinfoil hats are living in some archaic delusion and are going to miss the boat.

[iamnotback]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability.

I visualize a mass adoption wherein the users are watching their balances grow continuously and thus they are not concerned about volatility because they are invested in the paradigm.

They are involved because they love the concept and what it provides for giving them more freedom to do various endeavors on the Internet. Do people use Facebook because the price might go up or down?

We can't successfully approach crypto-currency as a checking account. That will never happen. See my prior post about my bifurcation thesis.

Crypto-currency will serve a fledgling niche that can't be served by fiat. Why? Because fiat can't be spent globally in a millisecond to a microtransaction. There are billions of people who don't have a credit card or who wouldn't even hassle with entering their credit card number for some microtransactions. Onboarding is a key concept (millions or billions of them won't be buying the crypto-currency for these micropayments). The larger the ecosystem, the more demand for the crypto-currency, thus the price increases.

[hv_]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

This guy knows what he's talking about and that is almost exactly what we are doing

Elastic supply gives the resources required to do said market making.

If you are wondering it works VERY well!

... Said the FED and Keynsyman.

I believe in open markets and selfregulation. The less but genius rules the better. Who are you try to get control over complex systems? God?

Just because one attempt failed spectacularly due to a number of issues such as a biased distribution, delay in economic information propagation, abuse of money creation, greed and corruption; doesn't mean it can't work if managed and regulated properly.

If an economic system is void of the above issues, which decentralized technology now allows us to do, then at the macro scale it simply comes down to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand.

Ok, I see we talk about sth very different. You talk about goods and services, I was about money.

[Fuserleer]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

This guy knows what he's talking about and that is almost exactly what we are doing

Elastic supply gives the resources required to do said market making.

If you are wondering it works VERY well!

... Said the FED and Keynsyman.

I believe in open markets and selfregulation. The less but genius rules the better. Who are you try to get control over complex systems? God?

Just because one attempt failed spectacularly due to a number of issues such as a biased distribution, delay in economic information propagation, abuse of money creation, greed and corruption; doesn't mean it can't work if managed and regulated properly.

If an economic system is void of the above issues, which decentralized technology now allows us to do, then at the macro scale it simply comes down to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand.

Ok, I see we talk about sth very different. You talk about goods and services, I was about money.

Not at all, you can quantify money to fit the same simple parameters as supply and demand economics if you are smart about it.

[hv_]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

This guy knows what he's talking about and that is almost exactly what we are doing

Elastic supply gives the resources required to do said market making.

If you are wondering it works VERY well!

... Said the FED and Keynsyman.

I believe in open markets and selfregulation. The less but genius rules the better. Who are you try to get control over complex systems? God?

Just because one attempt failed spectacularly due to a number of issues such as a biased distribution, delay in economic information propagation, abuse of money creation, greed and corruption; doesn't mean it can't work if managed and regulated properly.

If an economic system is void of the above issues, which decentralized technology now allows us to do, then at the macro scale it simply comes down to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand.

Ok, I see we talk about sth very different. You talk about goods and services, I was about money.

Not at all, you can quantify money to fit the same simple parameters as supply and demand economics if you are smart about it.

If you manage to set money equal to work hours you would not want anybody doing some elastic to your work time, would you?

[Fuserleer]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

This guy knows what he's talking about and that is almost exactly what we are doing

Elastic supply gives the resources required to do said market making.

If you are wondering it works VERY well!

... Said the FED and Keynsyman.

I believe in open markets and selfregulation. The less but genius rules the better. Who are you try to get control over complex systems? God?

Just because one attempt failed spectacularly due to a number of issues such as a biased distribution, delay in economic information propagation, abuse of money creation, greed and corruption; doesn't mean it can't work if managed and regulated properly.

If an economic system is void of the above issues, which decentralized technology now allows us to do, then at the macro scale it simply comes down to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand.

Ok, I see we talk about sth very different. You talk about goods and services, I was about money.

Not at all, you can quantify money to fit the same simple parameters as supply and demand economics if you are smart about it.

If you manage to set money equal to work hours you would not want anybody doing some elastic to your work time, would you?

That's a different paradigm though as its the consumption of a resource you can not get more of easily (or at all) thus it is a scare commodity.  There is no way to regulate that and it has to operate under free-market principles.

Think of money akin to something that can be cheaply manufactured yet maybe worth more than the sum of its parts (demand).  The manufacturing process and assembly line for said money is the network itself with its consensus and economic rules.

If you manufacture too much of something, its perceived value drops, and vice versa if you don't create enough.  Same applies with money.

The whole philosophy of inflation, and the central banks informing us that inflation is good, is so that the newly "printed" money at the top of the pyramid is worth the same as the money at the bottom so they can extract more value from it before the currency devalues slightly due to over supply.  As the new money trickles down the broad economy starts to feel the effect of it and the value of each unit in circulation devalues, pushing the price of good and services up.

If you remove that abuse alone, then already we are on the way to a more stable and dependable currency.

Ultimately my point is, that just because you and a few of use here know how to use volatile money, the rest of the world does not and expects a currency to be stable from day to day.  Until that happens, crypto and alternative money systems will remain under adopted at large.

[Peachy]

As the old expression goes:  Money doesn't make the world go round, but it sure does grease the wheels.

Effectively, money (whether you want to call it a commodity, currency, sovereign stock certificate, SDR...or whatever) is much like the oil in an engine.  Too much oil (inflation) and the real working parts of the engine of progress begin to breakdown due to stresses on the seals and eventually leads to engine leaks.  Too little oil (deflation) and the engine runs the risk of locking/freezing up (depression).

Managing the supply is something that needs to be monitored in near-real time autonomously and be responded to accurately (i.e. without emotional or political bias).  Keeping the level "just right" is what the system should do (and does).

[hv_]

I have been following you for years with much interest, I post very little.  How to you plan to stablize the price of your coin?   I realize that the market will ultimatly decide the value of a coin but for mass adoption I believe you will need some measure of stability, even if it means a slow and steady increase in the value of your work.
  It seems most people will not 'mass adopt' unless there is some level of stability. If you look at the jump(pump) and fall of any coin it does not take much to realize that an astute individual would not accept the great variance in price without abandoning a coin.  Even for a smaller holder...having 50$ one day and only 30$ the next because of great swing in price and lack of trust in the whole system will not produce the mass adoption you are looking for.  I realize social media adoption may be a bit diffrent but I think the idea for stability in price still applies. I also realize a pegged price seems to be a failure at this point...

Your thoughts?

D

  

You cannot stabilize exchange rates during any exponential growth phase unless you having unlimit money to do narrow market making.

This guy knows what he's talking about and that is almost exactly what we are doing

Elastic supply gives the resources required to do said market making.

If you are wondering it works VERY well!

... Said the FED and Keynsyman.

I believe in open markets and selfregulation. The less but genius rules the better. Who are you try to get control over complex systems? God?

Just because one attempt failed spectacularly due to a number of issues such as a biased distribution, delay in economic information propagation, abuse of money creation, greed and corruption; doesn't mean it can't work if managed and regulated properly.

If an economic system is void of the above issues, which decentralized technology now allows us to do, then at the macro scale it simply comes down to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand.

Ok, I see we talk about sth very different. You talk about goods and services, I was about money.

Not at all, you can quantify money to fit the same simple parameters as supply and demand economics if you are smart about it.

If you manage to set money equal to work hours you would not want anybody doing some elastic to your work time, would you?

That's a different paradigm though as its the consumption of a resource you can not get more of easily (or at all) thus it is a scare commodity.  There is no way to regulate that and it has to operate under free-market principles.

Think of money akin to something that can be cheaply manufactured yet maybe worth more than the sum of its parts (demand).  The manufacturing process and assembly line for said money is the network itself with its consensus and economic rules.

If you manufacture too much of something, its perceived value drops, and vice versa if you don't create enough.  Same applies with money.

The whole philosophy of inflation, and the central banks informing us that inflation is good, is so that the newly "printed" money at the top of the pyramid is worth the same as the money at the bottom so they can extract more value from it before the currency devalues slightly due to over supply.  As the new money trickles down the broad economy starts to feel the effect of it and the value of each unit in circulation devalues, pushing the price of good and services up.

If you remove that abuse alone, then already we are on the way to a more stable and dependable currency.

Ultimately my point is, that just because you and a few of use here know how to use volatile money, the rest of the world does not and expects a currency to be stable from day to day.  Until that happens, crypto and alternative money systems will remain under adopted at large.

I see you try to do your last fight here and regulators like you need more and more words for that to tweek logic.

All what you do with your ellastic supply of money, work, store of value is taking the risk from the lemmings, keep them uneducated and get rich personally. I would recommend you have good disclaimers on that.

I try to,educate the lemmings. You judge what helps more to our world.