The Ethereum Paradox

[r0ach]

Who the hell is cryptohunter?

[1713994041]

1713994041

[1713994041]

1713994041

[bl234st]

Who the hell is cryptohunter?

 He went after Evan and his gang of thieves for the Dark instamine a few years ago. He was just a teenager at the time. You are just a whining little bitch who has no credibility. At least cryptohunter did something. What have you contributed to crypto? Parroting people who are much, much, much smarter than you?

[bitfish]

Not when you have r0ach and Spoetnik FUDing up the place.

Yea, calling a scam a scam is "fud" right?  Even Goldman Sachs is like "wow this thing is one horrible financial instrument", and their usual investments are things like...mortgage backed securities haha.

Pffft..  ETH is still breaking out whether you like it or not.  That's what the market is doing, all your envy, jealousy and hate will have no positive impact on yourselves.  Just trade what seems to be a start of another trend and be happy win or lose.

Well said, thank you.
But we should feel empathy for these folks who cannot change their skin. They are prisoners of their negative egos.
I feel sorry for them. Poor souls...

[r0ach]

He went after Evan and his gang of thieves for the Dark instamine a few years ago. He was just a teenager at the time. You are just a whining little bitch who has no credibility. At least cryptohunter did something. What have you contributed to crypto? Parroting people who are much, much, much smarter than you?

Guys, I know you're all worried the single entity that is not even more than one person manipulating the price of Eth upwards is going to dump on you any second, but let's try to be civil here.

Cheer up, have a look at the Bitcoin charts:

https://twitter.com/bbands/status/733009813815222273

[eca.sh]

Proof of stake just doesn't work in the long run

Define long run.
POW stopped working for Bitcoin years ago. It doesn't represent the one cpu = one vote goal since ages. it kinda works, but so do paypal and visa.

It is not clear if proof-of-stake is legal in the USA when it is associated with an ICO.

[freshman777]

Proof of stake just doesn't work in the long run

Define long run.
POW stopped working for Bitcoin years ago. It doesn't represent the one cpu = one vote goal since ages. it kinda works, but so do paypal and visa.

It is not clear if proof-of-stake is legal in the USA when it is associated with an ICO.

Is this your definition of "doesn't work" ?

[r0ach]

Proof of stake just doesn't work in the long run

Define long run.
POW stopped working for Bitcoin years ago. It doesn't represent the one cpu = one vote goal since ages. it kinda works, but so do paypal and visa.

It is not clear if proof-of-stake is legal in the USA when it is associated with an ICO.

Is this your definition of "doesn't work" ?

Don't worry, people who work at Eth like Nick Szabo also know proof of stake doesn't work.  Why do you think he wanted Eth to stay on PoW?  All recursive systems are by definition not even decentralized currencies/networks in the first place.

[Zocadas]

Not when you have r0ach and Spoetnik FUDing up the place.

Yea, calling a scam a scam is "fud" right?  Even Goldman Sachs is like "wow this thing is one horrible financial instrument", and their usual investments are things like...mortgage backed securities haha.

Pffft..  ETH is still breaking out whether you like it or not.  That's what the market is doing, all your envy, jealousy and hate will have no positive impact on yourselves.  Just trade what seems to be a start of another trend and be happy win or lose.

Well said, thank you.
But we should feel empathy for these folks who cannot change their skin. They are prisoners of their negative egos.
I feel sorry for them. Poor souls...

This might not finish well. But we will not know the results in a few years. The investment is long term.

[freshman777]

Proof of stake just doesn't work in the long run

Define long run.
POW stopped working for Bitcoin years ago. It doesn't represent the one cpu = one vote goal since ages. it kinda works, but so do paypal and visa.

It is not clear if proof-of-stake is legal in the USA when it is associated with an ICO.

Is this your definition of "doesn't work" ?

Don't worry, people who work at Eth like Nick Szabo also know proof of stake doesn't work.  Why do you think he wanted Eth to stay on PoW?  All recursive systems are by definition not even decentralized currencies/networks in the first place.

Nick and others are biased.

[r0ach]

Don't worry, people who work at Eth like Nick Szabo also know proof of stake doesn't work.  Why do you think he wanted Eth to stay on PoW?  All recursive systems are by definition not even decentralized currencies/networks in the first place.

Nick and others are biased.

A guy that works at Eth is "biased"?  You're a known Eth shill/scammer, but please feel free to explain that nonsensical comment.

[eca.sh]

Proof of stake just doesn't work in the long run

Define long run.
POW stopped working for Bitcoin years ago. It doesn't represent the one cpu = one vote goal since ages. it kinda works, but so do paypal and visa.

It is not clear if proof-of-stake is legal in the USA when it is associated with an ICO.

Is this your definition of "doesn't work" ?

What is your definition of "stopped working"? Bitcoin is operational.

[ProfessionalGoogler]

Don't worry, people who work at Eth like Nick Szabo also know proof of stake doesn't work.  Why do you think he wanted Eth to stay on PoW?  All recursive systems are by definition not even decentralized currencies/networks in the first place.

Nick and others are biased.

A guy that works at Eth is "biased"?  You're a known Eth shill/scammer, but please feel free to explain that nonsensical comment.

Everyone is a known shill/scammer to r0ach.

I think I met him once.

[freshman777]

But of course Nick Szabo is biased! Every Bitcoin dev is biased about where Bitcoin development should be directed, you only need to look at their block size debates. Few humans can overcome their nature, specially when they are vested in something it's extremely hard to maintain an objective viewpoint, you, r0ach, is a prominent example of this. You've been promising that Bitcoin will break out upwards and selling this as a sure thing to n00bs and now they are f*cked. Bitcoin just broke the channel it was in since January. It's retards like you that damage Bitcoin by relentless shilling in lieu of urging devs to fix Bitcoin technical flaws.

[smooth]

But of course Nick Szabo is biased! Every Bitcoin dev is biased

Nick Szabo has never been a Bitcoin dev, unless you consider him to be (all or part of) the Satoshi Nakamoto identity, in which case he hasn't been a Bitcoin dev for five years or so.

[freshman777]

But of course Nick Szabo is biased! Every Bitcoin dev is biased

Nick Szabo has never been a Bitcoin dev, unless you consider him to be (all or part of) the Satoshi Nakamoto identity, in which case he hasn't been a dev for five years or so.

I didn't say he was. Bitcoin devs are an example of how devs can be biased and their words should be taken with a grain of salt. Nick is a Eth dev and he is biased just like Bitcoin devs are biased, like every human.

[smooth]

But of course Nick Szabo is biased! Every Bitcoin dev is biased

Nick Szabo has never been a Bitcoin dev, unless you consider him to be (all or part of) the Satoshi Nakamoto identity, in which case he hasn't been a dev for five years or so.

I didn't say he was. Bitcoin devs are an example of how devs can be biased and their words should be taken with a grain of salt. Nick is a Eth dev and he is biased just like Bitcoin devs are biased, like every human.

I don't think he's really an Eth dev, either. He's given some talks at Eth events, and has been involved in some Eth businesses.

Anyway, he's obviously someone who has been around crypto for a long time and has a deep understanding of many of the issues. That doesn't mean he is always right but I'd give his opinions a fair amount of weight, and if I disagreed with him about something in the domain I'd want to hear his reasons.

[r0ach]

Already covered why Vitalik likes proof of stake.  Even though all recursive systems (PoS) are inherently permissioned ledgers and not decentralized networks, he has some crazy, far leftist view that capitalism will cease to exist and everything will be run by authoritarian technocrats (which I'm sure he loves to pretend he will be one).  PoW only works in capitalist systems.  PoS, just like all permissioned ledgers (the US dollar is a federated chain), is ideal for usury based, neo-feudalistic, slave plantations.  

Vitalik slobbering over the idea of being trapped inside a completely vertically integrated, centrally planned, communist regime where capitalism doesn't exist, and all means of production and methods of travel are controlled by the state:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5VVmTI9F9s&feature=youtu.be&t=168

[freshman777]

Already covered why Vitalik likes proof of stake.  Even though all recursive systems (PoS) are inherently permissioned ledgers and not decentralized networks, he has some crazy, far leftist view that capitalism will cease to exist and everything will be run by authoritarian technocrats (which I'm sure he loves to pretend he will be one).  PoW only works in capitalist systems.  PoS, just like all permissioned ledgers (the US dollar is a federated chain), is ideal for all usury based, neo-feudalistic, slave plantations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5VVmTI9F9s&feature=youtu.be&t=168

This is BS. Proof of stake is capitalist. Stakeholders own means of production, in their stakes. In Proof of work most users don't have this luxury, means of production are concentrated among 0.01%. PoW descends to corporatism, corporations controlling means of production, while PoS is many small business owners, read mom and pop shops, producing and validating blocks. For all intents and purposes PoS is a more capitalist system and I don't care how Vitalik views it. You shouldn't either, think for yourself.

[eca.sh]

Proof of stake is capitalist.

Voting is never capitalist.

Stakeholders own means of production, in their stakes.

Voters own the means to have their wealth siphoned away in the inexorable powerlaw distribution of wealth.

Money is not a corporation.

It is also true that proof-of-work is convergent (or divergent depending on your basis expectation) on the powerlaw of distribution of wealth.

How do we remove wealth from a decentralized consensus protocol 

[freshman777]

Proof of stake is capitalist.

Voting is never capitalist.

Stakeholders own means of production, in their stakes.

Voters own the means to have their wealth siphoned away in the inexorable powerlaw distribution of wealth.

Money is not a corporation.

It is also true that proof-of-work is convergent (or divergent depending on your basis expectation) on the powerlaw of distribution of wealth.

How do we remove wealth from a decentralized consensus protocol  

Powerlaw distribution of wealth in cryptocoins is a non issue. Wealth will be distributed and re-distributed many times for the simple reason that code can be cloned unlike material wealth like gold. You don't expect in the future one global ledger, one world currency like most nerds here, do you?
Bitcoin is not backed by electrical power consumed to produce blocks, its idea can be copied and re-implemented. Its value is based on faith, we're watching some of this faith evaporating now to competition. Competition is code as well and wealth will be re-distributed to better competition, and so on, ad nauseam.