Synereo

[jimscarver]

Have I not explained my stance now?

Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.

Because they have only provided hand-waving technobabble and no specification that could be peer reviewed by anyone here.

The rest of your post was a combination of disingenuous drivel and more hype to pump some technobabble. Good luck.

Again you are speaking nonsense. There is ample material for review and comment at http://blog.synereo.com/ and the basic information at http://www.synereo.com/learn-more/, in the weekly hangouts and on the slack.

While I agree completely that more formal up do date publications would be nice, there are some pretty awesome innovations weekly and no paper submitted for publication would be out of date before it came out.  Greg's academic credentials are beyond question and there is more formal definition behind synereo than 99% of the decentralized applications out there.  Greg has done some recent papers http://www.mathpubs.com/author/Lucius+Gregory+Meredith have much more meat than the "hand waving" you characterize. I consider Greg's time better spent on developing Synereo which is why the community is taking on expressing Greg's abstract mathematics in terms you might understand.

[TPTB_need_war]

Have I not explained my stance now?

Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.

Because they have only provided hand-waving technobabble and no specification that could be peer reviewed by anyone here.

The rest of your post was a combination of disingenuous drivel and more hype to pump some technobabble. Good luck.

Again you are speaking nonsense. There is ample material for review and comment at http://blog.synereo.com/ and the basic information at http://www.synereo.com/learn-more/, in the weekly hangouts and on the slack.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-waving

I tried to extract the details from those various resources and was unable to. It is hand-waving technobabble. You can continue to lie to readers. That is your prerogative.

While I agree completely that more formal up do date publications would be nice, there are some pretty awesome innovations weekly

Formal paper won't help us to vet it. We need a layman's explanation of the math. And pretty awesome technobabble hype is hand-waving.

I consider Greg's time better spent on developing Synereo which is why the community is taking on expressing Greg's abstract mathematics in terms you might understand.

Okay you can delay the inevitable wherein it will be shown to be a flawed technology. That will not help you.

There is a huge gulf between abstract theory and practice. Every homebuilder knows this. Greg will be cut down to size by reality later.

[fartbags]

Synereo has no technology because both Bitcoin and Ethereum currently do not scale to the capacity Synereo will need. They are waiting for Ethereum 2.0. They are also working with Ethereum to create Ethereum 2.0.

$AMP is super over priced and has always been. Unfortunately there is big money involved in cryptocoins. They make deals in the background and manipulate markets to ensure they establish a free position while others are unable to obtain many coins.


This is the new scene. If you like the idea of Synereo "Social Contracts" combined with Ethereum "Smart Contracts" then you may want to check out the DAO that is starting to take off. They plan to use both technologies (once they are released)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1365958.0

[DecentralizeEconomics]

Have I not explained my stance now?

Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.

Because they have only provided hand-waving technobabble and no specification that could be peer reviewed by anyone here.

The rest of your post was a combination of disingenuous drivel and more hype to pump some technobabble. Good luck.

Again you are speaking nonsense. There is ample material for review and comment at http://blog.synereo.com/ and the basic information at http://www.synereo.com/learn-more/, in the weekly hangouts and on the slack.

While I agree completely that more formal up do date publications would be nice, there are some pretty awesome innovations weekly and no paper submitted for publication would be out of date before it came out.  Greg's academic credentials are beyond question and there is more formal definition behind synereo than 99% of the decentralized applications out there.  Greg has done some recent papers http://www.mathpubs.com/author/Lucius+Gregory+Meredith have much more meat than the "hand waving" you characterize. I consider Greg's time better spent on developing Synereo which is why the community is taking on expressing Greg's abstract mathematics in terms you might understand.

Jim, you might as well not waste your time on this guy.  He likes to make a lot of outlandish claims, but in reality, he knows nothing.  He's full of hot air and not a rational individual.  Anyone with any common sense can tell that he's not stable.

[SynereoCommunity]

..my observation that they would need to structure rep different for different #hashtags, which is no where in the whitepaper.

Sure it is.  That is explained across several sections in the white paper.
2.2.2
2.2.7

and more in 2.7 - within pi-calculus.

One thing that might help, is to understand how other terms are used instead of the perhaps more familiar "hashtag".  It is just a content identifier.  You will find this represented by other terms, like "channels", "syntactic entities", or terms specific to pi-calculus like "persisted queues", or even the word "network", as this does not apply to "gods-eye" perspectives here - so these sub-groups are most typically defined by a topic, or keyword.

Content delivery is one of the true innovations of Synereo; it is baked into it deeply.  REO functions with it, and based on it.

[SynereoCommunity]

Synereo has no technology because both Bitcoin and Ethereum currently do not scale to the capacity Synereo will need. They are waiting for Ethereum 2.0. They are also working with Ethereum to create Ethereum 2.0.

Has no technology?  And I suppose the Sun has no Helium?

We not need the scalable blockchain to launch Beta, and introduce several unprecedented features into the market.  So there is no "waiting", only building and creating.

$AMP is super over priced and has always been. Unfortunately there is big money involved in cryptocoins. They make deals in the background and manipulate markets to ensure they establish a free position while others are unable to obtain many coins.

Complete rubbish.  The price of anything is subjective.  If you think something is overpriced, fine.  But please refrain from simply badmouthing other people's work for other reasons.  It's really not cool.

There are no "background deals", or you would not have heard of them.  There is no manipulation whatsoever.  Synereo does not pay attention to short-term speculators, or daily price. 

[TPTB_need_war]

One thing that might help, is to understand how other terms are used instead of the perhaps more familiar "hashtag".  It is just a content identifier.  You will find this represented by other terms, like "channels", "syntactic entities", or terms specific to pi-calculus like "persisted queues", or even the word "network", as this does not apply to "gods-eye" perspectives here - so these sub-groups are most typically defined by a topic, or keyword.

So in short, Greg is using a private language for technobabble.

That is sure helpful for peer review.  

There is no manipulation whatsoever.

An ICO is inherently manipulation.


I need to bow out of this debate now because I have important work to focus on. Don't expect further replies. Good luck.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

I need to bow out of this debate now. Don't expect further replies. Good luck.

Lol... once your position becomes untenable you abandon the conversation.  Hilarious.

[SynereoCommunity]

One thing that might help, is to understand how other terms are used instead of the perhaps more familiar "hashtag".  It is just a content identifier.  You will find this represented by other terms, like "channels", "syntactic entities", or terms specific to pi-calculus like "persisted queues", or even the word "network", as this does not apply to "gods-eye" perspectives here - so these sub-groups are most typically defined by a topic, or keyword.

So in short, Greg is using a private language for technobabble.

That is sure helpful for peer review.  

Well, if you don't understand something, maybe I can help?  You are the only one saying it's "technobabble" - which just means you don't recognize it.  I understand it just fine.  Content management, including "hastags", is sophisticated, and thorough in Synereo.  Your "hashtags" are not left out, even though that concept does not appear in Twitter-language form.

And yes, you will find the same expressions in peer-reviewed papers, textbooks, etc.

There is no manipulation whatsoever.

An ICO is inherently manipulation.

I need to bow out of this debate now because I have important work to focus on. Don't expect further replies. Good luck.

Again, your opinion is yours - but we're not having a one-on-one conversation here; you are broadcasting.

A link to your opinion does not justify, or excuse your claim.  You think all "ICOs" are manipulation.  No one else does.


Best of luck to your project.

[TPTB_need_war]

You think all "ICOs" are manipulation.

I am confident they are ILLEGAL if publicly marketed to USA investors.

And no those weren't just my opinions. You will always try to distort what I wrote. How about you just state what you think about Synereo and stop trying to tell readers what I said. They can read my posts to see what I wrote.

Greg @ Synereo is avoiding explaining all the specification and technology to us in terms we can understand. No excuses you can make for that which are valid. He is selling AMPs and not giving us information we can verify. That is an illegal prospectus. If Synereo didn't sell AMPs to the public, Greg et al would have no obligation to explain the technology in detail to us in terms we can understand and verify.

Edit: it is rather useless if I go expend my scarce time to become an expert in process calculi so that I could find game theory flaws in Synereo's process calculi approach to their hyped Attention Model feature. Because it would still be an asymmetric information market for the investors, as then they would be required to trust either my conclusions or Greg's (Synereo's). The only solution is for Greg to do proper disclosure by explaining the technology in terms that all AMP investors can understand. They have the time to produce a very exquisite website and consume hours every week on video Hangouts that do hyped handwaving on technical details, then they should also have enough time to explain the technology in sufficient detail that we can analyze without requiring us to become one of the few process calculi researchers on earth.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

One thing that might help, is to understand how other terms are used instead of the perhaps more familiar "hashtag".  It is just a content identifier.  You will find this represented by other terms, like "channels", "syntactic entities", or terms specific to pi-calculus like "persisted queues", or even the word "network", as this does not apply to "gods-eye" perspectives here - so these sub-groups are most typically defined by a topic, or keyword.

So in short, Greg is using a private language for technobabble.

That is sure helpful for peer review.  

Well, if you don't understand something, maybe I can help?  You are the only one saying it's "technobabble" - which just means you don't recognize it.  I understand it just fine.  Content management, including "hastags", is sophisticated, and thorough in Synereo.  Your "hashtags" are not left out, even though that concept does not appear in Twitter-language form.

And yes, you will find the same expressions in peer-reviewed papers, textbooks, etc.

TPTB_need_war will never admit that he really isn't that smart.

[SynereoCommunity]

You think all "ICOs" are manipulation.

I am confident they are ILLEGAL if publicly marketed to USA investors.

Maybe that's why it's important to know that the managers of these are not in the US, and in this case, neither is the company.
However, regardless of either of our ideas, if they were truly as "illegal" as you state (out of context), then there would be action being taken, and I don't see that going on.  (not to say that there are not scams, and intentional fraud, etc - a small %, like in every industry)

Also: citation?  If it's illegal, it has a link stating so clearly.  Of course, you've employed circular reasoning by using the term "investment", and begged the question.  Crytpocurrency is neither a currency, nor an investment in the eyes of the law.

Greg @ Synereo is avoiding explaining all the specification and technology to us in terms we can understand. No excuses you can make for that which are valid. He is selling AMPs and not giving us information we can verify. That is an illegal prospectus. If Synereo didn't sell AMPs to the public, Greg et al would have no obligation to explain the technology in detail to us in terms we can understand and verify.

Edit: it is rather useless if I go expend my scarce time to become an expert in process calculi so that I could find game theory flaws in Synereo's process calculi approach to their hyped Attention Model feature. Because it would still be an asymmetric information market for the investors, as then they would be required to trust either my conclusions or Greg's (Synereo's). The only solution is for Greg to do proper disclosure by explaining the technology in terms that all AMP investors can understand. They have the time to produce a very exquisite website and consume hours every week on video Hangouts that do hyped handwaving on technical details, then they should also have enough time to explain the technology in sufficient detail that we can analyze without requiring us to become one of the few process calculi researchers on earth.

Greg never avoids explaining.  In fact, I've never heard him not add an invitation for more explanation if needed, to what he says in hangouts.  There are other class-like videos with more in depth info as well.  Analogies are a great tool to broaden understanding, and taking the workings of something like BitTorrent can give you an idea of how content distribution works on a decentralized basis.

Ask an informed question, and you'll get an informed answer.  Ask a vague question that expresses your lack of mental investment in a subject, and you'll likely be directed to some reading material.  Some amount of personal responsibility needs to be taken.

Investors regularly rely on the opinions of experts, including 2nd or 3rd opinions by independent parties.
Otherwise, we'd have no inventions like smart phones or computers, and we'd never had landed on the moon or mapped DNA, simply because "everyone could not understand it", so no funding.  Innovation and breakthroughs are by nature, beyond the reach of complete understanding by those not intimately familiar with the components already.

[TPTB_need_war]

You think all "ICOs" are manipulation.

I am confident they are ILLEGAL if publicly marketed to USA investors.

Maybe that's why it's important to know that the managers of these are not in the US, and in this case, neither is the company.
However, regardless of either of our ideas, if they were truly as "illegal" as you state (out of context), then there would be action being taken, and I don't see that going on.  (not to say that there are not scams, and intentional fraud, etc - a small %, like in every industry)

Also: citation?  If it's illegal, it has a link stating so clearly.  Of course, you've employed circular reasoning by using the term "investment", and begged the question.  Crytpocurrency is neither a currency, nor an investment in the eyes of the law.

Details of USA Securities Law is covered in the following thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.0

Making AMPS publicly available for sale to non-accredited USA investors makes the unregistered investment securities illegal even if issued by foreigners.

Greg Meredith will have a difficult time arguing that he was not promoting this, and he is a USA citizen. In my opinion he is taking a huge risk.

Greg @ Synereo is avoiding explaining all the specification and technology to us in terms we can understand. No excuses you can make for that which are valid. He is selling AMPs and not giving us information we can verify. That is an illegal prospectus. If Synereo didn't sell AMPs to the public, Greg et al would have no obligation to explain the technology in detail to us in terms we can understand and verify.

Edit: it is rather useless if I go expend my scarce time to become an expert in process calculi so that I could find game theory flaws in Synereo's process calculi approach to their hyped Attention Model feature. Because it would still be an asymmetric information market for the investors, as then they would be required to trust either my conclusions or Greg's (Synereo's). The only solution is for Greg to do proper disclosure by explaining the technology in terms that all AMP investors can understand. They have the time to produce a very exquisite website and consume hours every week on video Hangouts that do hyped handwaving on technical details, then they should also have enough time to explain the technology in sufficient detail that we can analyze without requiring us to become one of the few process calculi researchers on earth.

Greg never avoids explaining.  In fact, I've never heard him not add an invitation for more explanation if needed, to what he says in hangouts.

Verbal handwaving is not technical explaining. It is clever marketing to fool n00bs, but I know better.

Ask an informed question, and you'll get an informed answer.

I have stated what is needed. When the appropriate technical documents are made available, which expert programmers such as myself and smooth can understand and verify without needing to become process calculi researcher. We need sufficient technical detail so that we can verify if the system will do what he is claiming it will do.


Please don't reply to my post with more diversionary bullshit. It is getting very repetitive.

[TPTB_need_war]

Btw, Synereo is releasing its beta any day now.  Take a look at these guys -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU  They're going to dominate this space.

Lol, yes these dorks are going to dominate by requiring bloggers to learn Github.  

Then @ 26mins we have Greg Meredith raving about recruiting an economist and hiring a former Ethereum developer who talks about Oleg's monad blogs. As if this focus on eggheads has anything to do with wide-scale adoption of a social network.

At @30min, Greg admits that the "Lively Gig" team has stated, "Synereo doesn't know what they are doing".

At @38min, Greg points out that there is an insoluble problem in that the value of AMPs will be siphoned off to ETH or BTC units. And he admits Synereo can't scale for 18 months, because current block chain model won't scale and will need to be replaced.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

Btw, Synereo is releasing its beta any day now.  Take a look at these guys -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU  They're going to dominate this space.

Lol, yes these dorks are going to dominate by requiring bloggers to learn Github. 

You must have a lot of time on your hands... you've posted the same comment in three Synereo threads.

[Macno]

TPTB is one special little flake. His time is allegedly extremely "precious" (his words, not mine), yet he keeps stalking crypto-communities with his weird convolution of crypto-anarchist social justice warrior and yet stockholm-syndrom induced fetish for US securities laws. He is an obnoxious paranoid troll trapped in the body of some wannabe Satoshi who happens to have a higher IQ than the average forum user and thus impresses many of these kids. That`s pretty much it.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

The Synereo devs want your opinion as to whether AMPs should remain on the Omni protocol during Beta testing or switch over to the Ethereum blockchain.  Go over to the Synereo thread in Altcoin Discussions to let them know what you think.

[SynereoCommunity]

Details of USA Securities Law is covered in the following thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.0

Making AMPS publicly available for sale to non-accredited USA investors makes the unregistered investment securities illegal even if issued by foreigners.

Again, you coming to some imagined conclusion in your mind is not law.  Even if you're speculation turns out right, your claims are still wrong.  If a court case or new law sets a new precedent, future cases can be brought, but not from the past.

Alt currencies are not investments in the eyes of existing law anyway.

Verbal handwaving is not technical explaining. It is clever marketing to fool n00bs, but I know better.

If you are the guy who doesn't get it, and almost everyone else does, then you should look in the mirror first, before claiming the teacher is "handwaving".

It's just a baseless claim, chosen so others are not supposed to be able to argue against it without their own instructor certified level of understanding.

We need sufficient technical detail so that we can verify if the system will do what he is claiming it will do.

It has been in commercial operation for a couple years.  Your approval is not needed.
Also keep in mind that he works from a computationally correct basis - this is as good as proof of concept in this context.  In order to 'verify' it, you need to learn those specific maths.  Without that, you cannot verify it for yourself, and everything said about it will be above your head.


So, again, please cease and desist with the negative misinformation and claims.
Ask your father for a refresher on Libel & Slander.

[TPTB_need_war]

Details of USA Securities Law is covered in the following thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.0

Making AMPS publicly available for sale to non-accredited USA investors makes the unregistered investment securities illegal even if issued by foreigners.

Alt currencies are not investments in the eyes of existing law anyway.

With that strawman statement which does not address the points of the Howey test, you obviously do not comprehend the thread that was provided to you. You probably didn't even read it or read it carefully.

Verbal handwaving is not technical explaining. It is clever marketing to fool n00bs, but I know better.

If you are the guy who doesn't get it, and almost everyone else does

No one understands the details including yourself. For if you did, you would explain it here in sufficient technical detail so as to be unambiguous statements.

You are BS and you know it.

We need sufficient technical detail so that we can verify if the system will do what he is claiming it will do.

It has been in commercial operation for a couple years.

You are referring to components of the system such as Special K or Microsoft's use of process calculi, but the devil is in the details. This usage of some components of his research has no bearing on whether any of this is applicable to Synereo. Without the details, we can't tell you exactly why you are wrong.

And you certainly don't know the technical details either.

Any way, I don't have more time to waste on your nonsense.

So, again, please cease and desist with the negative misinformation and claims.
Ask your father for a refresher on Libel & Slander.

Sue me in the USA (which is the only jurisdiction which you can enforce on me). Hahaha. So we can go in court and talk about selling illegal unregistered investment securities. There is nothing slander nor libel in demanding proper disclosure with all the technical details explained so that laymen investors can evaluate if this AMP token is a worthwhile investment.

Any way, this is all a waste of my time because Synereo will fall and JAMBOX will not. And JAMBOX isn't selling and hyping tokens. Talk to me again in 6 - 9 months. Until then, any thing other than technical details from you is hot air.

Lol, Synereo with a $9 million marketcap and only $0.016 million ($16,000) of probably fake (insiders buying from themselves) daily volume. You snakeoil salesmen having a hard time getting fools to buy this fake market cap now.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

Details of USA Securities Law is covered in the following thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1218399.0

Making AMPS publicly available for sale to non-accredited USA investors makes the unregistered investment securities illegal even if issued by foreigners.

Alt currencies are not investments in the eyes of existing law anyway.

With that strawman statement which does not address the points of the Howey test, you obviously do not comprehend the thread that was provided to you. You probably didn't even read it or read it carefully.

Verbal handwaving is not technical explaining. It is clever marketing to fool n00bs, but I know better.

If you are the guy who doesn't get it, and almost everyone else does

No one understands the details including yourself. For if you did, you would explain it here in sufficient technical detail so as to be unambiguous statements.

You are BS and you know it.

We need sufficient technical detail so that we can verify if the system will do what he is claiming it will do.

It has been in commercial operation for a couple years.

You are referring to components of the system such as Special K or Microsoft's use of process calculi, but the devil is in the details. This usage of some components of his research has no bearing on whether any of this is applicable to Synereo. Without the details, we can't tell you exactly why you are wrong.

And you certainly don't know the technical details either.

Any way, I don't have more time to waste on your nonsense.

So, again, please cease and desist with the negative misinformation and claims.
Ask your father for a refresher on Libel & Slander.

Sue me in the USA (which is the only jurisdiction which you can enforce on me). Hahaha. So we can go in court and talk about selling illegal unregistered investment securities. There is nothing slander nor libel in demanding proper disclosure with all the technical details explained so that laymen investors can evaluate if this AMP token is a worthwhile investment.

Any way, this is all a waste of my time because Synereo will fall and JAMBOX will not. And JAMBOX isn't selling and hyping tokens. Talk to me again in 6 - 9 months. Until then, any thing other than technical details from you is hot air.

Lol, Synereo with a $9 million marketcap and only $0.016 million ($16,000) of probably fake (insiders buying from themselves) daily volume. You snakeoil salesmen having a hard time getting fools to buy this fake market cap now.

Stop wasting everyone's time with your ridiculous allegations.  Nobody takes you seriously.  Your stupid "Jambox" will be a total failure just like you are.