Shelᖚy (TPTB_need_war) Psychoanalysis. Smartest Man in the Altcoin Discussions?

[TPTB_need_war]

You don't seem to hate vaporware in general tho, because you like to advertise your own after every self-spam campaign in every thread you visit since months if not years.

Agree, and based on this I made my conclusion above that he is actually promoting his upcoming P&D, but after I had to agree with smooth that it is quite unfair to make such accusation. Still, the fact is, as you said that he has been promoting his vaporware. TPTB_need_war is a good man when he is in a right mindset and he contributed a lot to this forum already. Lets hope he is promoting his vaporware for ethical and honest reasons.

I hate if someone is asking someone to do something based on vaporware. Am I asking anyone IN PUBLIC to do anything because of my plans? No! If I ask people to buy a Tshirt to help me finance my coding, that is not a big loss for them. They get a cool Tshirt and no promises other than my reputation and best attempt to do the job. IN PRIVATE, I have every right to take angel (aka private placement) investment from accredited or sophisticated investors who understand the risks.

How many times have I said I will not be involved in any P&D. If ever I am able to reach my goal of launching a crypto-currency, it will be very very widely distributed, much more than Bitcoin. If not (i.e. if distribution fails and can't be fixed), I will disown it and walk away and destroy/burn my coins by spending them to a unspendable address.

There won't be any P&D, because no one will be able to buy enough and concentrate enough ownership to make it worthwhile or possible to manipulate. At least not unless it happens by some market force I can't design into the protocol such as most users dumping their coins to a whale. But decentralized markets that have a functioning use as a currency token, don't usually fail like that. When the Communists gave land back to the peasants or in another case of Auroracoin, those holders dumped all to the whales because they didn't know how to use nor have a use for the asset.

[1714792130]

1714792130

[1714792130]

1714792130

[1714792130]

1714792130

[traumschiff]

There won't be any P&D, because no one will be able to buy enough and concentrate enough ownership to make it worthwhile or possible to manipulate.

Proof except promises?

[TPTB_need_war]

There won't be any P&D, because no one will be able to buy enough and concentrate enough ownership to make it worthwhile or possible to manipulate.

Proof except promises?

Yes there will be more or less a proof that no one amassed 30% of the coin supply. And I believe it will be possible to prove from the block chain how many verified users have coins and how many coins they have. But let's wait to see the final decision before I can promise if that information will be on the block chain. I don't think that information will be mandatory, as I don't think we want a KYC block chain.

As you can see, I am not (at least not initially) going after the anonymity features.

[TPTB_need_war]

enforcing worldwide spread is not easy, and perhaps not doable.
They tried doing it with porn in the 90's, file sharing in 2000's and so on...
and servers kept over heating and got fried up

As I explained the key distinction upthread, those are free markets because they are decentralized and there is no significant asymmetry of information which makes it otherwise.

It pisses me off when readers waste my expensive time by ignoring what I already wrote twice in this thread. This makes three times. Please readers don't make me teach this again by writing another post which ignores my prior points.

I still dont understand why your'e calling waves a scam only cuz it made an ico (like everyone now).
Its devs are legit, real names with real work behind them.
So they thought charles and kushti are friends which will support them, and were wrong, apologized and moved on.
everyone got their asses covered legaly ofc..
so if you think all ico's are scams, you got lots of work now not just on waves bro

Please clearify. tnx

1. I already provided the link to the thread two or three times in this thread, which explains that ICOs sold to non-accredited USA investors are ostensibly illegal.

I hate ICOs by now for other reasons:

2. They contribute to the mainstream thinking that crypto-currency is a scam and thus we will have great difficulty getting CC widely adopted if don't put a stop to these scams.

3. They extract capital to a few scammers, which could be better used to build our real ecosystems which are not vaporware and have real decentralized designs, such as Bitcoin and Monero.

4. They prey on the ignorance of n00b speculators, thus can never be a free market.

5. They can never attain adoption because they destroy the Nash equilibrium and decentralization of the ecosystem:

As an example: I can show that dash is an oligarchy, whether intentional or not, due to the way their paynode scheme works. These systems are designed to work trustlessly, so any hiccups (intentional or not) should be invalidated by the design, not left-up to the good or bad intentions of those who are engaged with it.

did the monero wrote that fact about infinite supply in their ann Huh   if i was an investard in monero i would feel cheated if it isnt

No one can fork Monero without the support of the decentralized miners. The distinction from the Dash masternode scam, is that a masternode is staked only once with DRK (Dash tokens) and earns 50+% ROI per annum forever after for the largest holders of Dash tokens, thus further centralizing the coin meaning there is a centralized oligarchy which the investors are relying on for their future expecation of profits which afaics fulfills the Howey test for what is an investment security that is regulated by the Securities Act. A decentralized PoW miner is constantly expending on electricity in a competitive free market. Owning a lot of Monero doesn't give you any leverage as a miner.

New post to better articulate why permissioned ledger, closed entopy systems likely have no value:

The problem with Emunie, as I talked about in the IOTA thread, is that any system that doesn't have permanent coin turnover via mining, removes mining completely, or puts some type of abstraction layer between mining and block reward (as in the case of IOTA), is a permissioned ledger.  People got too caught up in trying to improve on consensus mechanisms and forgot what actually constitutes a decentralized currency in the first place.

When Maxwell said he "proved mathematically that Bitcoin couldn't exist" and then it did exist, it was because he didn't take open entropy systems into account.  He already knew stuff like NXT or Emunie could exist, but nobody actually considered them to be decentralized.  They're distributed but not decentralized.  Basically stocks that come from a central authority and then the shareholders attempt to form a nash equilibrium to...siphon fees from other shareholders in a zero sum game because there is no nash equilibrium to be had by outsiders adopting a closed entropy system in the first place...

Take for example the real world use case of a nash equilbrium in finance.  There's many rival nations on earth and they're all competing in currency wars, manipulating, devaluing, etc.  They would all be better off with an undisputed unit of account that the other can't tamper with for trade.  In order to adopt said unit, it would have to be a permissionless system that each nation has access to where one of the group isn't suspected to have an enormous advantage over the others, otherwise they would all just say no.

This is why gold was utilized at all.  Yea, some territories had more than others, but nobody actually knew what was under the ground at the time.  Everyone just agreed it was scarce, valuable, and nobody really had a monopoly on it.  There are really no circumstances where people on an individual level or nation-state level can come together to form any kind of nash equilibrium in a closed entropy system.  The market is cornered by design, and for value to increase, others need to willingly submit to the equivalent of an extortion scheme.  The only time systems like that have value at all is when governments use coercion to force them onto people.

6. Because they are not decentralized and rely on expectation of profits based on the performance of a core group, ICOs turn what should be a competition for creating the best technology into a fist fucking fest of ad hominem and political games:

Let's psychoanalyze those want to troll me with a thread like this. Actually I have no censorship motivated objection about making a thread about me (I wish so much, it was possible to do something great without attaining any personal fame), it just feels really stupid because I (the idealist in me) think the technology is more important than the person, which is one of the main reasons I hate vaporware ICOs.

This thread serves mainly to deflect attention away from Dash's instamine scam.

+1 for conscious reason.

The subconscious reason this thread exists is the psychological phenomenon that it is better to destroy everyone, than to fail alone.

"I dropped my ice cream in the mud, so now I am throwing mud on your ice cream so we are the same, because God hates us equally".

This is what socialism built. Equality is prosperity, because fairness is the uniformity of nature's Gaussian distribution. Equality is a human right! Didn't you know that!

They would rather waste the time of important coders whose time would be better spent coding a solution for humanity, so as to satisfy their inability to accept their mistakes and jealousy.

7. ICOs have less liquidity because they are not widely distributed and due to #5:

you can read my observations here.

Interesting post.

The salient quote is of course:

Why litecoin? Liquidity. These guys own 5 and 6 digits amount of BTC. They need massive liquidity to increase their holdings by any significant degree. And as such litecoin has been a blessing. Will history repeat itself?

I've had that in my mind for a loooong time. Liquidity is absolutely necessary for the design, marketing, and distribution of crypto-currency, if you want to succeed.

[TPTB_need_war]

His financial predictions are completely off the charts and useless. I pointed out in the Armstrong thread how wrong he was about the BTC price in several occasions - still he is marketing himself as a great forecaster. Total nonsense.

The underlined statement is false because it is too absolute. Additionally your post with those allegations was refuted by myself.

On software development, terms of implementation he is hopeless. I read not long time ago, he said none of the popular existing programming languages - which could expose the project to existing developer communities - satisfies his requirements, and therefore he is evaluating now the Rust language/framework. WTF? So he delays his progress again, because right now the programing languages are not suited to his use case. WTF again? It seems he doesn't have the ability to deliver anything, except showcasing his super intellect in this forum.

I am quoting this for posterity, so we can look back on it with the undeniable fact of retrospection.

Terms of his scam busting mission, as I said several times, make no mistake, he is not worried about the scams - in fact he said scams are "part of the game" -, he is just building up his honest and ethical profile, because he is preparing for a P&D to satisfy his "angel investors".

Is that a fact? Prove it.

And when it is not true in the end, do you think I am going to accept your apology for slandering me.

On the personal level, - apart from his incoming P&D venture - he is a very nice guy, the BCT forum wouldn't be the same without him.

I don't need your two-faced neurosis. Please instead conclude I am not a nice guy. That will be a more consistent.

[TPTB_need_war]

If i can't acquire native tokens except by willingly submitting to a centrally issued extortion scheme, then it's a permissioned ledger.  

Say hello to Bitcoin mining pools...

I agree with Fuserleer that Bitcoin is gradually losing its decentralized attribute because of the economics of mining, as the economies-of-scale increase and the block reward decreases.

Monero is ostensibly more decentralized because it is early stage and hasn't yet scaled to great economies-of-scale in mining, e.g. there is no ASIC available yet afaik.

However I don't know how eMunie plans to obtain a more wide and competitive distribution than proof-of-work. And is that topic really appropriate in a thread about me.

I've stated why I no longer like ICOs. I'll leave it at that.

[TPTB_need_war]

On software development, terms of implementation he is hopeless. I read not long time ago, he said none of the popular existing programming languages - which could expose the project to existing developer communities - satisfies his requirements, and therefore he is evaluating now the Rust language/framework. WTF? So he delays his progress again, because right now the programing languages are not suited to his use case. WTF again? It seems he doesn't have the ability to deliver anything, except showcasing his super intellect in this forum.

I agree with you on this. You go to war with the army you have, while working to make it better. Waiting for the perfect language guarantees waiting forever.

There is no perfect language, but I told you already that I have certain requirements which my project dictates which are not met by any language:

1. JIT compilation as loaded over the Internet.
2. Strong typing with type parameter polymorphism, eager by default, with Top as the disjunction of all types and Bottom (_|_) as the conjunction of all types (Haskell is the opposite).
3. Async/await (stackless coroutines)
4. Haskell typeclass adhoc polymorphism, i.e. no subclassing which is an anti-pattern
5. Low-level control for performance with high-level elegance such as first-class functions and functional programming paradigm.
6. Add first-class disjunctions to #4.

There is no language on earth which can do that. My analysis thus far concludes Rust is closest.

Rust does everything except #3 and #6, and IMO its #4 and #5 need some polishing.

If you are just building an application, crypto-currency or just a website, then you don't need to invest in creating the correct tools. But when you are building an application platform for others to build on top of, then you have to invest in the tools. Ask Google about Android. Ask Apple about iOS.

Is it outside my resources? Maybe. That is what I am trying to determine now. Deep in research and coding.

[Nxtblg]

Interesting, will read! Thanks for posting this.

~CfA~

Hey, glad to.

[r0ach]

If i can't acquire native tokens except by willingly submitting to a centrally issued extortion scheme, then it's a permissioned ledger.  

Say hello to Bitcoin mining pools...

I agree with Fuserleer that Bitcoin is gradually losing its decentralized attribute because of the economics of mining, as the economies-of-scale increase and the block reward decreases.

Monero is ostensibly more decentralized because it is early stage and hasn't yet scaled to great economies-of-scale in mining, e.g. there is no ASIC available yet afaik.

However I don't know how eMunie plans to obtain a more wide and competitive distribution than proof-of-work. And is that topic really appropriate in a thread about me.

I've stated why I no longer like ICOs. I'll leave it at that.

That's the funny part about it.  When people complain that others are able to acquire coins at a better marginal cost, they're essentially saying they don't like free market systems.  Ironically, the first sign you have a free market is that cartels and monopolies form.  Economy of scale is just something you have to deal with and the only other option is to remove the private sector monopoly power and hand it to the government instead.  Private sector cartels/monopolies tend to have a finite lifespan, while government based monopolies tend to be immortal, less accountable, and less efficient until the entire system collapses.  So everything in both governance and finance comes down to picking the lesser evil of those two.

[smooth]

If i can't acquire native tokens except by willingly submitting to a centrally issued extortion scheme, then it's a permissioned ledger.  

Say hello to Bitcoin mining pools...

I agree with Fuserleer that Bitcoin is gradually losing its decentralized attribute because of the economics of mining, as the economies-of-scale increase and the block reward decreases.

Monero is ostensibly more decentralized because it is early stage and hasn't yet scaled to great economies-of-scale in mining, e.g. there is no ASIC available yet afaik.

However I don't know how eMunie plans to obtain a more wide and competitive distribution than proof-of-work. And is that topic really appropriate in a thread about me.

I've stated why I no longer like ICOs. I'll leave it at that.

That's the funny part about it.  When people complain that others are able to acquire coins at a better marginal cost, they're essentially saying they don't like free market systems.  Ironically, the first sign you have a free market is that cartels and monopolies form.  Economy of scale is just something you have to deal with and the only other option is to remove the private sector monopoly power and hand it to the government instead.  Private sector cartels/monopolies tend to have a finite lifespan, while government based monopolies tend to be immortal, less accountable, and less efficient until the entire system collapses.  So everything in both governance and finance comes down to picking the lesser evil of those two.

These are constructed systems. It is almost certainly possible to construct systems that have stronger or weaker economies of scale, or those with smaller or larger natural limits, just as such variety exists in natural systems.

So I agree with both of you in that economies of scale and cartels are part of a freer market but not all such such markets will behave the same.

[r0ach]

It's interesting comparing the ICO to the two options I listed above.  Instead of having private sector cartels/monopolies vs government monopolies, you have the ICO issuer just walking up and pretending that even though he put in no effort to compete in the free market to climb to the top, nor is he offering any ridiculous "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" con, he just says:

"For absolutely no reason, grant me monopoly power over the economy and allow me to extort you.  All disciples who buy in will then become part of the multi-tier extortion network, who can then attempt to mimic what I have done at the top of the pyramid".  

Anyone that believes ICOs are a legit thing and not a scam is truly an idiot.

[DecentralizeEconomics]

It's interesting comparing the ICO to the two options I listed above.  Instead of having private sector cartels/monopolies vs government monopolies, you have the ICO issuer just walking up and pretending that even though he put in no effort to compete in the free market to climb to the top, nor is he offering any ridiculous "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" con, he just says:

"For absolutely no reason, grant me monopoly power over the economy and allow me to extort you.  All disciples who buy in will then become part of the multi-tier extortion network, who can then attempt to mimic what I have done at the top of the pyramid".  

Anyone that believes ICOs are a legit thing and not a scam is truly an idiot.

Communist

[instacalm]

Shit, the voting options suck

in a good way somehow

[ICOcountdown.com]

I setup a site just for you TPTB_needs_war http://miningcountdown.com send me a message when you are ready to launch and I will do a mining countdown for you.

[TPTB_need_war]

If i can't acquire native tokens except by willingly submitting to a centrally issued extortion scheme, then it's a permissioned ledger.  

Say hello to Bitcoin mining pools...

I agree with Fuserleer that Bitcoin is gradually losing its decentralized attribute because of the economics of mining, as the economies-of-scale increase and the block reward decreases.

Monero is ostensibly more decentralized because it is early stage and hasn't yet scaled to great economies-of-scale in mining, e.g. there is no ASIC available yet afaik.

However I don't know how eMunie plans to obtain a more wide and competitive distribution than proof-of-work. And is that topic really appropriate in a thread about me.

I've stated why I no longer like ICOs. I'll leave it at that.

That's the funny part about it.  When people complain that others are able to acquire coins at a better marginal cost, they're essentially saying they don't like free market systems.  Ironically, the first sign you have a free market is that cartels and monopolies form.  Economy of scale is just something you have to deal with and the only other option is to remove the private sector monopoly power and hand it to the government instead.  Private sector cartels/monopolies tend to have a finite lifespan, while government based monopolies tend to be immortal, less accountable, and less efficient until the entire system collapses.  So everything in both governance and finance comes down to picking the lesser evil of those two.

These are constructed systems. It is almost certainly possible to construct systems that have stronger or weaker economies of scale, or those with smaller or larger natural limits, just as such variety exists in natural systems.

So I agree with both of you in that economies of scale and cartels are part of a freer market but not all such such markets will behave the same.

By that definition, the term "free market" is no different than "everything". So obviously that can't be correct, because government manipulation, monopoly, and oligarchy would be included in everything.

As I've explained two times already in other threads recently (Monero Speculation thread about botnets, and IOHK Waves disclaimer thread about asymmetric information of the altcoin speculation market making it centralized to reliance on "expert" hypsters), my definition of "free market" is a decentralized market. This is why botnets are a free market with competition and an opportunity cost of doing just one thing (i.e. attacking Monero).

Sorry I disagree with you both of you, because you provided a vacuous definition of "free market".

Free markets have the attribute of having many decentralized decision makers, thus they anneal to fitness, i.e. they are anti-fragile. Top-down markets have the attribute of overshooting on vested interest decisions and thus are fragile.

The act of fornication (i.e. reproduction) is a free market. There is no economy-of-scale in fornication. It is always an individual decision.

[smooth]

If i can't acquire native tokens except by willingly submitting to a centrally issued extortion scheme, then it's a permissioned ledger. 

Say hello to Bitcoin mining pools...

I agree with Fuserleer that Bitcoin is gradually losing its decentralized attribute because of the economics of mining, as the economies-of-scale increase and the block reward decreases.

Monero is ostensibly more decentralized because it is early stage and hasn't yet scaled to great economies-of-scale in mining, e.g. there is no ASIC available yet afaik.

However I don't know how eMunie plans to obtain a more wide and competitive distribution than proof-of-work. And is that topic really appropriate in a thread about me.

I've stated why I no longer like ICOs. I'll leave it at that.

That's the funny part about it.  When people complain that others are able to acquire coins at a better marginal cost, they're essentially saying they don't like free market systems.  Ironically, the first sign you have a free market is that cartels and monopolies form.  Economy of scale is just something you have to deal with and the only other option is to remove the private sector monopoly power and hand it to the government instead.  Private sector cartels/monopolies tend to have a finite lifespan, while government based monopolies tend to be immortal, less accountable, and less efficient until the entire system collapses.  So everything in both governance and finance comes down to picking the lesser evil of those two.

These are constructed systems. It is almost certainly possible to construct systems that have stronger or weaker economies of scale, or those with smaller or larger natural limits, just as such variety exists in natural systems.

So I agree with both of you in that economies of scale and cartels are part of a freer market but not all such such markets will behave the same.

By that definition, the term "free market" is no different than "everything". So obviously that can't be correct, because government manipulation, monopoly, and oligarchy would be included in everything.

I did not use the term free market, and I indeed do not believe that term is particularly useful. The term freer market above was not a typo. Meaning comparatively more free.

What you are describing is closer to a 'competitive' market.

[TPTB_need_war]

I did not use the term free market, and I indeed do not believe that term is particularly useful. The term freer market above was not a typo. Meaning comparatively more free.

I think free market is synonymous with decentralized market, i.e. high degrees-of-freedom and thus very high entropy and Shannon information.

[TPTB_need_war]

He's an idiot.

Thanks bro, same to you.

Do you feel better now that you got that exquisitely detailed justification off your chest? You can exhale now.

I have some extra Vaseline here if you need some more?

[shitcointalk101]

he is probably autistic

[Moneroman88]

TPTB_need_war has been extremely supportive towards Monero and its technological foundation.
He has proven to be of outstanding knowledge of Cryptography and Mathemathics, as well as other disciplines.

I am proud to have him on board.   Please continue posting, good sir.