Bitcoin: The Digital Kill Switch

[AnonyMint]

I guess OP hasn't heard about merged-mining?

If a superior form of crypto-currency blockchain comes along, it can co-opt the bitcoin mining power and take-over ... it is a level playing field for any good ideas to compete upon.

Wait, don't tell me, that is diabolical?

You fail to understand the technical problem in the OP. Merged mining does not fix the threat. The threat is the corporations can make it uneconomic to mine because they can offer it for free and the other miners will get paid nothing for mining, thus they control all of the mining (merged or otherwise). Before you attack that, go re-read the OP more carefully.

I won't be re-reading any drivel from an amateur loud-mouth like you ... anyway i thought i was on ignore? I wasted enough time already on the first skim through.

It is easy enough to blow hard and loud on forums, go and produce the code. A fully anonymous, merged-mine coin (anonymcoin) will out compete bitcoin, we 'just' need someone to build it, not talk about it.

As I said I'll be watching to see how much code you produce ... not just talk about it.

I wrote before that I did not put you on ignore. Please go re-read my first reply to you up thread.

The first step in creating a better design is to make sure people understand why it is important to do so.

I am doing the first step first. The next step comes to writing the code, once people say "yes please go make it".

As I said, I would prefer that Bitcoin would be fixed, but Bitcoin refuses to make the necessary fix. And I understand why they won't make the fix, because the fix requires an ongoing debasement. That is why I explained in my OP that ongoing debasement (if small and automatic and known to all) is actually better. Gold has an ongoing debasement.

Satoshi put the "no debasement" design in because he knew you guys were gullible enough to fall for it, and he was working for the power elite.

[1714727006]

1714727006

[1714727006]

1714727006

[1714727006]

1714727006

[1714727006]

1714727006

[chmod755]

I am alleging the cartel will come, because monopolies make profits by extracting rents, e.g. they can increase the prices of products the customers are buying everywhere, just like how credit card fees are opaquely passed on to the customer and the customer does not care (because they don't know and they get to buy their junk).

Even if you argue the monopoly won't come (which I strongly doubt, since they always do), it is better to make a P2P currency that does not have this design flaw that exists in Bitcoin, so then we can be SURE it won't come.

In my design for a P2P currency, you will forever make money on mining. In my design, it would be impossible for the cartel to make mining free.

You can never be sure that there's no flaw in a system - if you are: it's already flawed. And there's no such thing as a "perfect monetary" system. If you don't want wealthy people to buy your currency you basically need to find them and kill them, but that costs too much…

[AnonyMint]

I am alleging the cartel will come, because monopolies make profits by extracting rents, e.g. they can increase the prices of products the customers are buying everywhere, just like how credit card fees are opaquely passed on to the customer and the customer does not care (because they don't know and they get to buy their junk).

Even if you argue the monopoly won't come (which I strongly doubt, since they always do), it is better to make a P2P currency that does not have this design flaw that exists in Bitcoin, so then we can be SURE it won't come.

In my design for a P2P currency, you will forever make money on mining. In my design, it would be impossible for the cartel to make mining free.

You can never be sure that there's no flaw in a system - if you are: it's already flawed. And there's no such thing as a "perfect monetary" system. If you don't want wealthy people to buy your currency you basically need to find them and kill them, but that costs too much…

We should not keep flaws that we know about, which clearly open the door and beg for monopolization.

The threat I identified is not from wealthy buying the coins. It has nothing to do with who buys the coins.

[nwbitcoin]

What a complete load of nonsense from someone who only believes in zero sum games.

The economy doesn't work like that in reality.

The core problem I see here is that it assumes that suddenly everyone is using bitcoins exclusively, and that gives 'the cartels' a control over how people spend their money.

However, the future isn't going to be like that.  Its all about a little bit of whatever is best for those circumstances.  This means that we will never be in a position where only one form of wealth transfer is available.

Bitcoin has got a number of faults in it, but all that means is that another crypto coin will be created and the early adopters start again.  Its not difficult - 3 years ago, hardly anyone had heard of bitcoin.  These days, only most people have hardly heard of bitcoin!

However, trying to guess the political control structure of something that currently doesn't have financial statues is just nonsense.  Its like trying to predict in 1993 that Linux was going to be the main software OS of mobile phones 20 years later when everyone was predicting it would take over on the desktop - which it never did!

Anyway, that's my 0.0005 BTC!

[AnonyMint]

What a complete load of nonsense from someone who only believes in zero sum games.

The economy doesn't work like that in reality.

The core problem I see here is that it assumes that suddenly everyone is using bitcoins exclusively, and that gives 'the cartels' a control over how people spend their money.

However, the future isn't going to be like that.  Its all about a little bit of whatever is best for those circumstances.  This means that we will never be in a position where only one form of wealth transfer is available.

Bitcoin has got a number of faults in it, but all that means is that another crypto coin will be created and the early adopters start again.  Its not difficult - 3 years ago, hardly anyone had heard of bitcoin.  These days, only most people have hardly heard of bitcoin!

However, trying to guess the political control structure of something that currently doesn't have financial statues is just nonsense.  Its like trying to predict in 1993 that Linux was going to be the main software OS of mobile phones 20 years later when everyone was predicting it would take over on the desktop - which it never did!

Anyway, that's my 0.0005 BTC!

Could you retract the nonsense claim? That isn't the way to have a civil debate. I never said "instantly a zero-sum game". You are putting words in my mouth which I never wrote or argued for.

Please go re-read my prior posts. I explained that I do not expect the threat to come suddenly. I expect it to come so slowly that you will not resist, because you will not even perceive it as a threat. And by the time you do, it will be too late.

Your point essentially is that P2P currencies won't overtake all commerce, or that not all P2P currencies will have this flaw that Bitcoin has. Well I hope so too! That is why I am here to say we need to make sure that happens.

So what is our disagreement? You think it will just happen naturally that cartels won't push Bitcoin? Do you not see what is happening now? First mover advantage is going heavily to Bitcoin (and Litecoin), both of which have this same design flaw.

I happen to believe that in 20 years or less, all transactions will be settled by P2P currency payment systems.

I don't agree that it will be easy to launch another P2P currency after one becomes dominant and heavily used by the general population and institutional investors. It is easy now, because there is a great unfilled demand. Once the demand has been filled, you can't replace.

Do you know how difficult it has been for us to replace Microsoft Windows and Microsoft's monopoly cartel? It took us 2 decades.

We would have never gotten there if not for the disruptive technology of the internet, server, and mobile Android phone (Linux).

But in currencies, you don't get another chance. P2P is it. After that, there won't be another paradigm shift opportunity in currencies for a loooonnng time probably.

The masses won't switch after their wallets are set in Bitcoin. They hate technology hassles. They just want it to work and give them their junk.

[itsunderstood]

[...]

I think you should go study how Rockefeller monopolized all oil and railroads in USA, if you believe cartels don't form naturally when the economics allow it.

I am proposing to change the design so that the economics will no longer allow it. Bitcoin allows it. My design does not.

OP, you seem upset that the bitcoin people didn't listen to you at the start.

These types of super geniuses who have their bruised ego dragging along behind them, are still relevant, though it is tedious to listen to it, because it's all about "Oh they should have listened to me!"  ...This reminds me of the shuttle accident with the O-rings, obviously they shouldn't have launched that shuttle, because it blew up.  HOWEVER, there is always one grumpy pants engineer, who will say afterwards "See!  I told you!"

OP seems to be trying to say "I am a techno prophet and can see 30 years into the future"  ...But you cannot.

Granted: Your idea is probably superior, just like the guy saying "No, o rings will fail when they get too cold!" yeah, he's right, but if we listen to him every time, there will be ZERO shuttles launched, because his job is to be a cranky ass.  His ego, in a way, has decided that by nitpicking something ad naseum, he can always say "told ya so!"...  And hey, like I said, he was right that fateful cold morning when the Challenger shuttle blew up.  And yes OP, you may be right here as well, bitcoin and litecoin may be chulthu'd over time, by cartels.  But please step outside your superior intellect to maybe see what I am saying.  Even if you are right, good luck getting anyone to agree with you based on your communication skills.

Let's break down some of the terms you are using:

Tax:  ...Okay, many Americans see taxation as theft.  So we have to go back to the essence of what money is, in order to use these weasel words (as Ayn Rand would call them) like "tax" which even now is being applied to bank deposit theft.  They'll use terms like "tax", "haircut", "forced loan", etc.  ...But the progressive income tax is a Marxist plank, and the 16th Amendment may be abolished before 2030, so using this word and drawing your airtight solutions based on concepts like this, tht will be probably destroyed by 2030, is a symptom of the ego-genius as I described above.  The word "tax" will have to be clarified based on utterly new paradigms which you or I are powerless to know for sure, as to what forms those new paradigms will take.  Admit it:  These words are relics, and nobody likes the IRS of the Federal Reserve Bank (debt issuers and thieves) so the impetus of humanity, will be to abolish these concepts, if humans are given the power.

Work:  ...Again, this is a word which has been watered down and destroyed in the sense that it has a dozen definitions.  Is sitting around babysitting some miner-PCs, "work" the same as digging a ditch for the local utility company as a pensioned s worker, wrecking your back with labor?  What is the meaning of the word "labor" once pensions are stolen?  Oh sure, you can reply at length, but I am simply knocking your premises around, because again, as with the term "tax", the words "work" and "labor" are going to be modified according to the new paradigm, which neither you or I can predict, though you may be x factorially smarter than me (and I work in IT but have a lot of contempt for so called 'developers' who are usually quite stupid as to practicality), neither of us can know what the future paradigm will be as to work, labor, and taxation.

So those are just two words, which are diverse in their meaning, and you can't pinion your whole super-genius-ness on them.  Yeah you're smart, but to knock bitcoin on the idea that miners will give their power to a cartel, is to diminsih the power of humans in general.  No, I do not agree with your shoddy estimation of the general mining pool.  Let me clarify along the lines of your argument.  You are saying for example, that Wackenhut, can use 1 million prisoners with each of them watching 100 servers, to produce a massive amount of hashing power, at pennies-per-watt...  TRUE, prisoners are very cheap employees, and yes, the prison industry is the best cartel there is!  Yes, your logic is sound.  HOWEVER, you are assuming that mankind will allow cartels to exist!  I am suggesting (sorry if my tone is a bit rough), that cartels are horrible institutions, and price does not drive all humans, and many many millions of workers/potential-prisoners will spend every ounce of their power and electricity, to DESTROY CARTELISM AND MERCANTILISM AS SUCH.

I understand you fear cartels.  Not every man does.  In essence, you underestimate the sheer political destructive power of bitcoin and all the clones that will come.  For example, during the civil war (which preceded the cartels you mention above, and the 16th taxation amendment), there were many many types of 'scrip' or paper currency.  Some were debt notes (like our federal reserve notes of today), some were exchange notes which could be traded easily for gold/silver if you were near a branch, point is, there were MANY types of 'money' during the horrific war called "US Civil War"  ...Therefore, one can easily plan for total mayhem between 2013 and 2030, and also with that mayhem will come many types of digital hash-based currency, but this will be a time of not just war, and competing currency, but of destruction of CARTELS AS SUCH.

After the US Civil War, the Constitution (which is a debt document, see the legal definition of "Constitutor" in Bouvier's law dictionary as: "One who agrees to pay the debt of another") was modified as to the 13th and 14th amendments, and this totally remakes the character of debt, work, and taxation (with the 16th amendment), so in the future paradigm, which neither of us can predict, I can safely say that if I am right about human nature (that humans will fight to be free), then I am right about the death of cartels, but if you are right about human nature (your tone is very poor as to the less-smart humans) then sure, you could be right.

In the end, prisoners make the cheapest workers, and thats the war that needs to be fought.  Bitcoin and its brother and sisters hash-based currencies are just the first of this type of weapon, but the point is that these weapons will be used to fight the money mercantile investment bank powers, not to give them more power.  War is fought by attrition of the enemy, and bitcoin gives a definite power to deny the enemy (cartels) of their debt power.  Bitcoin is not debt, but its not capital either, but that makes it in a way, more powerful for the common man, than either debt or capital.

[Fiyasko]

There is a VERY obvious reason as to why bitcoin is DECENTRALISED.
TO STOP GOVERNMENT CONTROL
To create a centralized "cartel" would be Shunned by the entire bitcoin community, Because you would be Creating a 51% attack.
Gosh this is stupid, This "killswitch" that your talking about is nothing more than the 51% attack threat that we ALL know about

Sir in all due respect, you fail to understand the threat I am explaining.

The mining won't be decentralized anymore, because the cartels will give it away for free.

(And none taken)
What i expect to happen would simply be something simmilar to a chainfork, We Would Not Use the "cartel coins", EVER, Knowing the Obvious threat that it comes with
Even if they were free!, They would have no value if nobody used them, Therefore making them worthless.
We would Fork off the chain away from centralization and use the Forked chain, Letting the (once good, but now bad) Cartel Coins (Centralized bitcoins) blockchain die

You could then Rinse and Repeat this process untill you have "killed" bitcoin, But you would then have Thousands of bitcoin equivalencies floating around.

[chmod755]

he knew you guys were gullible enough to fall for it, and he was working for the power elite.

Source? (being paranoid is not a reliable source btw.)

[AnonyMint]

[...]

I think you should go study how Rockefeller monopolized all oil and railroads in USA, if you believe cartels don't form naturally when the economics allow it.

I am proposing to change the design so that the economics will no longer allow it. Bitcoin allows it. My design does not.

OP, you seem upset that the bitcoin people didn't listen to you at the start.

I think they have failed in their responsibility to protect mankind.

These types of super geniuses who have their bruised ego dragging along behind them, are still relevant, though it is tedious to listen to it,

It has nothing to do with my ego. I would be very happy if someone will fix the design (so no more threat) without me.

I don't care who fixes it, as long as mankind won't be facing the Digital Kill Switch.

OP seems to be trying to say "I am a techno prophet and can see 30 years into the future"  ...But you cannot.

Economic opportunities dictate what happens in the future. If you leave a door wide open for the power elite, they will walk through it. GUARANTEED. I am even telling them how to do it now with these writings. And I will make sure these writings are spread far and wide.

This is going to be published every where. You will start seeing copies of my article all over the place soon.

I have already contacted people who can make this happen.

Shutting me down here, won't help you obfuscate my message.

You have to win on the merits of your logic. If you can convince me with logic, then I will listen.

Granted: Your idea is probably superior, just like the guy saying "No, o rings will fail when they get too cold!" yeah, he's right, but if we listen to him every time, there will be ZERO shuttles launched, because his job is to be a cranky ass.

I have no qualms with that. I agree. Great that Bitcoin was launched and proved the market exists.

I am here to ask if there is any demand to fix the designed threat or do people want to sweep it under the rug?

 His ego, in a way, has decided that by nitpicking something ad naseum, he can always say "told ya so!"...  And hey, like I said, he was right that fateful cold morning when the Challenger shuttle blew up.  And yes OP, you may be right here as well, bitcoin and litecoin may be chulthu'd over time, by cartels.  But please step outside your superior intellect to maybe see what I am saying.  Even if you are right, good luck getting anyone to agree with you based on your communication skills.

Let's break down some of the terms you are using:

Tax:  ...Okay, many Americans see taxation as theft.  So we have to go back to the essence of what money is, in order to use these weasel words (as Ayn Rand would call them) like "tax" which even now is being applied to bank deposit theft.  They'll use terms like "tax", "haircut", "forced loan", etc.  ...But the progressive income tax is a Marxist plank, and the 16th Amendment may be abolished before 2030, so using this word and drawing your airtight solutions based on concepts like this, tht will be probably destroyed by 2030, is a symptom of the ego-genius as I described above.  The word "tax" will have to be clarified based on utterly new paradigms which you or I are powerless to know for sure, as to what forms those new paradigms will take.  Admit it:  These words are relics, and nobody likes the IRS of the Federal Reserve Bank (debt issuers and thieves) so the impetus of humanity, will be to abolish these concepts, if humans are given the power.

Are you saying tax will disappear so we don't need to fix Bitcoin?

If that is your logic, I think you are not realistic.

Work:  ...Again, this is a word which has been watered down and destroyed in the sense that it has a dozen definitions.  Is sitting around babysitting some miner-PCs, "work" the same as digging a ditch for the local utility company as a pensioned s worker, wrecking your back with labor?  What is the meaning of the word "labor" once pensions are stolen?  Oh sure, you can reply at length, but I am simply knocking your premises around, because again, as with the term "tax", the words "work" and "labor" are going to be modified according to the new paradigm, which neither you or I can predict, though you may be x factorially smarter than me (and I work in IT but have a lot of contempt for so called 'developers' who are usually quite stupid as to practicality), neither of us can know what the future paradigm will be as to work, labor, and taxation.

Oh you are very correct. We are studying this now:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4867

I am JustSaying over there.

But none of this will change the fact that a huge chunk of the population for some decades won't be able to keep up with technology and will demand tht government tax and spend. So during this time, the cartels and government will become more powerful, not less.

We have history to guide us. I suggested you read:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong_economics_blog/

He has studied history probably more than any person in the world. He even spent $21 million to make an exact chart of the value of silver during the Roman empire and fall.

He says increased government and taxation is coming for at least until 2033. This is the 78 year cycle of technological disruption.

So those are just two words, which are diverse in their meaning, and you can't pinion your whole super-genius-ness on them.  Yeah you're smart, but to knock bitcoin on the idea that miners will give their power to a cartel, is to diminsih the power of humans in general.  No, I do not agree with your shoddy estimation of the general mining pool.  Let me clarify along the lines of your argument.  You are saying for example, that Wackenhut, can use 1 million prisoners with each of them watching 100 servers, to produce a massive amount of hashing power, at pennies-per-watt...  TRUE, prisoners are very cheap employees, and yes, the prison industry is the best cartel there is!  Yes, your logic is sound.  HOWEVER, you are assuming that mankind will allow cartels to exist!  I am suggesting (sorry if my tone is a bit rough), that cartels are horrible institutions, and price does not drive all humans, and many many millions of workers/potential-prisoners will spend every ounce of their power and electricity, to DESTROY CARTELISM AND MERCANTILISM AS SUCH.

Whether or not humanity can erase cartels by magic is something I will leave to witches.

In the meantime, I am grounded in economics, i.e. opportunity cost, which has proven to far more reliable than witches.

It does not harm for us to fix Bitcoin. Why not do it?

I understand you fear cartels.  Not every man does.  In essence, you underestimate the sheer political destructive power of bitcoin and all the clones that will come.

Agreed if the clones come and they don't all have the same incorrect design.

And my writing here, is to make sure it is so.

So what is your objection to my writings?

[Come-from-Beyond]

Satoshi put the "no debasement" design in because he knew you guys were gullible enough to fall for it, and he was working for the power elite.

Source? (being paranoid is not a reliable source btw.)

There could be no proof of this. But we shouldn't naively believe that Satoshi launched Bitcoin coz he was a good guy.

[marcus_of_augustus]

I am doing the first step first. The next step comes to writing the code, once people say "yes please go make it".

As I said, I would prefer that Bitcoin would be fixed, but Bitcoin refuses to make the necessary fix. And I understand why they won't make the fix, because the fix requires an ongoing debasement. That is why I explained in my OP that ongoing debasement (if small and automatic and known to all) is actually better. Gold has an ongoing debasement.

Satoshi put the "no debasement" design in because he knew you guys were gullible enough to fall for it, and he was working for the power elite.
   

Okay, all my gentle ribbing and prodding seems to have not worked. You make some good points, bitcoin has flaws, the fee structure is suspect, it is potentially vulnerable to cartel behaviour and govt. control (there exists no evidence of this as yet) and it has privacy vulnerabilities. An alternative solution choice is needed in the market place of free monetary system competition.

Yes, please go make it!

Hope that is clear enough.

NB: bitcoin is still light years better than the cartelised, endlessly debased, zero-privacy, paper ledger legacy database, crap fiat monetary system in existent today.

[AnonyMint]

Satoshi put the "no debasement" design in because he knew you guys were gullible enough to fall for it, and he was working for the power elite.

Source? (being paranoid is not a reliable source btw.)

I identified a threat inherent in the design. If identifying threats is paranoia, then please tell all the anti-malware activity to stop. And lets us be filled up with viruses and trojans.

You are correct, I can not be sure what was Satoshi's intent, and it doesn't matter any way. Let's just fix the threat.

(we don't need to assume Satoshi was a good guy, he got rich, so he got his reward already)

[AnonyMint]

I am doing the first step first. The next step comes to writing the code, once people say "yes please go make it".

As I said, I would prefer that Bitcoin would be fixed, but Bitcoin refuses to make the necessary fix. And I understand why they won't make the fix, because the fix requires an ongoing debasement. That is why I explained in my OP that ongoing debasement (if small and automatic and known to all) is actually better. Gold has an ongoing debasement.

Satoshi put the "no debasement" design in because he knew you guys were gullible enough to fall for it, and he was working for the power elite.
   

Okay, all my gentle ribbing and prodding seems to have not worked. You make some good points, bitcoin has flaws, the fee structure is suspect, it is potentially vulnerable to cartel behaviour and govt. control (there exists no evidence of this as yet) and it has privacy vulnerabilities. An alternative solution choice is needed in the market place of free monetary system competition.

Yes, please go make it!

Hope that is clear enough.

NB: bitcoin is still light years better than the cartelised, endlessly debased, zero-privacy, paper ledger legacy database, crap fiat monetary system in existent today.

We are in perfect agreement on all your points in this post (only). Thank you.

[joris]

If you want continuous debasement of Bitcoin, how do you distribute new coins? (not to the cartel miner I assume)

[AnonyMint]

If you want continuous debasement of Bitcoin, how do you distribute new coins? (not to the cartel miner I assume)

If the debasement continues forever, then the miners always get paid. Thus they never go bankrupt.

Thus there will always be some good miners.

We still have the 51% attack to worry about, where malicious is done. But remember the power elite don't want to be obvious, because then we would switch to an alternative.

And if all the miners are making money (which is more true in my design, because in my design you don't use electricity!  ), then we will have more inertia against the bastards any way.

*In my design, only a few peers are computing the next block at a time, but most of the time, they are idle. The proof-of-work is based on hard-disk space. It is very clever.

I am not talking about a large debasement. Very slow similar to gold. Set in the protocol, nobody can manipulate it.

All transactions will be free.  Micropayments work very well. Everything scales better than Bitcoin.

http://anonycoin.org (this is very rough, needs a lot of work to make it more clear)

If you all would prefer to change Bitcoin, I am happy with that! But can you?

[itsunderstood]

This is going to be published every where. You will start seeing copies of my article all over the place soon.

[...]

I am here to ask if there is any demand to fix the designed threat or do people want to sweep it under the rug?

[...]

Are you saying tax will disappear so we don't need to fix Bitcoin?  If that is your logic, I think you are not realistic.

1: Okay we will see your articles, and the discussion will continue.  Cool.

2: Probably bitcoin will not be fixed, but you have failed to explain how cartels will trump the human spirit which strives for less assholes in the world, controlling the workers. (see below)

3: Very cute how you frame it "Are you saying tax will disappear?"  In a way, yes, along the lines of the colonists who dressed up as Indians and threw biritsh tea into the sea to protest taxation and gun confiscation, as a prelude to full on warfare.  I am saying war will probably kill you and me and 50% of those reading this forum.  What our children build after that, cannot be predicted, not by you and certainly not by Martin Armstrong.

We have history to guide us. I suggested you read:  http://armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong_economics_blog/

[...]

Whether or not humanity can erase cartels by magic is something I will leave to witches.

In the meantime, I am grounded in economics, i.e. opportunity cost, which has proven to far more reliable than witches.

It does not harm for us to fix Bitcoin. Why not do it?

I am very familiar with Martin's work, I have printed all of it and studied it at length.  Is he still in jail?  Like I said, prisoners make the best employees, yet you think humans will still remain imprisoned in the future?  I am not so sure.  But Martin's ability to predict the future is not yet proven, his idea that gold may go to 30,000 USD per ounce is interesting, and his knowledge of Japanese money manipulation is deep, but he is not too different from Leo Wanta and his cronies, who crashed the Russian ruble, from a practical perspective.  Neither of these men, are now bitcoin billionaires and so I am saying if you are describing a curve which will meet some point in 2030, you are giving your vector-analysis too much credit.  But don't get all hurt about it, I look forward to your articles, and respect your desire to defeat evil, though you seem to see taxation as like food?  Something humans will never live without?  That's silly.

Martin Armstrong is a knowledgable guy, a Princeton U. genius, and the enemy of Goldman Sachs.  But his idea about cycles can be compared to any other prophet.  An example would be "The Bible Code" type modality where people take words from a page of the bible, and read "Hitler will take over Germany" from it.  They do their bible code ticks, in hindsight 20/20, and that's fine, but indeed many messages can be gathered from any book even Moby Dick has pages that spell out "Hitler will take over Germany" if you look close enough.  But analyzing the past is slipshod brainwork when applied to the future.  The very existence of bitcoin shows that to be true.  The street level geeks, mined the early coins and got rich or spent them, but all the experts like Martin, were nowhere to be found.  Similar to that idiot Bill Gates who said that the Internet wouldn't amount to much.  So I guess I am just knocking you around, and seeing if you bruise easily.  Genius often do.  I look forward to your articles and worldwide fame.  

[TransaDox]

You don't realize that investing in PV is economically worse than renting electricity from the utility.

You don't realize that nobody can manipulate electricity prices if you produce it and in the long term it's cheaper in some parts of the world.

You don't need mains electricity anymore with the new ASICs. 4 solar panels will run it so as long as you can recoup the ~$3500 outlay in the medium term. (A lot less than the outlay on GPU rigs and no running costs). When/if bitcoins become unprofitable, you can then just sell juice back to the grid.

[AnonyMint]

itsunderstood, the human spirit will prevail. How else would you characterize my attempt to make a fix or better bitcoin?

Let's keep progressing, that is the way to win.

Martin is out of jail (7 years held in jail without a trial) and he writes much more sensibly now. I couldn't understand him when he was writing from jail. Now that he gets daily email questions, he is able to explain his stuff better.

Now I realize he is not nonsense. Before I thought he was.

[AnonyMint]

You don't realize that investing in PV is economically worse than renting electricity from the utility.

You don't realize that nobody can manipulate electricity prices if you produce it and in the long term it's cheaper in some parts of the world.

You don't need mains electricity anymore with the new ASICs. 4 solar panels will run it so as long as you can recoup the ~$3500 outlay in the medium term. (A lot less than the outlay on GPU rigs and no running costs). When/if bitcoins become unprofitable, you can then just sell juice back to the grid.

That is not entirely correct (partially yes). Difficulty will scale up accordingly. But I do agree the ASICs hardware cost now far exceeds the electricity cost. This may change as ASICs are converted to IC chips that are mass produced.

My design uses hard-disk space, which is much more reliable to predict. We won't have these phase-shift changes causing miners to waste capital in a direction that becomes obsolete. The Moore's Law for hard-disks is very predictable.

I want miners to be healthy. I want every user to be able to mine some. In the design of a P2P currency, you can't neglect a part of your ecosystem. Investment requires predictability.

[itsunderstood]

http://anonycoin.org (this is very rough, needs a lot of work to make it more clear)

OP I am pasting this portion from the link you provided above:

[...]

To motivate peers to participate in storing and generating a P2P currency’s distributed database, they must be awarded some coins. This can be done with debasement (new coins created with each transaction block), transactions fees, or storage fees (a.k.a. demurrage).

Bitcoin’s protocol enforces decelerating debasement (asymptotically limited at 21 million coins) and allows peers to optionally charge transaction fees of any percent. The computational Proof-of-Work insures that debasement is distributed roughly in proportion to the computational resources each peer contributes to the distributed database.

AnonyCash / AnonyMint enforces self-adjusting, perpetual debasement (with protocol rules to regulate a more stable value for the coins) and the minimum consistent transaction fees necessary to prevent spam transactions. The static disk-space Proof-of-Work insures that owners of general purpose desktop personal computers (and hypothetically mobile devices with sufficient and fast cloud storage) are on a level playing field with deep pocketed capital. The large storage space requirement is created indexing the shared key into a 2nd dimension with the closeness to the hash of the hash of prior block, e.g. a million peers creates roughly a million × million = terabyte storage requirement.* The shared keys will be sent to the new peer during the delay before it becomes active, and can not be requested by that peer later on demand.

So to discuss your concept, most people would see debasing of coins, gold and silver specie type coins, as being a lessening of the metals content, meaning a 99% pure gold coin would be debased such that it becomes a 50% gold coin, i.e. debased by half.

As I understand the words above (correct me if I am wrong), you identify that bitcoin does not ever debase its coins, but indeed, aims to have the final block, even if it is worth a billion US dollars, be the same as to its nature, as the first bitcoin block.  Am I explaining this right?  So in essence, bitcoins can never be clipped or debased, and you're saying that's a problem because the people who mine those final blocks, won't get "paid"?  Is that right?

And so your explanation of debasement as good, is somewhat obverse as to what people associate that word with (myself included) because, I suppose, the debasing is done by assholes who want to enrich themselves.  But you are saying, I think, that debasing the coins as they move forward (the final blocks produce more coins than the first blocks) is a GOOD thing, because it makes for a consistent flow of coins?  Is that right?

Just trying to allow you to clarify your points.  But again, since we won't approach the final bitcoin blocks before total global warfare (means: death of half of all humans on Earth), I stick to my claims that long term predictions are essentially just so much guessing.  Bitcoin here in Q1 of 2013 has crossed the rubicon, and within a few more years, I believe it will cause massive changes politically before your cartels can grab miners as your theory describes.  Chaos will be increasing from here out.  Hmm but perhaps that chaos will cause the miners (be they prisoners or just weakling in their basement) to adhere to the cartels.  Hmm...