Bitcoin Forum
October 15, 2018, 10:55:03 PM *
News: Make sure you are not using versions of Bitcoin Core other than 0.17.0 [Torrent], 0.16.3, 0.15.2, or 0.14.3. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Common hashrate  (Read 1237 times)
aliashraf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 368


View Profile
September 15, 2017, 10:16:29 AM
 #21

Yes. That operation wins on raw power
What I want is a game of chance. Like the lottery you can buy $1M worth of tickets, does it guarantee you winning?
Now we are trying to build trust in a trustless world saturated by digital signals generated by unknown devils we have made by our own hands, impressive, entertaining, but pointless! Why in the hell we had to make such monsters in the first place?!

Because it is a trust-less world we attempt to build a system that does not require trust. And with each person in the system trying to secure his property secure the property of others.
We are alive, while we are we move forward. Solve problems as they come along, whether they are man made or otherwise.  

It is not a 'trust-less' world! The world is full of trust. I trust my eyes when I see a cat, I know it is not an elephant or a nuclear missile but one thing is trust-less: a computer that is running Windows or pretends to be running Linux, damn, I have no clue what the hell is it, I mean it, I have no clue at all, nobody does!

And good luck with your 'Do what you are obliged to do' approach I prefer the 'Ask Why' version.

Don't think I am getting your logic. On the other hand I might not be a fast learner.

Thanks

It is not about your learning skills nor my idea being too sophisticated. Just one reason: Ideology.

Believing in or giving up to the crypto terminology: 'trustless world' is part of this terminology and it is pure ideology. Guys in this forum are so happy with this cat and mouse game: We live in a trustless world and guess what? We have built a reliable ecosystem! We did what TCP/IP did decades ago with unreliable communication channels,  believe it? How smart we are! Our parents should be proud of us!

But TCP/IP was totally a different story: It fixed the problem directly, eliminated the packet lost problem and provided what we desperately needed: a reliable, fault tolerant, peer-to peer communication channel.

In the blockchain and consensus case we are just making the problem official todo our business wit it: computers are monsters? Good news! lets build an ecosystem upon it, based on it. In fact we  need them to be  unpredictable, unreliable things, otherwise how can we show our smartness? See? It is our ideology not our science nor our wisdom that speaks here.

I prefer to fix problems in a radical and straight forward way, I prefer to be right rather than smart,  in this case, I think we have to ask, in the first place: How did we ended here? This 'dealing with unreliable computing technology' dilemma? This 'computing in the shadows' paradigm?
1539644103
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539644103

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539644103
Reply with quote  #2

1539644103
Report to moderator
1539644103
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539644103

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539644103
Reply with quote  #2

1539644103
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1539644103
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539644103

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539644103
Reply with quote  #2

1539644103
Report to moderator
1539644103
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539644103

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539644103
Reply with quote  #2

1539644103
Report to moderator
cromex
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 116
Merit: 10


View Profile
September 15, 2017, 12:26:57 PM
 #22


Believing in or giving up to the crypto terminology: 'trustless world' is part of this terminology and it is pure ideology. Guys in this forum are so happy with this cat and mouse game: We live in a trustless world and guess what? We have built a reliable ecosystem! We did what TCP/IP did decades ago with unreliable communication channels,  believe it? How smart we are! Our parents should be proud of us!

But TCP/IP was totally a different story: It fixed the problem directly, eliminated the packet lost problem and provided what we desperately needed: a reliable, fault tolerant, peer-to peer communication channel.


If I am understanding you correctly, we are not trying to solve a real problem, we are stuck in an ideological loop?
We fixed the TCP/IP problem because we kept trying to solve it. Crypto terminology as you call it, to me is a tool to do work with. I ask myself the question, how can I use it to solve the problem I now have, or can it?

I prefer to fix problems in a radical and straight forward way, I prefer to be right rather than smart,  in this case, I think we have to ask, in the first place: How did we ended here? This 'dealing with unreliable computing technology' dilemma? This 'computing in the shadows' paradigm?


Elaborate some more on this.
aliashraf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 368


View Profile
September 15, 2017, 03:28:28 PM
 #23


Believing in or giving up to the crypto terminology: 'trustless world' is part of this terminology and it is pure ideology. Guys in this forum are so happy with this cat and mouse game: We live in a trustless world and guess what? We have built a reliable ecosystem! We did what TCP/IP did decades ago with unreliable communication channels,  believe it? How smart we are! Our parents should be proud of us!

But TCP/IP was totally a different story: It fixed the problem directly, eliminated the packet lost problem and provided what we desperately needed: a reliable, fault tolerant, peer-to peer communication channel.


If I am understanding you correctly, we are not trying to solve a real problem, we are stuck in an ideological loop?
We fixed the TCP/IP problem because we kept trying to solve it. Crypto terminology as you call it, to me is a tool to do work with. I ask myself the question, how can I use it to solve the problem I now have, or can it?
TCP/IP was a direct solution for a real problem: Any communication is potentially vulnerable to message lost. This is not a human made problem it is how the real world works. Noise is not avoidable, human kind did not invented noise or other mathematical and topological problems we were facing with which DARAP project successfully solved in late 70s by inventing TCP/IP ...

But when it comes to our ideological terminology and the infamous 'trustless-world', we are in a totally different situation:
We have made the problem by our hands, gradually and brake by brake. I know people are not trustable inherently but machines are, they should be.
Follow the orders, and work the way we have programmed you! It is what a machine is supposed to do . Machines have no purpose, they have no interests, they don't need any incentives to do their jobs, they are simply machines. If the word 'trust' has got any meaning, machines are among the most trustable objects in our world!

But now take a closer look at our contemporary computing technologies, which we have invented and developed leaded by greedy billion dollar corporates like IBM, Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, ...
Look closer and find a simple truth: they are not machines, they are just a big question mark label on a black box and this is the very first origin of our ideological problem: trustless-world it is not about the world, it is about the machines corporate made mixtures of evil hardware and software. World is trustful, these bastard babies of greed and ignorance, these 'computers' are not.
Coping with this phenomenon by applying smart tricks (like St. Satoshi's holly consensus invention and the blockchain) is  not necessarily the most smart choice we have ...

Instead I'm proposing to reconsider the whole computing technology and even re-invent it to eliminate the evil, Frankenstein like 'things' we call them computers.

Once we got truly computing machines, innocent, loyal, transparent machines that do their job predictably and honestly, the whole situation will change radically and it is not just about FINTECH but every single crisis in the IT we have today.


Quote

I prefer to fix problems in a radical and straight forward way, I prefer to be right rather than smart,  in this case, I think we have to ask, in the first place: How did we ended here? This 'dealing with unreliable computing technology' dilemma? This 'computing in the shadows' paradigm?


Elaborate some more on this.
I just did Smiley
cromex
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 116
Merit: 10


View Profile
September 15, 2017, 10:37:48 PM
 #24


Believing in or giving up to the crypto terminology: 'trustless world' is part of this terminology and it is pure ideology. Guys in this forum are so happy with this cat and mouse game: We live in a trustless world and guess what? We have built a reliable ecosystem! We did what TCP/IP did decades ago with unreliable communication channels,  believe it? How smart we are! Our parents should be proud of us!

But TCP/IP was totally a different story: It fixed the problem directly, eliminated the packet lost problem and provided what we desperately needed: a reliable, fault tolerant, peer-to peer communication channel.


If I am understanding you correctly, we are not trying to solve a real problem, we are stuck in an ideological loop?
We fixed the TCP/IP problem because we kept trying to solve it. Crypto terminology as you call it, to me is a tool to do work with. I ask myself the question, how can I use it to solve the problem I now have, or can it?
TCP/IP was a direct solution for a real problem: Any communication is potentially vulnerable to message lost. This is not a human made problem it is how the real world works. Noise is not avoidable, human kind did not invented noise or other mathematical and topological problems we were facing with which DARAP project successfully solved in late 70s by inventing TCP/IP ...

But when it comes to our ideological terminology and the infamous 'trustless-world', we are in a totally different situation:
We have made the problem by our hands, gradually and brake by brake. I know people are not trustable inherently but machines are, they should be.
Follow the orders, and work the way we have programmed you! It is what a machine is supposed to do . Machines have no purpose, they have no interests, they don't need any incentives to do their jobs, they are simply machines. If the word 'trust' has got any meaning, machines are among the most trustable objects in our world!

But now take a closer look at our contemporary computing technologies, which we have invented and developed leaded by greedy billion dollar corporates like IBM, Apple, Microsoft, Oracle, ...
Look closer and find a simple truth: they are not machines, they are just a big question mark label on a black box and this is the very first origin of our ideological problem: trustless-world it is not about the world, it is about the machines corporate made mixtures of evil hardware and software. World is trustful, these bastard babies of greed and ignorance, these 'computers' are not.
Coping with this phenomenon by applying smart tricks (like St. Satoshi's holly consensus invention and the blockchain) is  not necessarily the most smart choice we have ...

Instead I'm proposing to reconsider the whole computing technology and even re-invent it to eliminate the evil, Frankenstein like 'things' we call them computers.

Once we got truly computing machines, innocent, loyal, transparent machines that do their job predictably and honestly, the whole situation will change radically and it is not just about FINTECH but every single crisis in the IT we have today.


Quote

I prefer to fix problems in a radical and straight forward way, I prefer to be right rather than smart,  in this case, I think we have to ask, in the first place: How did we ended here? This 'dealing with unreliable computing technology' dilemma? This 'computing in the shadows' paradigm?


Elaborate some more on this.
I just did Smiley

I get your point now. Told you I am not that fast.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!