@Quickseller, @aliashraf, @Ix, @Traxo, @miscreanity et al, I appreciate that you’re awake to the evils of centralized databases on the Internet. Don’t expect altcoin shills to have any conscience, astute ethics, vision for future, or ability to foresee their own self-destruction. For example, the Core shills vision for the future is off-chain, fractional reserves, but they’re too blinded by their ignorance, fantasies, and/or vested interests to observe reality. There’s no solution that can brought forth within such a corrupt paradigm. The only solution is to move the Internet forward to “Web 3.0” on decentralized ledgers. So let’s just stop fighting the corruption from inside the corruption and get the necessary work done to disintermediate the corruption. You will get no where feeding the trolls and arguing with those who will vehemently shill for their altcoin (which is mostly the Core altcoin shills in this thread).
@cryptohunter my reaction to both your public and private comments, is I don’t want to return. Because I agree with what you noted, that you and virtually all (99%) the other guys here on this forum aren’t able to discern the technological arguments.
Thus attempting to explain such technological, game theory, economics, sociology, is a mostly fruitless (or let’s say insignificant ROI) misallocation of precious time. For example, after all the careful and patient effort I put into holding @Wind_FURY's (and to a lesser extent @Anon136’s) hand(s) recently and explaining everything to him very carefully in numerous threads and posts (which were censored), they both for example continue to make
clueless and ignorantly boastful, erroneous statements in the Lightning Networks discussion thread. The shills for altcoins such as Core (and all the others such Ethereum, etc) are analogous to violent soccer fans. It’s always “my team is better than you team” with hands over ears and eyes, yelling “na, na, na, na, I can’t hear you nor see you” and employing whatever sort of trolling is necessary to support their team and show their allegiance to either vested interests and/or inaccurate fantasies.
It’s like baboons who are cheering on the
blue vs.
red team which they religiously believe in while the
blue team is leading to a failure which they can’t comprehend. It’s both sad and hilarious. This is the unfortunate reason the masses are and will always be fodder. Unlike scammers and manipulators who only want to use their ignorance or who don’t care, I really tried to explain and help them but all I get in return in their ire (and ridiculously boastful ignorance) even when I patiently tried to teach them. So there’s nothing to be gained from me posting here where I can’t form my own decentralized circles and kick off the riff-raff. And worse, since the content is not stored on a decentralized, open database, I risk my effort being nuked as it has been so many times.
It’s a wiser allocation of my resources and much more productive for me to focus on my work. And no I am not frustrated at all that others don’t understand my work. They don’t really understand Bitcoin either yet they appreciate it. My work can be similarly appreciated at the correct juncture if I am able to complete it, which is mostly dependent on my health and my ability to not waste time.
Here is an example of what I am referring to and I must post here in Meta instead of in the LN thread where the discussion is:
Indeed, it's very telling how much effort they put into trash talking in comparison to how much they want to add supporting voices to alternative ideas to improve cryptocurrencies.
This, exactly this, was my problem with Shelby lately.
I addressed this twice near the end of
this post in Meta.
Also when y’all admit Core is an altcoin, then it can receive the same critical analysis that the other altcoins receive from myself. I don’t discriminate against Core.
I had also stated (in the posts that were nuked from the LN thread) that I’m not against the LN experiment. I stated very clearly the reasons I think it will become entirely centralized, run by the banksters, and be a fractional reserve system, that also donates all the real Bitcoin to the powers-that-be. In the future, we’ll observe if I am correct in my analysis and expectation.
Yet you all go on and on thinking that your errors in the LN thread will change that outcome. It won’t. And y’all do not understand why, even though I tried to explain it to you. So there isn’t anything more that needs to be said. Carry on to your destiny.
Even Gregory Maxwell admitted the LN is not what you
retards[n00bs] think it is:
https://news.bitcoin.com/the-curious-case-of-gregory-maxwell-and-the-lightning-network/
AnonyMint's posts are almost exclusively jargon-laden techno-babble. His posts are angry and abusive while at the same time they often fail to even make syntactic sense when it comes to the technical content-- at least to anyone who knows what the words mean.
If this is true, it would be trivial for someone with similar or greater technical knowledge than him to publicly prove him wrong and/or defeat him in a debate.
Oh Gregory surely can dig up something where I have been wrong (and probably where I even admitted my error) in order to obfuscate that Gregory will be unable to address the specific technological challenges that I presented in my prior post.
Note in the prior post made by @Traxo on my behalf, I have provided two examples where in a debate with Gregory he was shown to be incorrect and he refused (even until this day) to admit he was incorrect.
I understand a lot.
No you do not understand much in any holistic sense. Compounded on top of your lack of holistic understanding is your bunny rabbit fantasy confirmation bias, i.e. you really want to believe that proof-of-work can have some form of off-chain instant transactions and transaction volume scaling that won’t be centralized and won’t be fractional reserves. This fantasy bias causes you to reject becoming holistically astute, yet I also doubt that you have the ability to assimilate all the necessary information because of the extreme level of discipline and effort that is required.
By analogy, females-at-large (and note there’s always exceptions) can be awarded engineering degrees (by corrupted SJW holiness cesspools they name universities), but then
can’t produce tritium or complete the Obamacare website. Not even because they’re not smart enough (as James Donald
astutely points out females more typically excel as first lieutenants although of course there can be exceptions), but because as
Jordan Petersen explains, most of them aren’t willing to work 100 hours a week like I do grinding away at assimilating
all the “boring” engineering details. Similarly, you may understand (but as you admit at lower level of understanding) paradigmatically in the way the computer science student thinks he understands how to program and then gets into the real world of needing to holistically integrate programming, economics, game theory, sociology, etc. and falls flat on his face. Which BTW, is also one of Gregory Maxwell’s failure modes to some degree (although he’s expert in cryptography and encodings and various other computer science disciplines). Yet Gregory also suffers the
SJW victimization holiness psychosis which he probably learned as most Millennials do these days from these cesspools of academia.
Your Dunning-Kruger overconfidence can be best explained by a woman on Quora who has a 160 IQ. She is smarter than me. Read
how she explains it. @WIND_Fury you should also read that and take heed about what I had explained to you in the nuked posts, that if you’re 1 to 2 SD below in IQ or equivalently in detailed expertise, then you don’t understand anything at all and are just making errors pretty much every time you write anything. Leah also
wrote more about the hateful, ignorance you trolls spew.
An IQ of 135 is just over 2 standard deviations above normal. The definition for gifted should be 130, which is 2 standard deviations about normal. If 100 is average, then the gifted individual has as much in common with the person of average IQ as a person of average IQ has in common with someone of labeled as needing special services. The person who qualifies for special education services, at 2 standard deviations below, would have an IQ of about 70.
One could ask, does a person of average intelligence become frustrated with someone of less than average intelligence? I believe that the question would have the same answer, as the differences in IQ and functioning would be exactly the same.
The 160 IQ Eric S. Raymond wrote about the destiny that awaits you n00bs:
The return of the servant problemI
wrote on Quora:
Leah, you put into words the thought I’ve had that Millennials don’t appreciate their elders enough to apprentice under our expertise. I’m 53 and in the computer science field. I had the desire to work with the youth and build something together but the chasm between our respective attitudes seems so great. For example, I reject the SJWs mayonnaise spread on everything. For example recently
I contributed to a question on Stackoverflow Meta about how to address the spam problem of low quality questions that could be easily answered with a Google search. I suggested the simple economic solution to charge for asking a question more than the opportunity cost of doing a Google search. I pointed out that attempting to give away for free what is not free is impossible. Thus the insoluble problem they have and until they address the root cause they’ll just dig deeper into a clusterfuck of for example enabling arbitrary censorship. The Millennials downvoted my answer relentlessly because in their logic this would disincentivize participation (and I’m noting that
uniform anything is negentropic). The irony is their votes cost them nothing so they had nothing at stake of than their ideology (and could potentially be sockpuppet accounts harvested for free). My point is they’re losing the participation of those with high opportunity cost who value quality, for which the negligible cost for posting questions would be far outweighed by the gain in relevancy. The cost charged could be reputation instead of money, if identities are not free. Actually that is only a simplistic summary, as I have a more complex design in mind for a decentralized ledger. Anyway, my point is that they’re not experienced or open-minded enough to consider the holistic integration of economics. That is just one of many example interactions that indicate to me that they prioritize SJW egalitarianism mayonnaise on everything. I’m probably oversimplifying and missing some other facets of this generational phenomenon. Maybe I’m coming into contact with too many INTJs who lack interpersonal skills and an appreciation for hardwork, because I did stumble on this counter-example today:
SOLD EVERYTHING | GOOD-BYE USA | Jake Mace - Living in Portugal, pt. 2Also it’s not surprising that Millennials don’t value their elders, because Millennials are being thrown under the bus by the Boomers who filled their heads with political nonsense and have supported a politics that has saddled the country with debt servitude. I wrote on Medium:
“If you want the country to be less polarized then stop writing, talking, and thinking about…”If one can not confer upon another a right which he does not himself first possess, by what means does the state derive the right to engage in behaviors from which the public is prohibited?
That nonsense is a perfect example of your bunny rabbit fantasy and lack of holistic understanding of the world you live in. Rights don’t exist without the power to defend them. That’s why you bunny rabbits huddle together in a collective in order to try to assert some power to defend some rights. But
a collective is a power vacuum that demands that the bunny rabbits be manipulated by the most ruthless. Core is another bunny rabbit collectivized clusterfuck. So the answer to your question is power and the power vacuum of collective rights. In that light, your question reveals how blissfully ignorant you are. Yet you claim you understand much. No you don’t.
Honestly, I still never read any of your ridiculously verbose (and presumably the technical) posts.
If you want only soundbites, then you will never understand anything holistically at a level capable of not making a fool of yourself as you continue to do in the Lightning Networks (LN) thread you started recently.
How silly that you blame me for the complexity of the confluence of technology, economics, game theory, sociology, etc.. That exemplifies the ridiculousness of your claim of understanding a lot. Come on man stop jerking yourself off and get in touch with reality. Or don’t. Stay in your bunny rabbit fantasy and be played by disorder as it should be (see the tail end of the prior post from @Traxo about order and disorder which I am confident is entirely incomprehensible to you).
Further, it is difficult to take his post seriously when Greg's actions/behavior at Wikipedia have been described as "vandalism" by his peers at Wikipedia. Some have claimed that Greg continues to have a positive professional relationship with the admins at Wikipedia, however I have not seen evidence of this, nor have I seen anyone to claim to have affirmative direct knowledge of this.
Okay... So what did he change on wikipedia that was "vandalism"?
You claim, “I understand a lot.” But you’re unable or unwilling to do a Google search:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=36639732#User:Gmaxwellhttps://twitter.com/sayurichick/status/954381661885538304https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/74se80/wikipedia_admins_gregory_maxwell_of_blockstream/https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4klqtg/people_are_starting_to_realize_how_toxic_gregory/https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/45ail1/wikipedians_on_greg_maxwell_in_2006_now_cto_of/https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/459iyw/gmaxwell_in_2006_during_his_wikipedia_vandalism/https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/457y0k/greg_maxwells_wikipedia_war_or_he_how_learned_to/
He always argues that some terrible event is going to occur at some unspecified time in the future.
Oh like I called the
BTC triple bottom in late June and early July before the rest of the Speculation forum caught up to the concept. And I emphatically stated (which is in the nuked posts that @mprep
refuses to assist in sending me a copy of) that BTC would bounce from $6100 up to $8000+. That’s both not terrible and quite empirical.
I could go through a laundry list of examples like this such as
my correct public prediction in 2010 that silver would rise from $25 to $45 by Q2 2011 then crash (which is exactly what it did), but you’re just here to troll and write lies. So it would be a waste of my time, because you’re not interested in being non-disingenuous. Or never mind that I screamed all over these forums multi-posting
in numerous threads in early 2017 to buy LTC at $6 days before it blasted off and proceeded to over $350 in 2017. As I said, I could go on and on. But you trolls will try to make up some lies about my record by citing something out-of-context or based on your incorrect vague memory. And I don’t have enough time to continuously correct all your lies and errors. Because there’s a lot of more of you Core shills than myself. One against a horde of trolls is certainly a recipe for misallocation of scarce resources.
Did you also forget my
“Speculation Rule: buy when others are IRRATIONALLY pessimistic/cautious” (c.f. also
my blog of the same title) on October 25, 2016 when Bitcoin
was in the low $600s right before it started to blast off.
He clearly likes the attention
Where’s your empirical proof? No, I would actually like to mute you from the circle of people I want to discuss with, so I never see your useless slobbering.
Readers be very clear that every person spreading lies about me on this thread is a Core shill. They are offended about the truths I have explained.It is absolutely ridiculous to explicitly say (as Maxwell has said) that it is acceptable to ban people because you do not like them, or because many people do not like them.
Nice strawman. Please give the actual quote word for word where he said that, instead of just saying that he said it.
Anonymint didn't get banned because people don't like him, though.
Ah yes, we must remain technically accurate while obfuscating the reality of the situation. The Jews weren’t exterminated as cockroaches because they were Jews, but because they didn’t have the correct papers indicating they were not Jews.
Your point is analogous to “Slick Willy” Bill Clinton
arguing in the court what the definition of ‘is’ is.
I explained up-thread that I felt that people who didn’t like my dissenting information were asking mods to temp-ban me for spreading that information. They used technicalities to single me out for the activities that others were also doing and not being temp-banned for. The response here has been just because other people get away with it, doesn’t absolve me from responsibility to adhere to “the rules”. And I have pointed out that “the rules” aren’t even working to prevent trolling and spamming, so basically those rules exist so that shills (presumably who buy off the mods and @theymos behind the curtain, yeah where is the audit of the finances of these individuals?) have the means to be arbitrary against your critics. @QuickSeller and others (including myself) have correctly pointed out such a paradigm of censorship is the antithesis of our decentralization movement.
I’m not arguing with you because I want to come back to your centralized clusterfuck. I’m making sure that others who read this in the future (and we are archiving everything in case you realize I’m winning the argument and devolve to
censoring in Meta as Stackoverflow does), will understand the importance of the decentralized replacement I will create to disintermediate your corrupt shit.
he's here to tell us everything is broken yet again, even though it isn't.
Core shills want to dominate
bitcointalk.org and
r/Bitcoin with their propaganda and censor any dissenting information especially when a dissenting person is quite successful at attracting attention to that dissenting information.
So you Core shills want to have a monopoly on truth. But
the fact is that we could not even exist (time would not be irreversible and thermodynamic processes would not move forward irreversibly) if anyone had a monopoly on information.
