Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[TPTB_need_war]

I hope that people reading this thread do not skip this comment, so they can save time by skipping everything else you've written and everything else you will write from now on.

That assumption does not follow from any other theoretical point you had in mind. With that proclamation your are conflicting with your stated conceptualization of chaos theory.

[1713948594]

1713948594

[1713948594]

1713948594

[1713948594]

1713948594

[TPTB_need_war]

I also thought astrology was bullshit. But as hard as I tried, I was proven wrong in my experience (now that isn't a double-blind survey but relativity can't be i.e. your experience may be different).

I'm not surprised at all. People (such as myself) who are drawn toconflate "conspiracy theories" with data correlation tend to be suspicious about everything except the most obvious fraudsassume that everything that can't be falsified within their (our) data set is a fraud (and should be ignored thus further limiting their <our> available armchair dataset in a self-reinforcing myopia).

ftfy

[TPTB_need_war]

and you know what?  from the beginning, even before we found out about the large Chinese miners, i said this is a highly dubious attack that any such large miner should want to perform.  large blocks do not change the fact that miners will want first and foremost the block reward and should only continue to form the smallest, most efficiently propagating blocks they can so as not to be orphaned.  an attacker still risks losing their entire hardware investment by destroying the system in which they participate.  i've contended that the blonde in the Governing Dynamics video from John Nash is equivalent to either the the selfish or 51% miner attack.  they won't do it b/c all miners want to get laid.

Nash equilibrium doesn't apply in a system with out-of-band incentives.

[TPTB_need_war]

notice how none of the Blockstream devs come in to the thread on Reddit, where we know they hang out, to challenge me on this

Perhaps because unlike stupid me, they don't waste their scarce time on n00bs who will bury relevant discussion in useless noise.

[TPTB_need_war]

Central bank vs central authority in this context is a distinction without a difference.

Another point that follows from the key word "central" is that Visa doesn't have a monopoly on payment (although arguably close to one as we move digital and away from cash). Disrupting a central authority is not the same as competing against Visa.

[vokain]

Ah, astrology, one of my favorite tools to reflect with, and one of man's most ancient studies (along with alchemy and magick).

One should realize that astrology is not relegated to just the sign that the sun was in the moment you were born.

I could go into astrology's process of determining the relationship between space and time but more tangibly, there is a burgeoning branch of knowledge exploring a field termed epigenetics. Depending on certain environmental influences, the expression of our genetic code also changes. In Dr. Bruce Lipton's Biology of Belief, he posits that our beliefs can have an influence upon gene expression. The whole point of astrology reading in general is to make us aware of the traits inherent in every man and how we come to develop those traits. When we become aware of ourselves and ourselves to others, we develop more of which we are aware in ourselves and between others.  

In the Human Design school of thought, one of my traits is from the Incarnation Cross "freak-to-genius" channel, and so, here I am.
"...born on The Right Angle Cross of Explanation 3: Your job is to explain revolutionary and principled solutions; untested Individual knowing necessitates clarifying and repeating insights which have been filtered through logic’s formulas. (Gates 4-49-23-43)"

Edit: There is also theory re: neutrinos from stars. As they are small enough that they can pass through matter, yet still have effects upon what they pass through, it is posited that they carry influence that can also effect gene expression. This is a bit of a headier topic but astrology helps maps the timing of such influence.

[TPTB_need_war]

When we become aware of ourselves and ourselves to others, we develop more of which we are aware in ourselves and between others.

So true. As I have become more aware of my attributes, it has enabled me to be more attuned to which relationships work smoothly for me and why.

Even if astrology is just a thought process, it is worthwhile if it is worthwhile to the person applying (your mileage may vary). And my point is that life is a relative process with no permanent, global theories. Entropy wouldn't allow it. Life couldn't exist if there were permanent theories (change would be predetermined).

The laws of entropy might be permanent and fundamental because in them change is inexorable and relativity is never absolute.

[TPTB_need_war]

Here's a great example, in which Frap.doc doesn't even bother trying to substantiate his wacky, vaguely senile assertion that the bank bailouts Satoshi singularly cited in Genesis had something to do with Visa/Paypal:

The Genesis Block mentions bailouts for TBTF banks.  It does not mention Visa or Paypal.

"banks" were used as a broad term to encompass Visa/Paypal

Satoshi actually used the term "financial institution" in the white paper.  He focusses heavily on the transactional aspects of Bitcoin (e.g., the Visa/Paypal angle):

Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as trusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions, and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non-reversible services.

There's actually no mention of central banks in the white paper whatsoever (although he does use the term "central authority" twice).  The only mention of gold is in Section 6:

The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation.

TL/DR: The white paper focusses more heavily on the transactional aspects of bitcoin than on its potential as a replacement for fiat currency/gold.  

The only technological issue Satoshi solved was a form of consensus that can't scale decentralized. So while he might wish some related decentralized crypto technology can compete with the centralized financial institutions, fact is he didn't create such a technology.

Thus I must conclude he planted a Trojan on Bitcoin itself as I explained a few posts back.

[TPTB_need_war]

The ad hominem slights and MP style roastings seem to be counter productive, though they are fun.

Because this isn't technological disruption. It is politics. And you wonder why I would never put my name on any altcoin.

Note the distinction between Bitcoin and cell phone adoption.

And that is why I call nonsense MP's claim that Bitcoin is the only possible entrant. The competition over what is money is inexorable. And Bitcoin doesn't have the attributes to take over virally (i.e. decentralized).

Bitcoin stopped growing decentralized about when it peaked at $1000, which was the entire point of my thread on that issue. The next ramp is the centralized ramp out to the masses.

[TPTB_need_war]

i'm quite sympathetic to the concept of making Bitcoin digital gold.  that's why this thread was born.

however, what the 1MB apparatchiks are missing is that Bitcoin really does represent the "ideal money".  and that includes it being used widely in a manner that gold was never able to achieve.  and that means, widespread worldwide adoption that crosses borders and gets into the hands of individuals.  for it to be considered digital gold, however,  i already talked about how that requires cheap reliable dependable tx confirmations.  that is b/c Bitcoin is digital; it can't be held, weighed, shaped, coveted, etc.  all the normal tangible aspects that poor ppl covet or expect from physical gold.  

I agree.  I also like your example of the African kid who has to witness--with his own eyes--Bitcoin getting him the things he wants, before he'll ever be able to fathom that those digits on his phone are more valuable than the paper notes his father uses to purchase food from the market, or the little diamonds he once saw a man killed for.

We're not as smart as we think.  We need to see, touch, and experience something before we can really understand that thing.  You can't learn to ski by reading online tutorials--no matter how well you think you grok body mechanics and the laws of physics.  Similarly, the world will only understand (and come to appreciate) bitcoin by getting out there and using it.    

The centralized financial institutions will be providing that scalability for you. It won't scale to micropayments and it won't be decentralized. Political fascist result. Enjoy.

All this ideological delusion is pitiful. Does anyone have a grip on reality? Please speak up.

[TPTB_need_war]

b/c i just debunked the main spam attack the Blockstream devs have been scaring everyone with

 

I am seriously thinking (for my efficiency) you need to go on my ignore. I have no one on ignore. This would be quite an accomplishment, because I usually think all information (even noise) has some value.

Again you are missing the point. It isn't who are the largest miners today with 1 MB blocks, it is who would be the largest or only miners and node operators with 20 MB blocks.

Yup again and again and again...

[TPTB_need_war]

and not getting caught?

Don't assume she won't be caught in 2018 or so.

TPTB are letting everyone incriminate themselves first, so then we move into the totalitarian smashup/takedown.

[TPTB_need_war]

That comment is at best unclear except for the content-free insults, and at worst incoherent and rambling in the frothy manner of a crank like Anonymint.

Ain't it nice that you admit you can't comprehend. At least you didn't dishonestly accuse me of being context-free and you admitted you just can't wrap your mind about my logic. There are numerous possible reasons for this effect.

[TPTB_need_war]

MPEX may have invented the GavinCoin Short, but it will be far from the only exchange using it to nuke the Gavinstas' trollfork from space.

The same WMD can be used against Core too. This could be mutual annihilation (reverse wealth effect, which is levered) as you have mentioned. Or one fork could gain momentum and avalanche effect.

Again I would sell BTC for XMR or dollars immediately. I own no XMR and I keep a small amount of BTC because I can't spend XMR easily (or at least hasn't been worth it for me to figure out how).

I do intend to hold most of my wealth in crypto-coin in the near future. XMR will part of my holdings. BTC probably not.

[hdbuck]

That comment is at best unclear except for the content-free insults, and at worst incoherent and rambling in the frothy manner of a crank like Anonymint.

Ain't it nice that you admit you can't comprehend. At least you didn't dishonestly accuse me of being context-free and you admitted you just can't wrap your mind about my logic. There are numerous possible reasons for this effect.

wow, such cockfight.



much pop corn.


ps: hopefully bitcoin wont wage those egos all around. good thing is technology does not care about feelings.

[TPTB_need_war]

Now; lets make things simpler. Say we can set with a very good precision the initial conditions. We're now talking about a SIMPLE dynamic system here with fully determined initial conditions. Now pay attention: Even if you can set the initial conditions on such a system, small differences have a totally different outcome; so as the time goes by; your predictions are getting enormously difficult to be true, thus rendering the predictions useless. This system's behaviour is called "deterministic chaos" and was first observed by Edward Lorenz who defined it like this:

Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future. ¹

Implicit in your point is that we can not specify initial conditions with exact precision due to Planck's constant (which is intimately related to that the speed-of-light is finite and also conceptually related to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle).

That is all fine and dandy, except it is irrelevant to games of chance in real world outcomes. If it were true that no order emerged from chaos, then entropy would be simultaneously infinite (internally) and 0 (externally) and nothing could exist from an internal nor external perspective. The internal perspective would fail to find any relative order (no point of reference with which to make an observation) and the external observer would observe a void.

Order exists at higher levels of conceptualization. And this is your myopia on our disagreement about Armstrong's computer model and your other egregious attack on knowledge. I encourage you to delve into the links I gave you to Armstrong's writings about his model and chaos theory wherein he explains that moving to higher dimensions can extract order that is hidden in lower dimensional conceptualizations similar to your myopia here.

P.S. you are correct that the existing stochastic models employed are one-dimensional and thus don't have the scope to pull order out-of-chaos. Armstrong developed a multi-dimensional entropy stochastic model which extracts hidden order.

[cypherdoc]

I also thought astrology was bullshit. But as hard as I tried, I was proven wrong in my experience (now that isn't a double-blind survey but relativity can't be i.e. your experience may be different).

I'm not surprised at all. People who are drawn to conspiracy theories tend to be suspicious about everything except the most obvious frauds.

You assume I made any global assumption. All I stated is that in my experience I have noticed that early period Cancers have a tendency to be more extrovert than those later. Ditto my observation about Cancers being so incredibly attuned to details about intentions.

I have tried (even again recently) to find a case where it isn't true. Try as I might, I always fail to. Until I find a case that disproves the theory, then I have to assume that in my experience it is true.

You are a simpleton thinker (so far).

Your conceptualization of chaos is so myopic.

I hope that people reading this thread do not skip this comment, so they can save time by skipping everything else you've written and everything else you will write from now on.

Fur the first  time in my history here I hit the ignore button before going to bed. I  think this is going to work  out.

[klee]

The season you are born (climate in general) has MUCH to do with who you are (and not the stars).
Epigenome.

There are studies, bored to dig them up now, but it is very straightforward for people with evolutionary biology, epigenetics etc background.

[TPTB_need_war]

Fur the first  time in my history here I hit the ignore button before going to bed. I  think this is going to work  out.

Hi Führer, I really think that is for the best don't you?

I also thought astrology was bullshit. But as hard as I tried, I was proven wrong in my experience (now that isn't a double-blind survey but relativity can't be i.e. your experience may be different).

I'm not surprised at all. People (such as myself) who are drawn toconflate "conspiracy theories" with data correlation tend to be suspicious about everything except the most obvious fraudsassume that everything that can't be falsified within their (our) data set is a fraud (and should be ignored thus further limiting their <our> available armchair dataset in a self-reinforcing myopia).

ftfy

Now; lets make things simpler. Say we can set with a very good precision the initial conditions. We're now talking about a SIMPLE dynamic system here with fully determined initial conditions. Now pay attention: Even if you can set the initial conditions on such a system, small differences have a totally different outcome; so as the time goes by; your predictions are getting enormously difficult to be true, thus rendering the predictions useless. This system's behaviour is called "deterministic chaos" and was first observed by Edward Lorenz who defined it like this:

Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future. ¹

Implicit in your point is that we can not specify initial conditions with exact precision due to Planck's constant (which is intimately related to that the speed-of-light is finite and also conceptually related to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle).

That is all fine and dandy, except it is irrelevant to games of chance in real world outcomes. If it were true that no order emerged from chaos, then entropy would be simultaneously infinite (internally) and 0 (externally) and nothing could exist from an internal nor external perspective. The internal perspective would fail to find any relative order (no point of reference with which to make an observation) and the external observer would observe a void.

Order exists at higher levels of conceptualization. And this is your myopia on our disagreement about Armstrong's computer model and your other egregious attack on knowledge. I encourage you to delve into the links I gave you to Armstrong's writings about his model and chaos theory wherein he explains that moving to higher dimensions can extract order that is hidden in lower dimensional conceptualizations similar to your myopia here.

P.S. you are correct that the existing stochastic models employed are one-dimensional and thus don't have the scope to pull order out-of-chaos. Armstrong developed a multi-dimensional entropy stochastic model which extracts hidden order.

[vokain]

The season you are born (climate in general) has MUCH to do with who you are (and not the stars).
Epigenome.

There are studies, bored to dig them up now, but it is very straightforward for people with evolutionary biology, epigenetics etc background.

Dude, our climate is from the sun (a star)  

If your choice of nickname is apt, then you should easily realize that.