i read it huntercm
I enjoy reading your posts as well, often even to my own surprise. I think people often are too dismissive of your style just because it either reflects something that they normally keep a negative connotation of, or it just simply rubs them the wrong way.
People like you might end up being the deciding factor in whether the eventual PoA system that does manifest (ProzCoin or elsewhere) end up going the way the proz team and I think it will (promoting quality discourse) or the way all of my friends (including my significant other) seem to think it will go - under the troll bridge. Or maybe people like you will create a third way, language is an ever-evolving thing. (I might actually be rooting for this third thing, heh.)
your very important guy to this crypto world
Nah. Maybe in a past life in a slightly more nascent crypto world, I hope I had some influence. (That was another time, another me, another nickname, another place, another bitcoin.)
Now I'm only interested in such narrow contexts of it, like everyone I suppose.
im jeolous of your craft
The only suggestion I can give is to join in. Read SICP. Twice. Build and rebuild McCarthy's meta-circular interpreter a few dozen times and then go change the world.
teach these boys and girls
something more
love reading your craft, if this as example only was your coin
I've prototyped a few. I almost kinda sorta launched one, but then didn't because we found too many problems in private testing. I jumped in to help HUC fix critical bugs when Mikhail passed. I jumped in to help MOTO (some argue my kind (bot developer) can "only" hurt MOTO but I think this is misguided) when the developers cashed out and "all but" walked away.
I've tried to jump in to try to help a few other human mined and "proof-of-" coins now where the model has had problems. Very few are as receptive as the Proz team has been, despite some other aspects of their "PR" being of possible concern. I tend to think that any crypto necessarily must be a community endeavor, and am baffled by developers/teams who shun contribution, wall their project off, or simply refuse the admit that there are even suggestions or improvements to be made.
it would be solid, and i wouldnt be able to say shyt about for sure
I once mentioned to the agda2 developers that I was interested in doing a formally verified implementation of bitcoin. I decided at the time that it would be too difficult in the language, but now there are some better options.
A formally verified coin would be an interesting thing. To be able to point at an alt-coin and say "no, really, this coin has none of the following bugs or attack vectors, and we can prove it" would be nice.
I've done verification over some different pow/pos algorithms, but not a whole coin.
There is another fellow who lurks around these haunts, another very "socratic" fellow, if you will, who has also done some work in these directions. I think there are a few others. This is also on the list of things I mentioned previously that I'm generally surprised hasn't materialized yet. I "expected" someone would've formally proven the btc protocol by now.
I am disappoint. XD
maybe some will rub off on this crew
It seems that I'm having at least some impact on Shannon. I'm certainly having better luck than I had with Chris.
) will read the materials, I decided to bring a tiny bit of metamath.org to us.