Pages:
Author

Topic: Bitcoin: The Digital Kill Switch - page 9. (Read 55179 times)

full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 100
Troll of the Fourth Reich.
May 14, 2013, 08:22:46 AM
I belive 500$ Is going to be the max over this 10 year period.
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
May 14, 2013, 08:20:57 AM
Dude I have thought about these issues deeply. My IQ is well into the near genius range. Please stop wasting my time.

People that need to tell others that they are smart usually try to hide the fact that they are not smart enough in their eyes...
Seing what you have writen on these forums makes me think that maybe you are smart, but not even close to being genius.
So stop sniffing your own farts. Your brain will be more healthy that way.
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
May 14, 2013, 08:11:23 AM
And this is repeating, this time it is due to the computer causing massive unemployment.

In my experience computers have generated more work than any industry ever.
Workers that use computers don't work less hours, they simply do more in a given time period.
Moreover, computers created completely new industries. People designing websites, people working as engineers, etc, etc, etc.
The jobs of CGI artist, programmer, website designer, system administrator, computer guru, security specialist, network engineer/administrator, electronics manufacturer, dance music producer, industrial designer, video editor, etc etc etc etc.

I think you forget about the fact that computers created lots and lots of jobs.
So to me it is much more a shift of employment.
Sure, a lot of jobs became useless. But at the same time lots of new possibilities for employment came into existance.

In fact, please provide figures that make it clear that the computer revolution (lets take the first intel cpu as a starting point, around 1970) reduced jobs and caused unemployment. Please make it so that it is clear that unemployment was caused by computers and not by other factors.
Maybe you can start by comparing unemployment rate with PC penetration, see what you get.

 Roll Eyes
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
May 14, 2013, 03:34:46 AM
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2140843

What stops someone with fiat from buying Decrits and then buying shares (SHs)?

You can't know when a transaction was in exchange for fiat.

The mining design can't protect you from fiat.

This design is jumping through complex hoops to try to stop that which is natural-- the socialization of money.

The energy efficiency is the key magnificent feature of this design. No need to buy hardware, simply buy some shares and earn a profit. This would be popular.

Bad money drives good money out-of-circulation. Money is supposed to be bad. It is human nature.

You could radically simplify this design and make it popular, if stop trying to end human nature and socialization of money.

Just try to make it as attack proof as Bitcoin, but with advantages. Make it easier to implement.

Then we make it, get rich, and enjoy our lives.

We are not going to fix society-- leave that to a god.

We can continue to innovate knowledge, to uplift mankind. But money ain't it.

Well an efficient digital money will help a lot of people, just don't expect to fix all the ills of money with it.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
May 14, 2013, 03:22:05 AM
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2140631

But if we continue in theory, the attack is irrelevant because it can be identified long before the attackers would be able to hurt the honest SHs. If Walmart's cartel was controlling a large portion of consensus, everyone would know that Kmart's transaction verification is very slow. Kmart would not be wise to keep something hurting its business a secret.

I am more fearful of the coming world government (or the regional blocks under an umbrella of cooperation) providing a single currency and taking action only against individuals which refuse to provide their identity on all transactions. Most people agree with this. I don't think there will be consensus to stop it.

Let's stand back and assume that we can't stop the above outcome, rather we must embrace it. So how would we design a better Bitcoin that would be more popular (and more profitable for us) that people would accept more.

If we don't have to assume the government (or the fascist combo with corporations) is going to do evil we don't want, then our attack vulnerability is much decreased.

I now think it is entirely impossible (and undesirable) to create money that is not socialized. For the technical reasons upthread, but also for fundamental theoretical reasons that stored monetary (fungible) capital is the antithesis of knowledge production:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4946&cpage=1#comment-401510
http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Demise%20of%20Finance,%20Rise%20of%20Knowledge.html

Society needs an efficient fungible digital currency that the world government can adopt. What is the best design?

If it doesn't have the capacity to be debased by society, it will be destroyed or replaced. Period. Human nature and statism won't change (not since 3000 years).

We protect ourselves individually by innovating knowledge production. Money is not the solution, just as statism is not the solution. They are the aspects of human nature we have to route around with our knowledge production.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
May 14, 2013, 02:31:58 AM
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/05/13/gold-2015-75/
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/05/13/welcome-to-the-new-international-currency-the-dollar/

What he is saying is that gold bulls are fighting the idea that the dollar is going to rise (dollar rise because Europe and Japan will crater first over next 2 years or so), thus the low in gold is protacted until the bulls finally capitulate.

He doesn't see the low pushing out past 2015.

To me, looks like we might get a low this summer, then a rally, then another capitulation later perhaps 2014, for a final low. Then start moving back up.

He reasons in the second link above, that gold won't blast off like a crazy rocket to all time highs until the dollar rally has ceased, which is after 2015.

There simply isn't any reason to be in a rush to buy now. The dollar must go up first or gold bugs have to anticipate it early and capitulate.

The break of support at $25 for silver, can't be over yet. There is always at least a deadcat bounce and a move lower.

Any way, I am not really trying to make money on my savings in PMs now. Just trying to manage my savings sanely, so I have cash when I need it, and I minimize chances of needing to sell at the bottom.

The goal is not to make money, but preserve capital.

Let's hope capital gain taxes are only 28% on gold by the time we well (for those in USA without retirement plan deferral protection). By the way, get everything out the retirement plan-- it is all going to be nationalized and confiscated.

Stop thinking about not reporting unless you are dealing entirely in cash with a broker who doesn't record your identity. Too risky. See if there are cameras. I don't advocate breaking the law.

I am thinking it is best to pay taxes. The best is to work and generate income.

Money is a hassle. Keeping life simple is best, use what you really need. Work on what is really interesting and doesn't consume your entire life. If it generates enough to sustain your simple life and all is contented. Well that is the hope, but not always easy to implement.

Disclaimer: I am not giving advice, consult your own professional. I am sharing some thoughts about my thinking only! Don't hold me responsible for anything you do!
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
May 13, 2013, 11:22:03 PM
lol
a lot of fancy words
if the "cartel" wants to delay your tx ,   others will not and accept the tx    hardly a digital kill switch

Nonsense from someone who doesn't have a grasp of the technical issues.

Without the concensus block being respected, there is no guarantee against double-spends.

Dude I have thought about these issues deeply. My IQ is well into the near genius range. Please stop wasting my time.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
May 13, 2013, 11:18:53 PM
THE LINK TO THE EVIDENCE OF 78 YEAR CYCLE IS AT THE END OF THIS POST. STUDY IT. YOU WILL BE SHOCKED AT YOUR IGNORANCE.


I've read it and it's selective mumbo jumbo.



If you deny that the economic problems of Europe at turn of last century were caused by the unemployment due to loss of cottage industry to mass production, then go on in your fantasy world. The Case-Schiller housing price chart (for the USA) clearly shows that housing was abnormally cratered for a few decades due to this.

And this is repeating, this time it is due to the computer causing massive unemployment.

Note the more fundamental cause of Europe's problems have always been statism, as it funds (by stealing from production with taxes and sovereign debt) people to delay their adjustment to technological shift. The mathematical model here:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4934&cpage=1#comment-401368
newbie
Activity: 5
Merit: 0
May 13, 2013, 08:16:30 PM
lol
a lot of fancy words
if the "cartel" wants to delay your tx ,   others will not and accept the tx    hardly a digital kill switch
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
May 13, 2013, 06:19:57 PM
THE LINK TO THE EVIDENCE OF 78 YEAR CYCLE IS AT THE END OF THIS POST. STUDY IT. YOU WILL BE SHOCKED AT YOUR IGNORANCE.


I've read it and it's selective mumbo jumbo.

hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
May 13, 2013, 01:52:33 PM
Someone asking me if I was bailing out on investing in Bitcoin. Here was my reply.

I can't give advice because each person's situation is unique and because I can be wrong. I don't want to be responsible for the outcomes of others.

I don't think the flaws that I revealed in Bitcoin are going to affect the near-term outlook for speculators who are buying Bitcoin. Thus no impact on the near-term investment returns.

I will share with you what I am thinking for myself. First, I trust the following blog as having a good (not perfect) track record of understanding:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong_economics_blog/

Second, although Bitcoin will probably be a positive returning investment, no one can say for sure when it is overvalued short-term, and there is much risk from not only volatility but also from unexpected government rulings which could be positive or negative.

Also much capital is shifting into Bitcoin because there is so much capital floating around looking for a positive return. When the next liquidity squeeze comes (anytime between 2014 and 2017), then risk assets may be the first to selloff. I would be selling into the Bitcoin rallies and using proceeds to buy the gold dips.

Core savings that can not afford to be lost should be in gold. Period. And probably waiting for a further dip in the gold price to bottom either in 2013 or to extend the decline out to 2015. Armstrong is watching for a close below $1310 for 2013 as a sign of potential decline through 2015. If not, we may have seen the bottom in 2013, probably another 10 - 25% (perhaps even 30% as a small risk) lower from current price.

Given gold is going to double, triple or more by the end game, buying it at any time for long-term hold is fine.

Short-term speculation rarely works out. You buy Bitcoin for a long-term hold if you really believe in it, then maybe sell a portion on every 50% - 100% increase in the price. But realize it is no where near as sure to not destroy your savings as gold is. Allocate accordingly.

Having said that, I am not allocating anything to Bitcoin, because it is too much of a hassle and stress and I don't expect my big gains in life to come from speculations, rather I expect them to come from my programming projects. I don't want to cause a risk to my savings that prevents me from being able to work on the projects that I want to work on, that have the best chance of generating outsized returns.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
May 13, 2013, 01:42:58 PM
The link in the prior post to the table of the 78 year cycle is superior because it has links to much background information, but that server is not loading right now (it will load at other times, keep trying).

Here is a synopsis version:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4824&cpage=1#comment-395999 (scroll to the end of the linked comment)

Some other links on this point:

http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Housing%20Recovery%20Illusion.html
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4867&cpage=1#comment-397370
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4927&cpage=1#comment-400320

You might be interested in this:

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/UserInfo-Shelby_H_Moore.html

Check out the accurate predictions on silver Oct 2010 and gold on March 4. Yeah that is me.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
May 13, 2013, 01:17:20 PM
THE LINK TO THE EVIDENCE OF 78 YEAR CYCLE IS AT THE END OF THIS POST. STUDY IT. YOU WILL BE SHOCKED AT YOUR IGNORANCE.

You have no clue what statism means and the economics of the collective. Read the comments at the links at the bottom of this page.
I don't agree with this in the sense that you only look at half the story (It makes me think you have no clue as to the function statism has in any society).
I think you are only talking about when statism goes out of control.
I fully agree that statism out of control is a bad thing. But no statism at all is also a bad thing.
The only solution is to make sure there is a healthy balance.
Megadeath will happen on both extremes.
Too much statism is megadeath.
Too little statism is also megadeath (because people cannot voluntarily peacefully co-exist when resources are scarse).

Please read this rebuttal (including the comments below the linked one):

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4934&cpage=1#comment-401360

you hang around on bitcointalk talking about the bilderbergs?

For perhaps 10 days of my entire life, and just stated that I am leaving because I am stopping all work on cryptocurrencies.

LOL at how much fail is in that proposition.
You have no chance of not being part of the 1st world system, wherever you happen to live.

Except for the fact that I created coolpage.com back in 1998 from a Nipa Hut and was essentially the world's first social network with 1 million confirmed users at that time when the internet was tiny (had 1% of the internet building their websites with my product), and was earning a significant amount of money given I was the only employee.

And not to mention that precursor to friendster came around to buy me out, but only got a non-exclusive license because I didn't want stock options right before what I knew was a coming dot.com crash.

Should I mention I created one of world's first WYSIWYG commercial word processors back in 1986.

Or that I worked on what is now Corel Painter.

Your whole thought pattern is prove of that. You concern yourself with luxury problems of our society with no regard to the actual problems (and solutions to those problems) of third world countries. You show absolutely no insight in the actual dynamics that drive world economy. You put all blame in one thing (and that happens to be the subject of rich westerners conspiracy fantasies) and then see everything from that point of view.

Diarrhea.

To use bitcoin they need computers and fast internet to be ubiquitous.
But in a 3rd world country these are exactly the kinds of things that are missing.

To use bitcoin (not mine it), requires rudimentary smartphone with a client and rudimentary internet connection.

Both are ubiquitous in the Philippines where I am, which has higher penetration of cell phones than in the USA (most people own more than one), and there is an internet cafe on every street corner (if not 2 or 3).

Bitcoin is so terribly expensive in use that it is pretty much meaningless for people in the 3rd world.

Yes it is useless for transactions now. It is only a gambling casino right now (or speculation).

BTW, I can buy Bitcoin in the Philippines, do a damn Google search before you foam at the mouth.

I think those people are much more worried about their food and water supplies than about the possibility to sell their luxury products to some overseas fat white guy.

Nearly all income comes from exporting their products and people to service developed countries.

And they are fanatical about getting an education and about finding opportunities to generate income from abroad.

Usually these countries have very low industrialisation so WTF are they going to sell on the internet and in enough quantities to maintain their bitcoin ecosystem?

Native products, including bamboo furniture, artwork, carvings, but more importantly now they sell their time to do business process outsourcing, for example compiling corporate records, or medical records and zillion other things at 1/20th the cost of a westerner doing the same job.

There are even freelancers doing marketing surveys, writing blog posts to get share of advertising revenue, teaching english to other nationalities over Skype, and a zillion other things.

I personally know people doing all the things I mentioned above. I have been to their houses and see them doing it. Dumb ass!


If you don't have food then you can't invest in the kind of technology that is needed for bitcoin.

Come over here and see all the fat people. And girls with big breasts. Dumb ass!

Maybe you are thinking more of Africa, but I know someone in Ethiopia and they highly censor the internet, but the floodgate will open there, and the people are eating a lot more these days than you think. She recently added me to a social network I'd never heard of. People are much more aware and connected than you think. The change is happening so fast, that talking about last year's conditions is silly.

Bitcoin cannot ever help severely underdeveloped countries to get on top of their problems.
In some cases bitcoin could help but it can't change basic things like infrastructure or climate or political regime.

Who ever asserted that Bitcoin would solve every problem in the third world?

I was more interested in Bitcoin as a way other than gold for rich people to hide their capital from the statism failure that is going to confiscate everything in the next few years.

The idea that 3rd world people will become enslaved by bitcoin isrealy stupidly crazy. There is just not even the slightest posibility bitcoin will be meaningfull to these people.

If it would happen then it would be fascism, but it's just not very likely to go that way.

The entire world is going to be enslaved by the economic failure of statism and the confiscations are going to worsen the failure. The developing nations are short the dollar via massive dollar loans as the Fed has been flooding the world with dollars. Thus the more severe the confiscations (the less can be hidden), the worse the developing world is going to be hit with implosion and chaos.

Read an expert who called the decline in gold before it happened:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong_economics_blog/


Yes, and fascism will be there with or without bitcoin. Welcome to the world, it has not been different since known history.

The hope was another place to store capital to prevent the fascists from confiscating it (via their control over government).

 
The solution is not in bitcoin, the sollution is in reducing the power of these bankers. Trusting in some technology to solve your problems for you is tremendously stupid.
And so trusting in bitcoin to solve all your problems is also tremendously stupid.
In the end all change starts with people, not with technology.
That is because the actual problem is people, not technology.

The failure is guaranteed by the economics of statism. You still haven't read the links I sent you. Google this "Some Iron Laws of Political Economics".

There is no solution to avoid the failure. The only hope is to save yourself.

And yes to help as many people as possible to learn how to do hitech, so they won't be unemployed. ANd this is all about technology.

But that won't stop the coming failure and confiscations.


These people would first need to have food, housing and work before bitcoin would start taking on a meaning.

They can't have that unless they know how to do hitech, because other skills are going into the dustbin of robotic and automation pre-history.

Everything hinges on technology. For example, online education, which I am creating:

http://copute.com/edu/

I don't know this Children's International. It seems it's a US organisation. Funny that you know about them when you live in a 3rd world country when i don't know about them and i live in a 1st world country.
I think you're bullshitting and have never in your life visited a 3rd world coutry.

I was born in the USA. I emigrated in my mid-30s (48 now), but not permanently except perhaps since 2006.

If they own your ass then bitcoin never had a chance anyway. Your whole paranoia about a weakness in bitcoin is fantasy because they can control the societal dynamics despite it.

Indeed, except if there was a technological alternative that can't be dominated by societal dynamics. And it turns out that there apparently isn't such a possibility, for the reason that non-centralized entropy can't be injected into an alternative that does not otherwise have a 51% attack. As I detailed in a link up thread.

You realy need to let go of bitcoin as a magical technology that will free you from the tyrany of society.

Indeed I have.

What would actually help is to stop consuming all the products pushed on to you by the tyranny. Stop using bitcoins, stop using the internet, stop using computers, stop using cars, stop using supermarkets, grow your own food, don't visit doctors or hospitals, dig your own water pit, and have enough land to do it all without taking away from others.

Nonsense. None of that would stop the guaranteed failure of statism over and over in history.

But clearly you have it too good in the current situation to do all these things that are required to live a 'free' life.

That all comes from technology, which the statism fights against, by propping up the old paradigms with debt. Thus leading the repeating 78 year failure as technology advances and people don't

The two world wars were due to cottage industry disrupted by mass production and thus massive unemployment.

The current one is about the personal computer disrupting western employment. First the jobs went the China to compete against automation, now the jobs are leaving china as the automation has gotten more efficient as wages have risen in China.

The prior ones on the 1700 and 1800s were soil technology revolutions that increased yields and displaced agricultural workers. There was also the first industrial revolution and the railroad bubble.

It's funny to see people pretend to be revolutionaries that then use the tools provided to them by the system they oppose to prove the system is wrong. Their support of the system is contradictionary to their statements.

You are twisted. I never argued against using technology. I am one of the biggest proponents of technology you will find.

If you want real change then the first thing to do is switch off the computer.
The next thing to do is figure out how you can get all these nice things without any statism.

As if the computer depends on statism  Roll Eyes What an idiot. You conflate orthogonal things.

LOL.,
Again with the brain twisting.
We have had technology to wipe out the whole world population for over a hundred years now.
There are chemicals that, once injected into the atmosphere, would kill almost all people.
So this could have been done even before the first world war, if that was the goal.

No dimwit. There are real people with real hearts (majors, corporals, etc) between those buttons and the world annihilation.

Also the statism can't overtly kill everyone and have any support. It must pretend to have good versus bad, so the people fall into their trap of wanting everything they want irrespective of cost.

Also nuclear winter won't kill everyone. The likely survivors would include many hard-core anti-government folk.

The thought that statism doesnt kill everyone because of inefficiency is truely bizar.

Learn to spell, bizarre.

The efficiency has to operate within conventional war, where the excuse (illusion) of good vs. bad can be maintained.

The megadeaths occur where the population is disarmed and the government has been given the arms.


What i can make of it is that you trust that some un-subvertable technologies will save your ass.

That was the proposition. Research revealed it isn't possible.

If you would indeed be an experienced programmer like you claim you are you would know by heart that there is no such thing as a system that cannot be subverted.

There are varying degrees of subversion. If all technology was fully subvertable, nothing would function. This is stupid generalization. We look at the specifics and come to a conclusion based on the facts, as I did.

It is a stupid proposition to hope that technology will save your ass.

It is the only thing that has saved mankind's ass, starting since at least the invention of tools and fire.

There is no 78 year technological disruption cycle.
If there are any cycles than they must be accelerating.

WRONG!

Read all comments above and below the linked chart:

http://www.mpettis.com/2013/02/21/a-brief-history-of-the-chinese-growth-model/#comment-21690

(wait for the page to load the specific comment down the page, which has an unformatted textual table of dates and technology disruptions and the wars caused by the unemployment due to technology disruptions)

If the comment doesn't scroll into view after clicking the above link, then search down the page for "armstrong" then look for the comment with the table.

Note that linked site is sometimes down due to overloaded server. Keep trying it. I will also try to find another copy of the information and provide a link in future post.
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
May 13, 2013, 12:27:45 PM

Please explain why we had 2 big wars separated by 20 years instead of 78.

Treaty of Versailles. You could say it was one big war.  Smiley

Sure, but if you want to take that viewpoint then war never realy ended. And lots of other wars that were not directly related to this treaty. War never stopped because humans never stopped fighting over stuff. And the fact that there was this time of lots of disorder in our particular corner of the world doesn't point to a cycle, nevermind assuming some time period for it to be valid.

Just to be sure i want to stress that i make a distinction between cycles, which are cyclical and have a given period, and economic booms, which can overlap with other booms and have cycles with stochastic time periods.
To me a cycle is the result of a similar system acting over a long time and starting to resonate while booms are formed by singular changes to the system (like the availability of a new technology) that opens new opportunities.


In case you are a proponent of the 78 year cycles, look here and tell me if you can identify it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_1945%E2%80%9389

Maybe you can say that there is this cycle in the US economy, but to be honest, the world is stopping with giving a shit about the US of A. USA is not the future of the world. The future is much more likely to come from asia. USA is becoming a dinosaur on the world stage. Who are they going to attack? China? Russia?
If the USA starts a war for real they know it can't end well for them.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1007
May 13, 2013, 11:54:11 AM

Please explain why we had 2 big wars separated by 20 years instead of 78.

Treaty of Versailles. You could say it was one big war.  Smiley
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
May 13, 2013, 10:37:58 AM

The statism exhausts its resources eventually and there is a reset and renewal, e.g. after WW2. For example, 90% taxes can only be sustained for so long...then society is trashed and we start over again from the ashes.

There is no chance in the world that 90% tax would make a system survive longer than a day in the current situation. No statist power in the westen world can extract 90% of what people make and use it for its own selfish goals.
To do it you would need complete and total control over all information. This is simply not doable anymore. Countries like north korea get it done because they strictly control the posibilities for communication. That would be unthinkable in our world and so this form of control becomes a lot more useless unless everyone decides to not use their internet or mobile phones.

I'll say it again, things are not a simple or clear cut as you make them out to be.
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
May 13, 2013, 10:26:49 AM
The bigger threat is the government will not shut it down, but rather embrace, help it grow, and control it so they can turn off your ability to eat individually if they don't like you

Aah, so their solution is to have the people they don't like beg and steal for their food? Great way to have a nice stable society..  Roll Eyes

No it is to have them die (or jailed when they steal), because they fight against slavery and thus threaten the statist apparatus.

Statism tries to maintain a stable society but results in horror and megadeath every time in human history.

You have no clue what statism means and the economics of the collective. Read the comments at the links at the bottom of this page.
I don't agree with this in the sense that you only look at half the story (It makes me think you have no clue as to the function statism has in any society).
I think you are only talking about when statism goes out of control.
I fully agree that statism out of control is a bad thing. But no statism at all is also a bad thing.
The only solution is to make sure there is a healthy balance.
Megadeath will happen on both extremes.
Too much statism is megadeath.
Too little statism is also megadeath (because people cannot voluntarily peacefully co-exist when resources are scarse).

Statism doesn't care about resource cost. Debt is paid for by the dumb masses, not the cartel owners of the state.

My opening article speculates that a supranational $trillionaire cartel (which owns the state already, Bilderberg meetings do actually happen), would love to have a functioning digital currency. Why would they destroy it, when they've been trying to find a way to eliminate cash (and physical bullion) so they can track everything (so they can destroy competition from millionaires).

Can you say 666?
And i still don't see your point. Almost all transactions are already digital.

I guess you haven't transacted daily in any of the third world countries that contained roughly 5 billion of the world's population. Yet many of them now carry a smartphone and thus are ready for a Bitcoin.


LOL,.,
People in 3rd world countries do not usually have cell phones and when they do i don't think they have internet, never mind the money to pay for upkeeping the blockchain.

I live in a 3rd world country, you are making a fool of yourself.

Wait, you're an accomplished programmer (that's what you said in anoteher thread) and you live in a 3rd world country and you hang around on bitcointalk talking about the bilderbergs?
LOL at how much fail is in that proposition.
You have no chance of not being part of the 1st world system, wherever you happen to live. Your whole thought pattern is prove of that. You concern yourself with luxury problems of our society with no regard to the actual problems (and solutions to those problems) of third world countries. You show absolutely no insight in the actual dynamics that drive world economy. You put all blame in one thing (and that happens to be the subject of rich westerners conspiracy fantasies) and then see everything from that point of view.
How could anyone in a 3rd world country be so thoroughly indoctrinated with western paranoia about the bilderbergs?


And what are they going to use their bitcoins for? Buying from silk road?
For these people bitcoin is the most useless thing in the world.

Well bitcoin is pretty useless now, and if it becomes useful, then it will be useful to these people because they are dying to be able to sell over the internet, but paypal won't let them be sellers.

They are innovating and stealing your jobs with BPO, call centers, freelancer, etc.. This will accelerate with a Bitcoin.

LOL at your twisted brain.

Bitcoin can only be usefull if it has a benefit for the users.
So by saying that bitcoin will become usefull you already agree that these people have a benefit in using it. To use bitcoin they need computers and fast internet to be ubiquitous.
But in a 3rd world country these are exactly the kinds of things that are missing.
Bitcoin is so terribly expensive in use that it is pretty much meaningless for people in the 3rd world.
I think those people are much more worried about their food and water supplies than about the possibility to sell their luxury products to some overseas fat white guy.
Usually these countries have very low industrialisation so WTF are they going to sell on the internet and in enough quantities to maintain their bitcoin ecosystem?
If you don't have food then you can't invest in the kind of technology that is needed for bitcoin.
Bitcoin cannot ever help severely underdeveloped countries to get on top of their problems.
In some cases bitcoin could help but it can't change basic things like infrastructure or climate or political regime. You put too much faith in bitcoin and fail to see it is not some magical fix-everything currency.
It has some benefits, sure, but it's mostly a rich kids toy.

The idea that 3rd world people will become enslaved by bitcoin isrealy stupidly crazy. There is just not even the slightest posibility bitcoin will be meaningfull to these people.

If it would happen then it would be fascism, but it's just not very likely to go that way.

We already have fascism in the world. What do you call the global banking takeover of regulators and governance?

Or have you been spending all your time under a rock since 2007?
Yes, and fascism will be there with or without bitcoin. Welcome to the world, it has not been different since known history.
The solution is not in bitcoin, the sollution is in reducing the power of these bankers. Trusting in some technology to solve your problems for you is tremendously stupid.
And so trusting in bitcoin to solve all your problems is also tremendously stupid.
In the end all change starts with people, not with technology.
That is because the actual problem is people, not technology.

These people would first need to have food, housing and work before bitcoin would start taking on a meaning.

Are you feeling a bit insecure and wanting to imagine what you see on Children's International. Take a trip and discover reality.
I don't know this Children's International. It seems it's a US organisation. Funny that you know about them when you live in a 3rd world country when i don't know about them and i live in a 1st world country.
I think you're bullshitting and have never in your life visited a 3rd world coutry.

About the bilderbergs designing bitcoin/technology.
If you can't trust bitcoin then you can't trust any device in the world. Bitlderbergs would already own your ass.

They do own your ass. Or at least I can say for sure that the statism owns your ass, and this will become very clear to you before 2032, something along the lines of Nazi Germany is heading our way again.

You do know that Prescott Bush, the grandfather of baby Bush was a financier (Union Bank) of Hilter's work camps?

You do know that Bush's have purchased ranches in Paraguay, with US Military mini-base nearby for protection?
Ok, so i'm going to assume you're from the US and not some 3rd world country.

If they own your ass then bitcoin never had a chance anyway. Your whole paranoia about a weakness in bitcoin is fantasy because they can control the societal dynamics despite it.
You realy need to let go of bitcoin as a magical technology that will free you from the tyrany of society.
What would actually help is to stop consuming all the products pushed on to you by the tyranny. Stop using bitcoins, stop using the internet, stop using computers, stop using cars, stop using supermarkets, grow your own food, don't visit doctors or hospitals, dig your own water pit, and have enough land to do it all without taking away from others.
But clearly you have it too good in the current situation to do all these things that are required to live a 'free' life.
It's funny to see people pretend to be revolutionaries that then use the tools provided to them by the system they oppose to prove the system is wrong. Their support of the system is contradictionary to their statements.
If you want real change then the first thing to do is switch off the computer.
The next thing to do is figure out how you can get all these nice things without any statism.
Once you get there we can talk again. But you won't because these nice things are the result of a certain ammount of statism.

Statism is just a tool and like any tool it can be abused. You don't want statism to go away, you want it to be a tool for society and you want to prevent it from becoming too dominant.
But again, that is not what bitcoin can achieve. The kinds of changes that are needed for this have nothing to do with technology.

If such groups could organize stuff on this level then society would already be completely controlled by them. Nothing you say or do will make a difference and you will be their slave all your life.

The statism can't usually kill everyone, it isn't that efficient yet. For WW2 period, the USA had a gun under everything blade of grass. The 3rd world countries had a bolo knife behind every banana tree. Things are changing, technology for killing has improved. Gun control is more widespread, where the dept of Homelove has permission to buy 1.6 billion hollowpoint bullets (over 10 years, and these are illegal in war, because they are so gruesome). There are more roads now, etc..
LOL.,
Again with the brain twisting.
We have had technology to wipe out the whole world population for over a hundred years now.
There are chemicals that, once injected into the atmosphere, would kill almost all people.
So this could have been done even before the first world war, if that was the goal.

The thought that statism doesnt kill everyone because of inefficiency is truely bizar.
If they kill everyone (and as i say above, the tools have been there for a while now) then who will still make up the system?
You call it statist but actually its called the information age.
We live in transformative times. Technology has opened far more doors than we can possibly look through at once. We need to find a new balance within these new posibilities.

You are confusing technological innovation with statist outcomes. I will stop here, because what you just said is so uninformed that I can't possibly clear this up in the time I have to alot to this. I don't want to repeat the discussion here that I just had over at following blog:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4912&cpage=1#comment-399082
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4927&cpage=1#comment-399859
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4934&cpage=1#comment-401360
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4912&cpage=1#comment-399642
What i can make of it is that you trust that some un-subvertable technologies will save your ass.
If you would indeed be an experienced programmer like you claim you are you would know by heart that there is no such thing as a system that cannot be subverted.
It is a stupid proposition to hope that technology will save your ass.


And your techocratic underdog fantasy is also nothing more than a fantasy.
You claim that the recent crisis is because machines are more efficient than humans and and so humans become obsolete.
But the actual problem is human greed. It has nothing to do with workers but everything to do with a finacial system that thrives on profit and self-enrichment.

We already had the debate on the vulnerability of Bitcoin upthread, so I am not going to repeat that as I already refuted everything you just wrote.
I did not mention bitcoins in this paragraph...

Quote
I see you haven't studied the repeating 78 year technology disruption cycle. You have all the wrong reasoning about what is happening now. Sigh. I provided links up thread to all the research and evidence. It is up to you if you want to educate yourself or remain an ignorant one.
There is no 78 year technological disruption cycle.
If there are any cycles than they must be accelerating.
We used to have horses for milennia. Now in a short time we got both trains and cars.
Then only a slow evolution of these ideas without anything specific technological disruption.

The first and second world war had nothing to do with technological disruption.
If anything the wars themselfs were a big factor for advancing technology.

Please explain why we had 2 big wars separated by 20 years instead of 78.
What kind of cycle is that?
And why do you conveniently fail to count the many many wars between the world wars and now as significant? Why the arbitrary 78 years? In the last 78 years the world never stopped changing, so what is so special about these 78 year periods?

Please provide evidence that such a cycle indeed exists and then provide evidence why it must happen.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
May 13, 2013, 07:46:43 AM
The bigger threat is the government will not shut it down, but rather embrace, help it grow, and control it so they can turn off your ability to eat individually if they don't like you

Aah, so their solution is to have the people they don't like beg and steal for their food? Great way to have a nice stable society..  Roll Eyes

No it is to have them die (or jailed when they steal), because they fight against slavery and thus threaten the statist apparatus.

Statism tries to maintain a stable society but results in horror and megadeath every time in human history.

You have no clue what statism means and the economics of the collective. Read the comments at the links at the bottom of this page.

Statism doesn't care about resource cost. Debt is paid for by the dumb masses, not the cartel owners of the state.

My opening article speculates that a supranational $trillionaire cartel (which owns the state already, Bilderberg meetings do actually happen), would love to have a functioning digital currency. Why would they destroy it, when they've been trying to find a way to eliminate cash (and physical bullion) so they can track everything (so they can destroy competition from millionaires).

Can you say 666?
And i still don't see your point. Almost all transactions are already digital.

I guess you haven't transacted daily in any of the third world countries that contained roughly 5 billion of the world's population. Yet many of them now carry a smartphone and thus are ready for a Bitcoin.


LOL,.,
People in 3rd world countries do not usually have cell phones and when they do i don't think they have internet, never mind the money to pay for upkeeping the blockchain.

I live in a 3rd world country, you are making a fool of yourself.

And what are they going to use their bitcoins for? Buying from silk road?
For these people bitcoin is the most useless thing in the world.

Well bitcoin is pretty useless now, and if it becomes useful, then it will be useful to these people because they are dying to be able to sell over the internet, but paypal won't let them be sellers.

They are innovating and stealing your jobs with BPO, call centers, freelancer, etc.. This will accelerate with a Bitcoin.

The idea that 3rd world people will become enslaved by bitcoin isrealy stupidly crazy. There is just not even the slightest posibility bitcoin will be meaningfull to these people.

If it would happen then it would be fascism, but it's just not very likely to go that way.

We already have fascism in the world. What do you call the global banking takeover of regulators and governance?

Or have you been spending all your time under a rock since 2007?

These people would first need to have food, housing and work before bitcoin would start taking on a meaning.

Are you feeling a bit insecure and wanting to imagine what you see on Children's International. Take a trip and discover reality.

About the bilderbergs designing bitcoin/technology.
If you can't trust bitcoin then you can't trust any device in the world. Bitlderbergs would already own your ass.

They do own your ass. Or at least I can say for sure that the statism owns your ass, and this will become very clear to you before 2032, something along the lines of Nazi Germany is heading our way again.

You do know that Prescott Bush, the grandfather of baby Bush was a financier (Union Bank) of Hilter's work camps?

You do know that Bush's have purchased ranches in Paraguay, with US Military mini-base nearby for protection?

If such groups could organize stuff on this level then society would already be completely controlled by them. Nothing you say or do will make a difference and you will be their slave all your life.

The statism can't usually kill everyone, it isn't that efficient yet. For WW2 period, the USA had a gun under everything blade of grass. The 3rd world countries had a bolo knife behind every banana tree. Things are changing, technology for killing has improved. Gun control is more widespread, where the dept of Homelove has permission to buy 1.6 billion hollowpoint bullets (over 10 years, and these are illegal in war, because they are so gruesome). There are more roads now, etc..

You call it statist but actually its called the information age.
We live in transformative times. Technology has opened far more doors than we can possibly look through at once. We need to find a new balance within these new posibilities.

You are confusing technological innovation with statist outcomes. I will stop here, because what you just said is so uninformed that I can't possibly clear this up in the time I have to alot to this. I don't want to repeat the discussion here that I just had over at following blog:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4912&cpage=1#comment-399082
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4927&cpage=1#comment-399859
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4934&cpage=1#comment-401360
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4912&cpage=1#comment-399642

And your techocratic underdog fantasy is also nothing more than a fantasy.
You claim that the recent crisis is because machines are more efficient than humans and and so humans become obsolete.
But the actual problem is human greed. It has nothing to do with workers but everything to do with a finacial system that thrives on profit and self-enrichment.

We already had the debate on the vulnerability of Bitcoin upthread, so I am not going to repeat that as I already refuted everything you just wrote.

I see you haven't studied the repeating 78 year technology disruption cycle. You have all the wrong reasoning about what is happening now. Sigh. I provided links up thread to all the research and evidence. It is up to you if you want to educate yourself or remain an ignorant one.

P.S. If you read more carefully, I never said humans are obsolete. I said the statism helps many of them delay adjustment and education. The Singularity is hogwash, the humans will always do the creative work.

The statism exhausts its resources eventually and there is a reset and renewal, e.g. after WW2. For example, 90% taxes can only be sustained for so long...then society is trashed and we start over again from the ashes.
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
May 13, 2013, 07:39:59 AM
The bigger threat is the government will not shut it down, but rather embrace, help it grow, and control it so they can turn off your ability to eat individually if they don't like you

Aah, so their solution is to have the people they don't like beg and steal for their food? Great way to have a nice stable society..  Roll Eyes
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
May 13, 2013, 07:35:20 AM
2. I have an unresolved problem with the hard disk space Proof-of-Work concept. The selection of the next peer to perform work is the one whose key is closest to the "next key". The problem is the "next key" can't be known a priori, else peers can game it when they select their key. So where does the entropy of the "next key" come from? It seems it must come from a hash of transactions, since that is the only non-centralized source of entropy we have. So if the current block peer is selecting the transactions, the "next key" can be gamed to point to a chosen peer. Whereas, if the peers compete to include the most transactions that has a hash that is closest to their key, this can still be gamed by introducing transactions. This also appears to be related to the problem that #1 was trying to address-- requiring that mining peers don't exclude transactions. I had mentioned this issue in my original draft of the specification at anonymint.com

Seems this problem may be solved when the entropy is grabbed ever day or so, instead for every transaction block:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2120749

But the details are still unclear to me on how to have a global consensus on this randomized hash.

I think we may have a fundamentally unresolvable problem in attempting to fix Bitcoin's 51% attack with any alternative scheme:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2128451

It has to do with peers being first instead of last, i.e. the inability to inject non-determinism in the selection of who processes the transactions.

So you quote yourself answering yourself with a link to a post from yourself describing a problem you perceive yourself..

You must think very highly of yourself.....
Pages:
Jump to: