Bitcoin trades the inequity of dynastic power for the inequity of early adoption - page 10.

Red

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 115

Quote from: Qoheleth on April 13, 2013, 03:47:58 PM

Quote from: myrkul on April 13, 2013, 03:43:58 PM

And nothing you said in that thread changes anything. Please read:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

I think you're misunderstanding Red's contention here.

If I understand correctly, it's not that proof of work is unnecessary if you want to reach consensus on transaction order without trusted bookkeepers.

Rather, it's that having trusted bookkeepers isn't so bad.

Thanks for all the replies. Yes I intimately understand the block chain and the point. I personally exchanged PMs with Satoshi on some low level technical details.

Qoheleth's paraphrase comes closest to what I'm trying to say.
At the beginning bitcoin was a philosophical problem. How do we do all these things in complete anonymity with everyone being an equal peer. Today, bitcoin and its ecosystem isn't the same beast.

I'm not saying trusted bookkeepers aren't so bad. I'm saying they exist and you discuss them everyday. The Bitcoin community is just pretty pnambic.
http://jargon.net/jargonfile/p/pnambic.html

Ever considered what happens when a block chain fork actually occurs? This:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/alert-chain-fork-caused-by-pre-08-clients-dealing-badly-with-large-blocks-152030

The wizards spring into action!

Luckybit

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 510

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 03:59:46 PM

Quote from: Luckybit on April 13, 2013, 03:53:59 PM

Think of the early adopters like founding fathers. If you were an early adopter in Bitcoin you were risking your life to develop and test the idea during a time where every government in the world and every bank wanted to stop you.

If you were brave enough to take the risk at that time you should be rewarded. Why wouldn't you want to reward bravery? At the same time miners have to be rewarded as well for protecting Bitcoin. Family dysnasty doesn't really serve any function in society. They protect a broken system. I could see if the US economy were working or if the Euro were working but these are broken systems and only solutions from outside the system can work because they have too much to lose to experiment or take any risk.

The best solution they could come up with was to either raise taxes or cut benefits or bailouts to austerity. But none of that shit helps people in my age range 20s-30s or younger. Bitcoin as unstable as it is, at least it's an alternative to the sure failure which awaits us in the fiat currency.

When you have to roll out saccharine hubris like that to defend the fundamental unfairness of the Bitcoin model you are losing the argument.

If you aren't willing to risk your life as much as Satoshi was willing to risk his for the idea then why should you expect that you'd get the same benefits? Being an early adopter in something like Bitcoin means risking your life. Satoshi could have been declared a terrorist or criminal and locked up before Bitcoin development was complete or the local mafia could have tracked him down and put an end to him. He was taking risks whether you understand that or not.

Luckybit

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 510

Quote from: Qoheleth on April 13, 2013, 03:57:40 PM

Quote from: Luckybit on April 13, 2013, 03:53:59 PM

If you were an early adopter in Bitcoin you were risking your life to develop and test the idea during a time where every government in the world and every bank wanted to stop you.

Why do you think Satoshi couldn't reveal his identity? What he was doing was risking his life to develop Bitcoin and he knew that. There are a lot of ruthless people who don't lime competition even if its for the betterment of society.

revans

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: John Self on April 13, 2013, 03:58:40 PM

The Rothschilds are relatively small fish these days.

Lower profile, but don't be fooled, behind the scenes they still have massive influence.

revans

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: myrkul on April 13, 2013, 03:56:05 PM

Quote from: Qoheleth on April 13, 2013, 03:47:58 PM

Quote from: myrkul on April 13, 2013, 03:43:58 PM

And nothing you said in that thread changes anything. Please read:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

I think you're misunderstanding Red's contention here.

If I understand correctly, it's not that proof of work is unnecessary if you want to reach consensus on transaction order without trusted bookkeepers.

Rather, it's that having trusted bookkeepers isn't so bad.

So, basically, Red wants to make MtGox into the new Rothschilds, and revans says that early adopters are already them.

MtGox is undoubtedly the central bank of Bitcoin already, and they engage in the kind of price fixing activity central banks always do

revans

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: Luckybit on April 13, 2013, 03:53:59 PM

Think of the early adopters like founding fathers. If you were an early adopter in Bitcoin you were risking your life to develop and test the idea during a time where every government in the world and every bank wanted to stop you.

If you were brave enough to take the risk at that time you should be rewarded. Why wouldn't you want to reward bravery? At the same time miners have to be rewarded as well for protecting Bitcoin. Family dysnasty doesn't really serve any function in society. They protect a broken system. I could see if the US economy were working or if the Euro were working but these are broken systems and only solutions from outside the system can work because they have too much to lose to experiment or take any risk.

The best solution they could come up with was to either raise taxes or cut benefits or bailouts to austerity. But none of that shit helps people in my age range 20s-30s or younger. Bitcoin as unstable as it is, at least it's an alternative to the sure failure which awaits us in the fiat currency.

When you have to roll out saccharine hubris like that to defend the fundamental unfairness of the Bitcoin model you are losing the argument.

John Self

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

The Rothschilds are relatively small fish these days.

Luckybit

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 510

Quote from: BTC Books on April 13, 2013, 10:36:50 AM

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 10:20:13 AM

And what of all those people with similar vision and desire too young to know about this burgeoning revolution; if the Bitcoin masturbators get their way these children will grow up in a world from which they are financially disenfranchised unless Mummy or Daddy happened to be a Bitcoin early adopter; so very little difference from the inequity of the world of state fiat.

Yeah. Brilliant point.

I spend part of every day feeling bad for all those kids in middle-school today, who were too young to know about investing in IBM back when they made typewriters the ubiquitous office tool.

Then be a better leader if Bitcoin is a success. Bitcoin and money are just tools of empowerment and if you have a lot of it then you can do more good than if you don't.

Qoheleth

legendary

Activity: 960

Merit: 1028

Spurn wild goose chases. Seek that which endures.

Quote from: Luckybit on April 13, 2013, 03:53:59 PM

If you were an early adopter in Bitcoin you were risking your life to develop and test the idea during a time where every government in the world and every bank wanted to stop you.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Qoheleth on April 13, 2013, 03:47:58 PM

Quote from: myrkul on April 13, 2013, 03:43:58 PM

And nothing you said in that thread changes anything. Please read:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

I think you're misunderstanding Red's contention here.

If I understand correctly, it's not that proof of work is unnecessary if you want to reach consensus on transaction order without trusted bookkeepers.

Rather, it's that having trusted bookkeepers isn't so bad.

So, basically, Red wants to make MtGox into the new Rothschilds, and revans says that early adopters are already them.

Luckybit

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 510

Think of the early adopters like founding fathers. If you were an early adopter in Bitcoin you were risking your life to develop and test the idea during a time where every government in the world and every bank wanted to stop you.

If you were brave enough to take the risk at that time you should be rewarded. Why wouldn't you want to reward bravery? At the same time miners have to be rewarded as well for protecting Bitcoin. Family dysnasty doesn't really serve any function in society. They protect a broken system. I could see if the US economy were working or if the Euro were working but these are broken systems and only solutions from outside the system can work because they have too much to lose to experiment or take any risk.

The best solution they could come up with was to either raise taxes or cut benefits or bailouts to austerity. But none of that shit helps people in my age range 20s-30s or younger. Bitcoin as unstable as it is, at least it's an alternative to the sure failure which awaits us in the fiat currency.

alcibiades

jr. member

Activity: 39

Merit: 1

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 03:49:46 PM

Quote from: Red on April 13, 2013, 03:14:15 PM

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 03:02:53 PM

No, having more people throw more computational power at pointless calculations is the root problem, not something to which I wish to contribute.

Are you interested in contributing to the solution to that?

I think solutions are out there now, but what they need is user adoption. I imagine with increasing media coverage of Bitcoin will come increasing scrutiny of its origins and the coin distribution.

Proof-of-stake is really cool. We need a coin-design forum to discuss the different algos we can use to build a blockchain. Bitcoin was the first but it isn't the best.

revans

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: pretendo on April 13, 2013, 03:41:15 PM

So other people having better foresight and investing savvy than you is inequality? Well, yeah. They are better at taking good risks than you, I guess.

'investment'?

I thought Bitcoin was a medium of exchange. And therein lies the problem; early adopters now see Bitcoin as a meal ticket for life, not as a payment system.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 03:47:20 PM

Quote from: myrkul on April 13, 2013, 03:14:09 PM

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 03:02:53 PM

No, having more people throw more computational power at pointless calculations is the root problem, not something to which I wish to contribute.

"Pointless calculations," eh? In that case, cash out your Bitcoins, and donate your fiat to good causes, because giving Bitcoins to any "good causes" that accept bitcoin will only support additional "pointless calculations" to disperse and use those Bitcoins.

Those calculations are how the network works, chief, and you can't get rid of them.

I was referring to the mining aspect

So was I.

revans

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: Red on April 13, 2013, 03:14:15 PM

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 03:02:53 PM

No, having more people throw more computational power at pointless calculations is the root problem, not something to which I wish to contribute.

Are you interested in contributing to the solution to that?

I think solutions are out there now, but what they need is user adoption. I imagine with increasing media coverage of Bitcoin will come increasing scrutiny of its origins and the coin distribution.

Qoheleth

legendary

Activity: 960

Merit: 1028

Spurn wild goose chases. Seek that which endures.

Quote from: myrkul on April 13, 2013, 03:43:58 PM

And nothing you said in that thread changes anything. Please read:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

I think you're misunderstanding Red's contention here.

If I understand correctly, it's not that proof of work is unnecessary if you want to reach consensus on transaction order without trusted bookkeepers.

Rather, it's that having trusted bookkeepers isn't so bad.

revans

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: myrkul on April 13, 2013, 03:14:09 PM

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 03:02:53 PM

No, having more people throw more computational power at pointless calculations is the root problem, not something to which I wish to contribute.

"Pointless calculations," eh? In that case, cash out your Bitcoins, and donate your fiat to good causes, because giving Bitcoins to any "good causes" that accept bitcoin will only support additional "pointless calculations" to disperse and use those Bitcoins.

Those calculations are how the network works, chief, and you can't get rid of them.

I was referring to the mining aspect

Luckybit

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 510

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 09:17:05 AM

So, one of the main arguments I encounter when discussing Bitcoin with its promulgators is that it can potentially free the financial system from the cabal of plutocrats that currently run the show, and who have lavished enormous wealth on themselves and their cronies. This argument seems to entirely dismiss the actions of the shady cabal who mined huge numbers of Bitcoins when doing so was trivial (and prior to any public availability), and to a lesser extent the early adopters.

When central bankers throw money like confetti at themselves and their friends whilst most others must struggle to earn small amounts of it this is deemed a moral evil. Yet when the progenitors of Bitcoin and their acolytes do much the same; capture the low hanging fruit and leave everyone else fighting over increasingly complex computational scraps this is hailed as a brave new world of financial freedom.

Should Bitcoin ever achieve the kind of ubiquity its most ardent fans hope for, these people will wield more financial power than any of the Banksters they decry. They will also control such a large amount of the monetary base that they too could end up becoming plutocrats

Far from being a revolution, the future as envisaged by Bitcoin fanboys will be little more than a changing of the cast of villains.

There are always winners and losers and always going to be inequality and elites. Deal with it.

The people who helped make Bitcoin deserve it.

Luckybit

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 510

Quote from: revans on April 13, 2013, 09:17:05 AM

So, one of the main arguments I encounter when discussing Bitcoin with its promulgators is that it can potentially free the financial system from the cabal of plutocrats that currently run the show, and who have lavished enormous wealth on themselves and their cronies. This argument seems to entirely dismiss the actions of the shady cabal who mined huge numbers of Bitcoins when doing so was trivial (and prior to any public availability), and to a lesser extent the early adopters.

When central bankers throw money like confetti at themselves and their friends whilst most others must struggle to earn small amounts of it this is deemed a moral evil. Yet when the progenitors of Bitcoin and their acolytes do much the same; capture the low hanging fruit and leave everyone else fighting over increasingly complex computational scraps this is hailed as a brave new world of financial freedom.

Should Bitcoin ever achieve the kind of ubiquity its most ardent fans hope for, these people will wield more financial power than any of the Banksters they decry. They will also control such a large amount of the monetary base that they too could end up becoming plutocrats

Far from being a revolution, the future as envisaged by Bitcoin fanboys will be little more than a changing of the cast of villains.

I'd rather have early adoption. At least if you take risks and have the knowledge you get rewarded. It's more fair than just having to be born at the right time, place, family.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: Red on April 13, 2013, 03:29:51 PM

Quote from: myrkul on April 13, 2013, 03:25:02 PM

No calculations, no network. No block generation. No transactions. No Bitcoin.

We can do it with fewer, easier calculations, but not none.

I wrote on that earlier today.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1829444

And nothing you said in that thread changes anything. Please read:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proof_of_work

Topic: Bitcoin trades the inequity of dynastic power for the inequity of early adoption - page 10. (Read 11076 times)