Topic: Do you think "iamnotback" really has the" Bitcoin killer"? - page 23. (Read 79954 times)

I woke up with bitcoin going to $1100+ again and altcoins crashing, including ETH. Looks like you diversified at the wrong time. Maybe doing nothing and seeing the storm pass is the actual good choice?

It's delusional to think BUcoin can win, the market will eventually choose the better devs, as a bunch of mining goons can easily be replaced, not so easy to replace worldclass coders in the field.
I don't believe BUcoin has realistic chances to win. Like it or not, Core are the better devs and im not gambling my money in BUcoin. I believe this will be the final sentiment if the moment to choose between the two tokens arise. This may be a good time to increase BTC holdings by dumping BUcoin.

I still may buy some alt (most likely ETH if it goes lower, maybe XMR and ZEC depending on how the graph looks like) since the process will most likely result on loss of value for both tokens, but I believe it is a serious possibility that this is all a bluff by Jihan and Roger. Roger claims he will dump all of his coins to buy BUcoin. I don't believe that for a second.

I understand to some extent the struggle to be coherent in the face of a lack of cognitive function-- for me, I am often sleep deprived.

I've been working in distributed systems a long time, and on an alt coin myself.  So I'm speaking from first hand experience here.


I read the first dozen or so pages of that paper.  It is incoherent and unstructured and appears to be written by amateurs. It's really easy to come up with features and ideas and see "problems" with bitcoin-- and in their case they don't seem to understand why bitcoin is the way it is in the first place.

Distributed systems are genuinely hard.  What Satoshi did was genuinely new and that's why it has had such an impact.

People seem to think that it is easy because he made it look easy.  It isn't.  And there is also a huge difference between coming up with a bunch of ideas -- like that paper has-- and actually producing a secure, scalable, reliable distributed system.

Put another way, every feature means more work and more risk-- every feature reduces security, scalability, reliability and coherence in the distributed system.

And that's still at the theoretical level.  Actually putting things into production is another matter. When you're writing code you have inadvertent bugs to contend with as well.

Cloning bitcoin and making a few small key changes is a reasonable approach-- because a lot of work went into bitcoin.

One single great idea, or innovation on Bitcoin is enough to make a dent.  IF you have a way to avoid the "no power to mine for months at a time" problem, that alone would be worth implementing.

All the other ideas can be done later, on other alts, or whatever.

I think that's what I'm trying to say.  Aim low, and achieve it, before aiming high.  It's harder than it looks.  ;-)

And I wish you the best-- please don't take any of this as negative.  

If you are writing something new, however, from scratch, with several key changes it will take you a long time.  As an individual developer, at least 3-4 years.

Absolutely agreed on this point, though I think if we really abstract away the application from the content data, we have no way of knowing the transaction is valid or not. If I'm not running BitUber, how would my client determine if the BitUber transactions are valid.

Also in my opinion, you are fundamentally responsible for being your own block emitter. If you want to spend a cryptocurrency you obtained, and your blocks have not propagated enough you may need to provide the store with a large packet containing all the blocks/chains necessary to fully trace the inputs to your transaction for validation.

Nothing is stopping someone from someone having many chains, one for crypto-currency (keep it small) and another for content (Large!).

Thank you for your input. I look forward to hearing your design.

I would go more for single chain with block data filtering than having a chain / user from the moment the data is not transaction, and doesnt relate to previous state, the whole block validation process become meaning less, as well as most of double spending related issues. And it remove lot of the issue to incencitive block emitters.

From the moment it's content data, any block is valid. And the data can be skipped if the person dont need it and dont want to "host" it. There is not much rule to validate content data itself, if it doesnt contain transaction.



I will probably give a try at detailing the way i want to do it, but it also rely on whole system of type class like system and module/component/interface between app & blockchain.

Multichain have implementation of storing structured data with signature & timestamping, but I think my system is potentially better.

I don't know who the hell is "Bitcoin Killer" but the other dude sure mastered the art of walltexting. I read a couple messages of his and i agreed in general but walling and walling message after message i'm just tired of scrolling down, so i had no choice but ignore him.

He better takes his chances as a book author about the crypto currencies. He is wasting his talents here.  

Decentralized Social Media:
Quietly I've developed a decentralized "message board" application on top of Blockchain technology. It does not have the issues with centralization that PoW mining leads to. I have the basic concept implemented but it's not ready to be released publicly. Unlike imnotback, I will describe my specific approach .

The basic idea is this: Instead of a "Single Global Blockchain" where there is contention to get your information into the chain through mining, every user has their own chain. They hash their previous header/new data then sign it from their new header (like traditional blockchain). Here's the difference: instead of mining, the header includes "witness hashes" pointing to the most recent blocks from chains of their peers. The "witnesses" prove your data is more recent in topological time, as well as provide a vote to prevent a "double spend" attack in other chains. This structure forms a DAG which can be sorted in linear time.

In order to form "chain communities", people can subscribe to 1 or more "root" blocks. The software client looks for subsequent blocks which have cryptographic traceability to these roots. The person who created the root block may publish branching messages on their chain pointing to other peers chains. This will inform software clients that they may also follow these other peer chains of they so choose. The peers chains can issues branching as well. If one of these chains starts spamming too much information/branches the client has configurable rules to discontinue following these sub-peers. Each person for themselves can determine how much of the network they can handle store, etc.

The End Result: "chain communities" every single block/message is un-censorable and has full traceability back to the root (like in blockchain). My design has all the benefits of the chain, (integrity, non repudiation, byzantine fault tolerance, etc.) while being low-latency (< 1sec) by avoiding PoW mining. It should be resistant to Sybil attacks, spammers, double spends as far as I can tell. You could build crypto-currency applications, smart contracts on top of it if you so choose.

Let me know what you guys think.

Some years I was involved with developping a c++ streaming module based on ogg/ogm and independant distribution platform, was still involved with this in the beginning of last year with blockchain / html5 based things. But we saw very quickly it's very locked, artist and author have literally gun on their temple from their producer, and even signifiant part of them has been heavily brainwashed on hating p2p in the 2000

Can hope on independant artist or content creator, but they will rarely bring high commercial interest, and still large part will prefer to stick to traditional edition/promotion companies, even with the bad conditions, but they dont think any other way to make good revenu with content creation than being signed with universal or Sony.

We have somehow à plan with decentralized music streaming, and made quick prototype with multi chain, and home made ogg streamer in the node + html5 player and some thinking on this kind of system. But not sure it's 100% viable commercially and if enough artist who are not already chain signed to a big one would jump the step.

And explaining block chain to artists good luck already 2+2 they have an head ache

No pb, I can totally understand this I know this kind of issue, and also I prefer to stay out of hot code and decision when im not 100% :)I need to kick myself in the but sometime again when I mess up code trying to advance when im not 100%   now it's clear I avoid to rush in long coding project and prefer to take time, think things out, and get into coding & décision when im confortable enough doing it, after i absorb as much of theory as possible, watch other project, and solidify the idea two week in hospital bed with a pneumonia was enough for me i can totally understand this

I am trying to get to that stage asap. Sorry I am slow for the reason I explained in my prior post. Also I can't think entirely clearly and comprehensively yet about optimal (organizational, etc) strategy for acceleration of progress.


Even 80% of the market prefers to only goggle over Justin Bieber, there are significant markets that want more diversity. For example, Shawn Grunberger who created BandCamp was a guy that I encouraged back in 1995 to pursue his dream (when I was the programmer and he was working the customer support dept). He even thanked me and attributed me to raising his confidence and interacting with him as programmer willing to explain concepts, etc.. He is now a multi-millionaire and in 1995 I was earning $80K + $milllion in stock options (inflation adjust that!) when he was earning perhaps $30K + no stock options. I have helped inspire others to reach success and want to continue to do that again, but on a much larger scale.

We are headed into a fracturing of society where humans break away from a monolith and assert their differences.


Btw, my 27 year old filipina gf was talking with her guidance counselor at the college today and they started talking about me and apparently he had "invested" in (unbeknownst to him a MLM scam named) OneCoin. There are a lot fools out there, but their interest is to find new things and new opportunities. Perhaps not all 100% of humans are stupid cows. I want you to think about why some random filipino instructor was aware of OneCoin. That will be an instructive for understanding that I know something about viral marketing.

The interest out there for many new opportunities is increasing...

The key is empowering the actors in the system to have an interactive medium with a motive. What differentiated the Internet from the TV, was that the consumer of the transmission would also transmit back and interact.

You have to engage your audience and stimulate them. Marketing concepts such as stickiness, etc...

I can't possibly find all those opportunities all by myself. That is why I need to empower the app developers. Although I do have a couple of good ideas for apps to jumpstart the process. And I did formerly create million user commercial apps myself in the past decades. I do understand GUI programming and all aspects of programming (except I am weak in networking and daemon server-side programming experience, but the concepts are not incomprehensible for me). I also understand marketing somewhat.

The problem with the ICO model is it motivates app developers who are only mining the speculators. My model motivates app developers who want to drive real user adoption. That is a very key distinction. Pay attention!

I am not proposing to cater to derelict or unprofessional developers and content providers. I am instead proposing that there is a wider diversity of qualified ones out there than are currently able to find a (or maximize their) market for themselves.

There is some good content for example on Medium, but Medium is still trying to figure out how to best monetize. Even Steem occasionally has decent content, but top notch content is more likely to be on Medium than on Steem, because Medium has more readers. I hate Medium's comment thread format and even the Medium editor sucks IMO. There is a lot of room to innovate.

Decentralized social media is your first target ? it's one of mine too, i have also a revenge to take on youtube and deezer

Do you have precise idea of the characteristics for decentralized social media ?


But the problem is always to have commercial grade content posted on it, it's same with blogs & social media & streaming, and 95% of the market is locked by majors and big editors.

Note I edited the above to add the link to an interesting Martin Armstrong blog post. Trump's use of Twitter and even Wikileaks is possibly another example (except that I think that was orchestrated by Rothschilds, and you can google for the links to Julian Assange), yet in any case the public now bypasses the top-down control to get access to news (e.g. via websites such as The Drudge Report and decentralized blogs) despite the fact that a Google search on "Trump news" only brings up MSM links which carry the agenda of the left (who are in the back pocket of the banksters) such as the NY TImes, Washington Post, etc..

---

My most significant impediment at the moment is that I experience significant discombobulated cognition, which significantly interferes with my ability to write clearly, think clearly, and assimilate a lot of information (i.e. there is no way I can entirely digest my own whitepaper since I started the TB treatment). Although it might seem like from my posts that I am functioning at a high level, please believe me that I am no where near functioning at the level of cognition that I am accustomed to before I acquired this chronic illness.

So at the moment, I am trying to be productive (make steady progress on various work in my todo list) while waiting for my cognitive function to return to normal. And I am avoiding making any major decisions until then. To better understand this, I suggest you go get shitfaced drunk and then trust yourself to assimilate dozens of research papers, situational facts about the market, etc.. and make well thought out holistically reasoned decisions. It simply can't be done. Cognitive function is critical. So I limp along make progress on items in my todo in which snafus won't entirely destroy the project.

I understand this might sound like a sob story, delusional, or whatever. I don't think it is possible to explain in an appreciable manner, that I am currently handicapped, but that I am hoping for this ailment to be cleared out soon (and have some signs that it might be improving). I just don't think other humans can conceive what means to be handicapped by cognitive delirium. I doubt readers even realize that I am struggling to write coherently. I have to carefully re-read what I type, but I am so often typing words that maybe share two consonants with the word I intended (my brain is really in delirium). It is a continuous struggle, as if I was extremely drunk.

It is postulated that my chronic fatigue now is not predominantly due to the postulated disseminated TB in the digestive tract and organs (which had also caused liver disease) as it was before starting 4 drug antibiotic treatment 62 days ago. And thus postulated that the current symptoms are due to the liver toxic, neurotoxic, ocular toxic 4 antibiotics which are specific to TB treatment. But this can't be assured to be the case. We will only know by the result over time. As of tonight (30 minutes from now), I take my last dose of the 4 drug treatment and then I have 109 more days of a 2 drug treatment. The remaining drugs are also liver and neurotoxic (not ocular toxic) but hopefully a reduced level of toxicity, so perhaps my level of cognition will continue to improve.

My cognition has been sporadically improving over the past few weeks, but it is still the case that I feel so discombobulated for hours after take a meal in most cases. However, if I eat a lot of dark chocolate, then I become alert for some hours after I digest that fully, but the alertness is somewhat discontinuous in that it is like I awake from dream-like delirium for some hours (but I can't quite get all the thoughts lined up from prior days, weeks, and months within that block of time) and then later I lose the continuity as I slide back into the delirium. It is very discombobulating and so this can also explain my erratic posting styles. I really feel like a pinball in an arcade game or a clothes tumbling around in a washing machine. It is very frustrating and I really can't explain to you what this is like. Trust me if you have a very strong intellect, you don't want to end up in this condition. There is a likely reason Franz Kafka's writing was so bizarre, he died of TB.

So please allow me some time to get myself cured. With the reduced dosing starting tomorrow, I am aiming to try to start pushing myself in the gym again and hoping I can start to get my liver to really heal. But there is also the possibility that my symptoms will remain another 109 days. It is also depressingly possible that my health problems are more complicated and won't be resolved by the TB treatment. But I am optimistic.

I really don't want to have to explain this again. Everyone is tired of the thread being about a virtual doctor's clinic.

I was going to ignore your post for this reason, but I decided to explain. I appreciate your interest. But I am in no condition to make any decisions right now. I am trying to get some work done. I was reading this research paper:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1607.01341.pdf

Btw, I am reasonably sure I already have the issues fully resolved and not in the state that you lament about other projects. And that confidence is why I don't need an ICO. I can go straight to launching the solution, but I really need my cognitive health. So I am just trying to bide my time while also being productive as I can be. I fight my health issue every day and try not to mention it every day.


It is my fault because I go posting around the forum marketing myself and my project, while also sharing my analysis of other projects and technologies. So then I create interest but I am not really fully prepared yet to go full speed. I should go put my head in the sand, which is what I want to do now. But also I am an extrovert and I want to communicate. It is what is. It is sort of erratic mess because of the delirium for the time being. But my technology work is not a mess. But that will be more cogently assured as this health matter clears up, move forward the way I know I am capable of when healthy.

Apologies for making this too much about me. I really hate that. I like surprising people with results, not all these fucking words. I really hate this. I hate the medical situation I am in, and I trying to fight my way out of it.

That would be good news

This is a well argued point:

It's always good to re-read the Satoshi paper, as it is not only laying out revolutionary stuff, it is a benchmark for succinctness.  So much about early bitcoin was not in that paper.

Writing a white paper can turn into a kitchen sink of a wishlist document.

Hopefully you're getting feedback from people on the paper, and you are doing some coding to test the implementation ability of some of your ideas.

I've been looking at the coins coming out and doing ICOs and reading their papers and it's really obvious how many will take forever to ever work (hell, I argue ethereum still does't work like it was supposed to. They still haven't solved fundamental problems.)

Finally, I think there are two good paths here-- if you want to play devils advocate and argue for better choices, go for it.  But if you want to be secret and write your paper in secret before sharing it with people, then probably best to not talk about your idea here-- don't let ego take you away.

If you are building what you say, then your time is better spent building it than talking to naysayers here.  IF you aren't building it, that's fine, share your ideas.

I'd be happy to review your white paper if you like, I can send you my bonafides by pm.

Hello

I am motivated to make blockchain based application What do you have as framework and base to build the applications ?

I think i'm on the same line than you with many things, with typeclass, json like data definition, javascript, DOM, and i have good experience in many domain you are talking on the git

I'm probably about to pull out the basics of script engine to program blockchain node based on my framework with the binary module components, json data definition, and i already have all the working code base for this

I'm just not sure about your organisation, and how to get involved with your ideas, if you are looking for people to develop stuff, i'm on the same line for theory in language definition and decentralized code, and i'm rather pro efficient in programing in many languages, and i'm totally aware of the problematics you are pointing in the zen script git hub discussion

I'm aware also of health problem, had a pneumonia some years back, and still have some amount of neuropathy/fibromalgy, but i keep myself healthy now I try to do sport and eat healthy and manage stress and anxiety better

But i'm aware with this problem and concentration needed to do good code, need to find to good pace

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le6qeMe7-vM

That was unexpected 
iamnotback = tptbneedwar

Yes you missed it. I have already explained the math for why there is no relationship between an average orphan rate and a cost per byte (which is a necessary prerequisite for a supply curve as explained by @Peter R's paper). In other words, if we model that every miner has the same orphan rate, then there is no level of block size which is more or less favorable to the miner, because difficulty adjusts to the same level for all the miners. In other words, the wasted hashrate of the orphan rate is paid for by income from the block because all miners have the same costs (@Peter R's model inherently presumes that hashrate and propagation delay are uniformly distributed).

It is only when we model relativistic orphan rate (which @Peter R's paper doesn't even consider) that we will see any relative profit levels and able to model orphan rate as a cost. @Peter R should have realized this, but he apparently didn't quite realize that his model was meaningless although he did mention some of these issues that perplexed him in his concluding remarks.

Once we do model differing orphan rates for different miners, then the optimal strategies for mining come into play. And if you work out the game theory of that, you realize that collusion and centralization are the only possible outcome.


Also I received a reply in private from one of the people I asked to peer review the issue:


You are making a similar error as those two others did upthread. A 51% (or even 33% selfish mining) attack is not a change in protocol. In other words, in BTC the miners can't make huge blocks, because it violates the protocol limit of 1MB.


There was minimum advised fee and there were pools doing anti-spam such as I think I've read that Luke Jr's pool rejected dust transactions. I haven't studied that period of time in great detail, so perhaps someone else would be better qualified to discuss that with you.

This inability to offer ICOs to non-qualified USA persons (i.e. those identified to be sophisticated and have at least a $million networth) due to requirements of USA investment securities law, is I think maybe going to be another reason that my OpenShare project's method of funding apps without ICOs, is going to be very popular.

Even Iconomi's ICO was not offered in the USA. Click here to read Iconomi's explanation.

It makes perfect sense that averaged across all miners cost per byte ~ inflation rate (e^t) where t is propagation time and ~ means proportional to. Because difficulty adjusts, thus hashing cost rises to match the block reward (i.e. inflation rate) multiplied by wasted hashrate losses due to orphan rate.

It is independent of the amount data in the block (meaning there is no cost constraining amount of data to put in a block). That is because the equation he chose is modeling everyone having the same orphan rate, thus it models that no miner attempts to use a smaller block size than the other one.

But miners will strategically employ this block size choice and it turns out that it is a power vacuum with winner-take-all property that forces a cartel to use large blocks as a weapon against those not in the cartel.

So IMO he hasn't entirely acknowledged his error. He noticed there were problems in his analysis, but he didn't entirely home in on the holistic conclusion. His model is meaningless. It makes no sense to model average orphan rate as a limiting factor providing an equilibrium, because miners have incentive to do whatever it takes to reduce the waste of their individualized orphan rate and they can do so at their advantage by not including the minority in their cartel, so that the non-cartel minority has a very high orphan rate and the cartel has an ultra low orphan rate. The only equilibrium is due to centralization of control.