Topic: Do you think "iamnotback" really has the" Bitcoin killer"? - page 28. (Read 79954 times)

I have a dog. The ladies walk it. Walking the dog requires I leave my desk (and consumes more than 2 minutes). A hacker sleeps under and eats at his desk and is rarely ever an arm's length away from typing down any spontaneous thought.

Don't fill up this thread with nonsense. You don't understand intense programming. Get off our lawn.

Arrh. I see the problem now......constantly listening to your own echo, day in, day out, would be enough to send anyone a bit mad.
Seriously, get a dog, and walk it. Welcome to the real world.   

It is hacker humor. Something you obviously have no knowledge of. Programming for 16 hours is known to cause hackers to take 2 minutes to humorously point out a fool and blow off some steam before heading back into the cave where real work gets done.


That you think meeting in person is a productive use of time exemplifies you don't have any knowledge at all about how real work gets done on programming.

@Shelby. Serious question....  who have you actually met in RL in the Bitcoin world?

52, and you still think this is what you should be doing^^^. Pathetic.

And you have done what, in the Bitcoin world?

You bought a meal, Well done! (pats gently on retards head)

Never a truer word spoken IMO.

I've spent almost 4 years now solving the same problems Shelby is attempting.   I've thrown away more ideas and code than I care to think about.  Some of those ideas are doing the rounds now as the "next big thing" and I threw them away years ago as they weren't good enough or would have issues further down the line.

I think the problem is that because Bitcoin works, and block chains are "good enough" for most things, the perception is that it must be easy...as someones already done it to a sufficient degree.   It's far from easy though and Satoshi most likely took a number of years of R&D, trialing things out, throwing ideas and code away before he got to Bitcoin.

However, Shelby does spend TOO much time on this forum (and others) procrastinating and debating rather than doing!

Even if he has something fundamental that he can turn into a spectacular product he runs the risk of missing the boat and being the Betamax....or worse someone invents Betamax before him and markets it like VHS.

IMO the boat has already sailed...I'm VERY close and I have working code!  Save for some final critical testing a release is now imminent....I know others are also making progress and edging in on what he's trying to achieve too.

I had, and bought dinner for a staff member here, some weeks ago. What about you? Do you get out much and meet real-people in the Bitcoin world, or do you make that stupid mistake of judging people by what they just post? Good luck with that. 

How do you know he hasn't ?
He had listed at least 7 forum accounts he has made here and is stubborn and obtuse.
He has no idea why his main old account was even banned and claims conspiracy.
Clearly "the man" was keeping him down.. Big Illuminati etc.

I am not trying to be mean but it speaks volumes when he plays bum-buddy with Risto for a half decade.
Both are mentally ill.
One of them admitted it and the other is obvious.

Me thinks buddy likes his crypto-pundit position.
But there is little excuse i think..
A week ago i installed Visual Studio and modded some code and clicked build (build time was 1.17 seconds)
And it took about 20 minutes to install the IDE..
So when you have YEARS of running your mouth stalling i have to wonder.
Don't forget he WAS already quoted saying his "Bitcoin Killer" would be released in early 2017.
..times up bud

In his defense though it does require proper thought.
And each idea can be a dead end with wasted time.
A currency concept would require investigation and more than likely the obvious hits you later.. it's a bad idea LOL
I have had a bunch of ideas but the more i thought of them the more holes i punched in the idea.
And the standard is VERY HIGH !

He enjoys his instant gratification he gets from parading around here as the expert on everything.
A massive ego stroking..
That would be gone if he had to bury his head in code 4 the next few months.
And he said himself that a project like Bitcoin etc can NOT be created unless you get an ICO of millions for dev funds.

I could tell by his subtle play on words he was positioning himself to launch his own and he backed out when i confronted him and laughed at him.
But he did !
He spent the last year or two calling every ICO that came along a scam.. riding around on my coat-tails the whole time.. then ...... carefully wording things so he could do his own LOL

The point to an ICO is the launch.
The point to the coin is the initial distribution.
So..
If he has a Bitcoin Killer then he would have a better initial distribution model ..than an ICO
and he does NOT .

Beyond this, there is the whole Turing Halting pb, and the whole theory saying Turing like computer program are fundamentally unpredictible , even with 100% tape based standalone computer, add interrupt, thread to this, and you are not far from chaos

All framework or high level language do is adding more restriction in the synthaxe to have more determined state and less freedom, to increase predictibility.

But I believe much more in good runtime rather than more complex language and compiler , all expérience like intel atom who wanted to rely on compile time order didn't show very good result.


There are experience with Lisp to define complete grammatical language interpretation that are interesting, but anything in between for me nah  


My goal is more to get to something like this with protocol message parsing based on data definition tree template, to have good runtime type checking, and compiler/system independant code who can be executed in distributed environment with a layer above the compiler to deal with data location/availability/sharing with the layer of the data tree, directly from C language compiled to binary machine code.


https://github.com/iadix/purenode/blob/master/protocol_adx/protocol.c#L1363

With this there is all the comfort of high level language with soft typed reference tree, and still  easy to compile to cross compiler/system  binaries.

But I will probably develop higher level language script at some point to encapsulate modules and api and interface better, I looked into CHARM ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charm_(programming_language) )some time ago, it seemed to fit my purpose.

Blockchain is still bit more délicate to handle than the average code. It's almost nasa style where the code must have minimum update and works well everywhere the same, as it directly hold value the code must be really well studied inside and out, and lots of bugs or flaw can easily creep in, and have dramatic conséquences on the functioning of the project.

I can completely follow this logic. All puzzle parts falling into the right places. To my mind Anonymint would make a great addition in a bigger developper team where the others can set him back on track occasionally. XMR been imaginable at some point in time. That guy has potential, it's just wasted.

Yeah, and what if he had done what everyone else did instead, started some coin with sub-optimal technology and be now stuck with it, unable to fork away from his investors. Well he could do what many do and that is to just leave the failed project and a lot of people feeling scammed and start a new one, but maybe he's more decent than your average altcoin dev. It is irresponsible to launch a financial instrument knowing it will be a failure. The less qualified devs do not see in advance what will be a failure and won't have such inhibitions against launching new coins.

I had commented on Coval in November.

I commented about Shannon Code and even today I still can't find the open source repo.

You are pointing out the brittleness of relying on total orders, because total orders don't exist over the entire universe. The challenges of blockchain consensus is tied into this fact.

But the way we get around this is by forming partial orders (<--- this link contains a link to a presentation on Ethereum's Casper including Vitalik and Greg Meredith from RChain/Synereo).

However with blockchain consensus we need eventual consistency with a total order over all transactions. Blockchain consensus scaling decentralized is a very, very difficult problem to solve. Vitalik has not solved it. Casper (and even Byteball) will only work centralized. He damn well knows that and that is why technobabble research with Greg Meredith is ongoing (they are still searching/researching).

True, but I don't only post here. I am posting much more in discussions with experts.


True, but I already wrote that money isn't a sufficient motivation by itself:

---

The more you write me off, the more motivated I am to shock you.

---

Lol:

---

Real artists ship.

I fully agree. That said, the trap iamnotback may fall into, and I have fallen in such a trap in the past too, is:
"the best is the enemy of the good".
By being too perfectionist, and by being too intelligent to fail to see the flaws in your design, you end up never delivering.  While the guy that is somewhat less smart, and *didn't even see the problem* will deliver something (that will have a problem, true, but everything has problems).  If you hold back, because you have *understood* that your idea has a problem, you're not doing, what the less smart guy or girl is doing without realizing that there was a problem, but delivers, nevertheless.