Topic: Do you think "iamnotback" really has the" Bitcoin killer"? - page 46. (Read 79952 times)

I would love a chance to read the whitepaper.
Although I haven't been on this forum long, I've seen some posts from iamnotback that are definitely very interesting.
There are still lots of great ideas out there. Bitcoin is the beginning, not the end.

I found that offensive... but accurate ROFL   

And quote it or it didn't happen ?
It did happen then you say "might" and make excuses for your notorious behavior.
You have derailed some topics about Monero before for a 100+ pages running with each comment being a long winded rant that makes my comments look short in comparison.. and that is one example i could easily go "quote" for you.
And in that example i kept trying to point out to you and that knob smooth or smoothie (forgot which one) that you two were getting way too technical and anal and long winded alienating every person here.
Turning it into a giant wank fest..
Point being is you were lecturing to deaf ears ..again.
Get it ?

I hope so because i have tried to relay that exact concern to you countless times.
I can guarantee you Shelby people tune you out chronically.
Trust me i'd know.., they do it to me too for similar reasons LOL

And don't forget bud.. i am the smart on here . 

I fucking told you all that this guy was planning on launching his own ICO
..while simultaneously saying they are ALL bad by design (hopping on my coat-tails)
While carefully verbally positioning himself here leaving the door open for him to launch his own later.

and.. he just said this below


I am the knower and haver of everything seen & known in crypto now and forever kidiots !
I know what you are all going to do before YOU do and i post comments publicly predicting it all the time then i get to say, I Told You So later.

I should say thanks for be conciliatory, but I must also say that saying someone's statement is stupid is akin to saying they are stupid. There seems to be no way to avoid that, when using that word.

I am acknowledging your conciliatory tone. I still don't agree my statement was stupid.


But you did, so I will reply.


I never wrote anything about miner's electricity prices. What I wrote implied (or was intended to imply) that miners possibly wouldn't be able to source any fiat to make a payment for their bills if Jim Rickards' prediction comes to reality.

To repeat my prior point again, I agree that some crypto-currency might become more golden in such a chaos, and I think it will be mine (or you could argue for a PoS variant) which doesn't have vulnerable security that relies on the functioning of the fiat system. Bitcoin's security is conflated with the fiat system, which was my entire point. When the shit hits the fan, and people can see that there is a better system that has no such reliance on the fiat system, they may prefer it.

I believe I am going to pretty much discredit PoW as the preferred system with my whitepaper. So be forewarned. That doesn't mean I expect PoW and Bitcoin to die quickly because of it. I don't know what the transition will be. We make a system and put in the wild and see what society does.


I already explained how you moved the goal posts from the issue of being able to make fiat payments for electricity to one of whether equality of energy will solve PoW's centralization quagmire. And I also already alluded to (or asserted) that your expectation of renewable energy having equality of economies-of-scale and distribution is a fairytale that will never happen. It violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. You don't realize it but you are actually predicting that the future will become indistinguishable from the past and the light cones of Special Relativity will collapse.

I mean I am being polite because I really should just call you a kook and put you on Ignore, except you are being cordial so I am trying to be patient even though you are not making any sense.


Please don't slander me with the fact that you don't understand of all the factors I am looking at. I mean I understand Physics, you don't. I understand political economics, and I doubt you do, Etc. Sorry man, I just know that most people are not that knowledgeable even though they think are. Does that make me egotistical? In my life I always tried to tell myself that everyone could understand if I would just explain. But it doesn't work that way. People have different levels of knowledge, attention spans, effort, attendance, etc and I could write another 30,000 posts and that still wouldn't change. There will always be 100s or 1000s of people who think I am full of shit and maybe even one or two of them will be correct.

Again it doesn't mean I (or any person) am (is) infallible. I am not claiming that. Please do continue to express your thoughts. That is good. I hope you understand that I respond frankly too. Sorry I don't know how else to respond, other than to ignore.


Yeah I really think all this talk is cheap. Wouldn't you agree?

The bigger challenge is actually getting something done. Let's stop talking.

@iamnotback

I didn't say you were stupid, that statement was. It wasn't personal. Not to restart our conversation but in such a chaos scenario, if anything, bitcoin would become golden (depending on the scale of the chaos) and possibly part of the solution (wishful thinking) but I'd highly doubt miner's electricity prices and the security of the network would be a major issue.

I'm certainly don't feel like I'm moving the goal posts; you were arguing against PoW while I tried to defend it with a few points, one being the advancements in renewable energy is also increasingly beneficial to PoW.

If anything, I think you're muddying the water with a lot of assumptions, politics and just general ego.

Anyway, we'll see what your big thing will be and I'll leave it at that.

You won't see that. It will be limited. And you will have to fight to get in (don't know yet how I will handle this, perhaps first come first serve and also a minimum BTC level perhaps 10 BTC). Maybe ~$1 million raise (maybe less, maybe slightly more because I haven't written down any budget yet nor analyzed all the factors). Not $5 - 18 million cashout as other devs have been doing (ETH, LISK, WAVES, etc). It will not be enough to cashout and quit. Look I am age 51 and I see this as the last major project of my career. I am bankrupt. $1 million is not enough for me to retire on. I have much higher expectations than that. I didn't put 4 years of my life into this for $1 million. I was earning (inflation adjusted) $1 million a year back in 2001 with CoolPage. My minimum expectation for my eventual long-term (over many years) cashout is $10 million, but I would like to go for $100 million. I am shooting for a $100 billion market cap social network. If we simply duplicate Ethereum's market cap, that would still be a success any way. I am not going to start pitching that now. Wait until there is a real working system that we can be boast about. Right now this is all just vaporware and I didn't start this thread. Nor did I instigate the OP to create this thread. I was shocked to see this thread. I had no desire to discuss this now at this premature stage.

It is just enough to see the project through to maturity of development. I will earn my cashout on the tokens I will hold (which should be worth a hell of lot more than $1 million by the time we are done). But I really want to refrain from making any predictions about investment or anything like that because runs afoul of SEC regs and I am a USA citizen (unless perhaps we only sell to qualified investors or I can find a proxy to handle the ICO for us who is not a USA citizen, but the more mouths to feed the more waste). Thus you guys can go on writing comments like this and I will simply have to not respond. But my silence won't mean I agree with your comment.

Steem reached $400 million marketcap. I think I have solved the design problems that plagued Steem. How much is fixing Bitcoin's scaling and decentralization worth?



That is a valid skepticism. Frankly I worry about that too. I worry most about my health and its impact on my production (which is why I spent the past week just doing intense sports and barbell and being in the sunshine but now here I am again working allnite and it is 5am here). And I also worry about my age and that I haven't coded a lot since I got ill in 2006. And I worry about the complexity of this project and the management load of all this. It seems quite huge and I wish I was in perfect health and more youthful excess of energy level. And the best way to conquer that is to do action. So that is why I will shut up and generate code. That is a confidence builder in itself. But the white paper was also just as important as the code and I did complete that. So that is already a confidence booster.

But for example whereas Ethereum never had a consensus system design ever locked down ever. Not even now. I have my whitepaper with the design all spelled out in great detail and locked down already.

And before any ICO, I will have something working on a testnet so tokens can be traded immediately after ICO.

So just compare to Ethereum with it's $18 million raise, never had a solid design, too many talkers not enough coders, hyperventilated project, etc. And what was ETH's peak market cap?

Yet Ethereum did have a lot of others helping and they had good marketing. I will get to that later. First we need to have code and a working system. I don't want to start with complete vaporware as Ethereum and others did.



Didn't you profit big on the Ethereum ICO?




It will be different.

I'm also excited to know more about iamnotback's cryptocurrency and check if it bears some similarity to my own latest proposal for an alternative system of securing a cryptocurrency: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17365846.

My proposal can be characterised as Proof-of-Stake AND (Proof-of-Time OR Proof-of-Trust). While PoS can be beaten by any attacker who is wealthy enough, time is a resource that is non-renewable and non-transferable. On the other hand, trusting people who could easily steal your stake is a high-risk game, especially if it's clear to them that you are acting with an intent of attacking the coin. Both aspects along with good old Proof-of-Stake are to secure the integrity of the blockchain that I'm currently desiging.
 

You are moving the goal posts. I was talking about whether mining farms would be vulnerable if Jim Rickards' prediction of a financial system blackout became a reality.

Now you want to talk about if mining will become decentralized in the future due to an end of specialization in the efficiencies of energy production such that anyone can produce energy at the lowest cost at any position on the earth with any level of economies-of-scale.

Well your expectation is ludicrous. It is the fantasies of those illiterate in physics who think perpetual motion machines are coming. Society and technology are moving to higher specialization (also maximum division-of-labor) and efficiencies thereof, not the other direction.

Leftists expect equality and all they get in return is an end game of totalitarianism. Sorry these fantasies about equality, destroy civilization.

Refer to a post I wrote today:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17396067

Because you said what I wrote was "stupid"― which is hostile and quick judgement. That is a strong word to use against someone who is not stupid. What you do you think Satoshi would have done had you said he wrote something stupid? He would have roasted you, the same as he did to Daniel Larimer (the developer of Bitshares and Steem).

Discussion can be cordial or violent. You decide. I have no problem with cordial debate.

It doesn't mean I am infallible. I even have made some careless decisions in my life in my youth which can be characterized as stupid. But I don't think I often (if ever) have written stupid comments on serious topics on this forum. Some may totally disagree with my position (and that can often be to lack of understanding of each sides' views), but that doesn't mean it is proven that I wrote something stupid.

I think the security of PoW is more about the total cost of the network - heavily discounted by centralization of the miners - and not just energy.

Universally cheap electricity would definitely make mining more accessible and less of a problem in general (eg. environmental concerns, miner centralization) and definitely not make it any less secure.

I mean miner centralization is party there because not everyone has access to cheap electricity and it's not like the biggest farms doesn't already work with dirt cheap electricity anyway, because they do.

With cheap renewable electricity the importance of geological location or having to have ties to obtain cheap electricity would be a thing of the past and almost all the investments would go into ASICs potentially allowing more people to start mining.

More miners = less centralization and renewable electricity = less environmental concerns so I stand by what I said.

Not sure why the hostility and quick judgement though.

Well they banned me because they don't want to hear the truth that bonded validators can't ever work (not in Casper, Tendermint, Cosmos, or any other).

Any way, here is what I was going to post there next:


P.S. What is this with open source projects banning those who want to report fatal flaws? Censorship is the antithesis of open source.

Glad to see this is still being talked about. I'm still very sceptical.

I also have ideas that could change the world "if only I could get the funds to build a team of architects/programmers/marketers/executives". Sounds like big ICO talk with no guarantees. Sounds just like Ethereum (and so many other crowdsales). Gimme your money now and pray that I build exactly what I've said I'll build.

But that's the biggest problem. What you think you're building ain't always what's left on the table when the tools are put down. This will be building an unproven concept not a 3 bedroom townhouse where architects plans are exact representations.

I still remain sceptical that the project will ever get off the ground. All I see now is an upcoming ICO/IPO. A few of the popular guys on BitcoinTalk will get rich in crowdsale BTC while their faithful followers pray to turn a profit... someday. Doesn't matter if it works or not, just get that bugger onto the exchanges!

Shame because I was actually thinking something different might happen here with this one. I was expecting to see some code some day. Looking forward to eating my words (or maybe just stand wrong and strong - hadn't decided). Now all I see is a big fat greasy IPO/ICO.

Meh

I understand all of that, and I do not take it as a lack of real backing. I am convinced that there is something interesting in your project, and it will be a pleasure to talk again with you once the testnet will be ready and that competition will no more be an issue to present your ideas. For now, get back to work and create us something that has a true potential in this ocean of mediocrity !

That is already covered in great detail in my paper. I don't want to release that detail prematurely for obvious competition reasons.


Absolutely. I observed that mistake. And besides I already know that from working in real software development teams. For example, I was one of the 3 original programmers of Corel Painter (not Paint), the first software to ship in a paint can in the 1990s.

It is easier said than done to find a great co-developer. It is magic when it clicks. I have found that what you need comes to you when you need it. Trying to find it before you need it, doesn't seem to work.

I have to demonstrate some coding first. Great devs are attracted to leaders, who lead by doing not talking and giving commands.


A creative person loves to talk about and share his creations, but I can't reveal my invention before it is ready to release (ICO) because of competition reasons. Sorry I can't tell you anymore than I have already written in the Decentralization thread.

And I better go back to working and stop talking here.  It would be best to stop acting like AnonyMint and more like Satoshi right about now. Which means more action, less talk.

Steem's biggest mistake is that voting from a collective pool can be Sybil attacked unless it is controlled by whales. I explained that in a blog:

https://steemit.com/steem/@anonymint/blog-rewards-can-t-be-widely-distributed

Nice job you made me get interest in your project ! Bitcoin as the reserve currency is for me the best, maybe another altcoin could handle the current flaws of using it as a day-to-day payment system, but there's still some problems to solve, I could numerate them here if you want but I would not doubt that you are already aware of them. I think there's potential for your crypto-currency to grow in that field. At least also you're trying to get a small team of focused members and that's very too, and the total inverse of the Ethereum development team, which a disaster. The most catching-eye part is the way you will be securing it, neither by PoW nor by Steem (hopefully this is also a disaster), but by something new. I'd enjoy very much if you could enlight us a bit about this because I think you have something interesting under hood !

I won't this time let that go unchallenged. Maybe in the future, I will just ignore these (as I am sure that it is impossible to not rub some people the wrong way no matter what a person does).

Quote it now or it didn't happen.

What you think is verbal diarrhea is (to me at least) information that appears to you as noise, because the information is ostensibly above your comprehension ability (or interest or patience or knowledge at the time you read it). Often one of my motivations for writing is to organize (collect) my own thoughts.

Over time, more of my past posts will make more sense to you. I am always a few years ahead of most of the other people.

Is your definition of "verbal diarrhea" equated to voluminous posting on wide-ranging topics? Because I like to engage others in debate? Even on topics in Politics & Society.

I realize simpletons prefer the soundbite tl;dr. Sophisticated investors understand that the devil is in the details. Speculators also understand that a good pump-and-dump is sufficient, so perhaps there is a reason to prefer the soundbite.

I think you need both. You need soundbite marketing and you need sophisticated detail, e.g. Bitcoin.

I will not promise that I am the best pumper. I can only tell you that I did formerly manage to produce popular software and did a lot of coding. I have been working on the whitepaper and will be working more on the coding. And posting less (I have been posting less).

I will hopefully switch gears from being a forum poster to leading a software project and marketing. So there needs to be some shift in focus and attitude. If that is your point, then I am not disagreeing.


Edit: I realize maybe he is referring to when TPTB_need_war  would criticize other projects such as Ethereum, Dash, Synereo, etc and also the long thread about whether ICOs are legal. That was a period of learning and conceptualizing about those issues. It was a necessarily stage of gaining understanding and insight.

Especially the crypto whose security isn't impacted by inability to convert the token to fiat. So the impetus and motivation will likely turn away from PoW and towards anything secure as an alternative (and realize I have knowledge of such a system which is unreleased). I have information you don't have.


Mining farms have to pay their electricity bills. Hobbiests are not providing the security of Bitcoin.


That would be more compelling argument if the mining wasn't concentrated into a few mining farms.

If the elite want to shut everything down so they can force firesale prices so they can gobble up the assets they want, why would mining farms be undesirable assets to steal?


So you didn't take Economics 101 and thus don't understand that mining farms are not the marginal miners.


Mining farms are probably mostly debt slaves who have to make their debt payments every month as well as electricity.

But even if not, they still need fiat to pay their electricity with. If the financial system shuts down, they can't pay their electricity. Or worse, maybe their electricity provider can't pay its employees and shuts down.

I didn't state it as a certainty. I stated it as an additional risk factor.

Centralized paradigms are not anti-fragile.


Now you've totally ruined your credibility. I suggest you get an education in Economics before you try to challenge me:

http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/

The security of PoW is the amount spent on energy. If energy gets cheaper, then the hashrate will increase so that the total amount spent remains the same.

I don't pay a lot of attention to iamnotback mainly because of verbal diarrhea(sorry iamnotback). He is one of our more well known characters for better or worse ... something like Spoetnik.

Hard to say if he can produce something unique. He might be the next "satoshi". Genuis comes in many forms and is often mistaked for idiocy.

Would I buy his coin? Hell ya. The entertainment value alone would be worth the few bucks. Can you imagine the shit storms?

the year of 2016 was fairly full of exciting news in the cryptocurrency world and We have seen many continued blockchain innovation,
the steady growth of Bitcoin and increasing global acceptance of the currency and Of course That's not all we clould see but 2017 is just beginning.
It's going to be an exciting year and yes, Bitcoin has done a surprised wonder passing over 1,100$.

Bitcoin - You,  Do not spoil our surprise. Thank you, Bitcoin.

Happy New Year - the golden year of 2017.

Bitcoin only has a couple million users at best. A very small social network is 100 million users. I think we can get more users than Bitcoin. I had a million users for my CoolPage s/w in 2002 when the Internet was 10X smaller.

Btw, I never contemplate killing Bitcoin. Bitcoin will continue to be the on/off ramp to/from fiat. No altcoin will supplant that. Thus Bitcoin will remain the reserve currency of crypto. But in terms of scaling and adoption, yeah I think we can challenge Bitcoin.

The distribution is not going to be primarily ICO. And it is not going to be PoW either. And it is not going to be Steem's voting rewards. It is going to be something better.

My problem is not the ideas and design work, it is the hard slog of execution. Execution requires capital and larger development teams (but not too large just a few guys who are well focused and professionals). So we will need a small ICO at testnet stage (meaning in theory very high multiples of upside potential and this will need to be explained in terms of the ongoing distribution but I don't want to reveal that now), to get enough capital to hire some more devs to do all the ecosystem development work that has to be done. I can't do that all programming by myself. I am just hoping to be able to complete the development work to have something functioning at testnet.

Reading the following thread can give some insight into the knowledge I have gained from organizing the whitepaper:

https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos/issues/47

If possible, I would be interested in possibly hiring some devs from outside our ecosystem. Some professional programmers. Or perhaps working with IOHK as consultants (perhaps but I can't speak to any compatibility between Charles' operation and myself). Actually selecting and hiring devs is also a major pita.