Topic: Economic Devastation - page 83. (Read 504811 times)

You stated that with the non-anonymous blockchain.


That is implied by the implication by you that there can only be one system.


For the reputation to be non-violable as you appeared to require then it would have to be only one system.


I never said that. You are hallucinating.


You obviously haven't read my posts in my former usernames. I doing $100s of charity every month in the Philippines and this is difficult for someone who is nearly bankrupt.


Do you really expect sufficient readers for a discussion about your gibberish when you don't even communicate clearly in English.

Let me say something CoinCube will not say to you by respect you don't deserve, again, in less holistic words.

You are in internal denial. I don't know why or with what this process is relating to and it is apparent because you are always psychologically leaking trough labeling. Like, when I first told about RepCoin you summarily labeled it of Marxist. who said that? You.

Who said it will be perennial? You.
Who said it will be coercive? You.
Who said it will be non-voluntary? You.
Who said there will be only one system? You.
Who said charity will be left out of it? You. And that one I know why. You do not know social value in your own life and fail to acknowledge social capital. You should be doing some serious charity to take the chance of learning it.


But know what? It is already at work. There are plenty districts and islands doing it with the wrong tools, but soon it gonna be a thriving city on the swamp of world economics, maybe a city-state. Could be a strong tool for a Florenza like republic. Could put social distinction and titles where it deserves to exist. BUT NOoooo!

It does not matter if there will be no full representation and UN-vote system. Its Marxism!
It does not matter if the group budget will be fully transparent and completely subject to each individual approval. Its Marxism for Christ sake!
It does not matter if it kills the "public" straw man cause Its fucking Marxism!
It does not matter if it subjects justice to local law and peer evaluation. DON'T YOU SEE IT IS MARXISM?!
It does not matter if it can remove the boundaries and renew the dying system of bankruptcy and prescription. OH MY GOD THIS IS MARXGASM!

Ha ha well I certainly do not want to be responsible for that.

I worry you are assigning suboptimal amounts of personal resources to this debate.
I will answer your question but will wait to do so until exactly one week from today.

Spend some time with your lady friend. That is more important.  

I already know how I will route around that for the Knowledge Age economy. The masses (and CoinCube) can go into that negative entropy production system and perish.

In what way have I not refuted it?

The mutation analogy only proved that a top-down controller can't exist, because there is no a priori metric on the optimum rate of mutation. Nature obviously converges without a pre-chosen top-down structure. Any structure created is known only after the fact of the free market creating it, not a priori.

You Marxists academics just can't accept that nature doesn't need your "superior intelligence" to manage and control it. You all are jealous of nature.

Sorry man you are really pissing me off with your nonsense. Are you really this obtuse?

(if you cause me to lose this lady because I've been ignoring her communications in order to balance my work with all this communication with you, then I will never forgive you!!)

You can had better get to the fucking point!

Google's Plan to "Estimate Web Sources' Trustworthiness"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be1W32qQy_k

We are losing the war for the update of the civilization signalling system. They are pushing even more the branding of reputation with all its devils.

I have made my argument in my post on entropy upthread you have not adequately refuted it although I know you think you have.

Maybe you can do so with that essay you are talking about above maybe not. I look forward to reading it when it is done. For now like I said let's move on.

Free markets increase entropy. Monopolies don't. There is no argument.

If you don't want entropy increase, then you have to kill nature, because nature demands entropy increase per the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

I have no more time for your nonsense. Whether it is ego (passive aggressive shit that Marxists are expert at) or not, is irrelevant.

Make some kind of argument that isn't just more obfuscation such as your mutation analogy.

Do you realize how much of my valuable time you have wasted on this nonsense of yours?

This is true. Any barbs should be looked at as friendly gibes rather than wounding attacks. Perhaps in the spirit of competition I have been taking things too far? Fair point I will pull back from the gibes.


We agree on what is needed to further this discussion. On current trajectory is not one of convergence. So lets put this debate back on hold (pause) as we discussed earlier. There is no rush we can return to it later when you have time.  


Ah we are getting back to the philosophical now. In this area (as in so many areas it seems) we appear to be natural opponents  

Your mistake is you are conflating energy and entropy.

It is true that a perpetual motion machine of the 2nd kind violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It is not possible to attain 100% efficiency in a thermal transfer process because we would need an infinite reservoir (heat sink) of absolute 0 temperature internally and an infinite external ambient environment (heat source) of infinite temperature.

What is being considered with the Conservation of Energy in the First Law of Thermodynamics and the transfer of Heat in the Second Law of Thermodynamics is the fact that the matter of the universe is constant. I was going to go more abstractly into what the matter of the universe is, because I have unifying theory on that which I think will be breakthrough. But suffice it to say that the matter of the universe does not increase nor decrease. Btw, my future elucidation will explain why this is required else the universe would need to have a fixed, absolute origin and edge and thus could not exist (would collapse into an infinitesimal point), but that is not elucidation is not necessary for the point we need to discuss now.

Whereas the entropy, i.e. the probabilistic degrees-of-freedom organization of the matter, of the universe is not constant and is always increasing. This is the entropic force and the other forces and macroscopic effects emerge from it, e.g. gravity emerges from the entropic force. See the matter of the universe is uninteresting. It doesn't cause any thing to happen. It is the organization of the matter that defines the various macroscopic effects, such as potential energy, kinetic energy, heat, etc..

The Second Law tells us that entropy is always created by any thermodynamic process (except for idealized reversible processes which never occur in nature).

Thus the entropy created by the internet which exceeds the potential energy that can be created by the work done of building the physical internet, is an increase in efficiency above 100%. But that > 100% efficiency is not in terms of energy, but rather in terms of entropy. Thus it does not violate the Conservation of Energy.

Measuring efficiency in terms of energy is myopic, because for example I can achieve near to 100% efficiency for transferring energy from reservoir (e.g. battery) to another but that hasn't achieved anything useful.

The useful work as far as nature is concerned are the increases in entropy. Nature's entire holistic motivation is increasing entropy.

Thus the only definition for efficiency which has any consistently, holistic meaning is the ratio of entropy increase.

Thus (entropic) perpetual motions machines do exist! They are called Life a.k.a. nature.


Your subordination of entropy to a 2nd class citizen of physics and nature is abomination and travesty of science and philosophical inquiry.

Hey technological dunce, servers don't have a Dunbar limit. Even users of P2P don't have to be limited by their Dunbar limit, because P2P is automated (which is probably why Bitcoin is tracking Metcalf's law).

My server for new website is accepting all connection requests to it and doesn't need to ask me first. Duh!

While it is true that Reed's law doesn't apply to all the users on the internet because they don't all connect with each other over the internet (i.e. P2P is not used yet by all users, although I plan to change that!), the article you cited admits that Reed stipulated that his law only applied to groups wherein all the users did interact with each other.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/metcalfes-law-is-wrong


Don't flatter yourself. I was already well aware that you would think that and it is obvious why you would think that. Really I have your thinking all mapped out already. I know why you are wrong. I was going to address that fundamental math in the more abstract essay. Nevertheless the math above is irrefutable.

Start searching now for your mistake instead of assuming incorrectly and egotistically presuming that my thought process was not exhaustive (when have I ever demonstrated myopia?! never!), and see if you can figure it out before I tell you.


The network is free market, self-organizing into a plurarity of top-down managed mesh or bus connected hubs which multifurcate (spoke topology) to the network ends.

I am arguing against a monopoly on (force) top-down management, because it has an entropy approaching 0. Someday you will get this distinction into your hard head.


Flattering your ignorance with platitudes is noise. You'd be wiser to stop interjecting those incorrect barbs and stick to futilely, incorrectly arguing the facts.

In your stubborn ignorance, you are going to miss a huge opportunity to become a $billionaire. You are like the politically correct, mainstream educated fools who told Columbus not to sail because the world is flat.

Your disingenuous behavior is causing me to not ever want to be your friend in future, even after you finally realize I am correct. All the apologies you could make won't erase the memory I will have of how you prefer disingenuous ego (you appear to be so worried about your reputation as if that is your productive value in society whereas I shred my reputation every damn day because my value to society is actual production and pursuit of truth, ego be damned!) over intellectual pursuit of truth. If you were sincere, you would have at least explored the point I make above. It is certainly obvious to someone of your intellect. Or are you really that myopic? Well I have had a few indications that you are that myopic, such as the rash investment decision, etc.. So perhaps this isn't insincerety but rather just a mental handicap? Then I guess I should be empathetic.

If you quote bullshit academic ivory tower armchair cathedrals with no evidence and no real world experience, I can quote actual real world evidence that Bitcoin is tracking Metcalf's law:


I suppose you forgot the basic tenet that the scientific method requires real world verification.

AnonyMint I can tell you only spent 5 minutes on this.

Reed's law is the unproven assertion of David P. Reed that the utility of large networks scale exponentially with the size of the network.

This so called law is obviously and intuitively wrong. It fails to acknowledge limits on the number of inbound and outbound connections a member in a group-forming network can manage. The actual maximum-value structure is much sparser than Reed's guesstimate would suggest.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/metcalfes-law-is-wrong


Although you won't admit it you are essentially trying to prove the second law of thermodynamics is wrong. You have no chance of success.  If you insist on trying you need to make the argument using the math of thermodynamics not business school guesswork.

You were correct before when you agreed with me that some top down constraints are needed to ensure convergence. You should return to your prior and correct insight.

It is clear you do not have the time currently to do this topic justice. I am content to leave the matter in dispute. Let's return to it later when you can give it more attention.

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Physics & math proof internet unstoppable, uncontrollable
Date:    Mon, April 27, 2015 10:54 pm
To:      "Armstrong Economics" <[email protected]>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


It didn't take me 2 hours. Once my mind was fresh, it took me 5 minutes to figure out how to refute this.

I was going to come at this more abstractly explaining why matter is conserved so that the universe doesn't have an edge nor collapse to infinitesimal point and then explain that the only degree-of-freedom for a non-static (non-existent) universe is increasing entropy, but let's save that for the future essay where I can tear to shreds CoinCube's popularized notion of entropy as some baseline that order draws from. For the moment I'd rather make my point more comprehensible and concise.


Reed's law says the potential increases 2^N - N - 1 thus with exponential complexity[1]. Multifurcating networks and multiplexing routers means the energy cost to provide available connection between N nodes only increases with polynomial or subexponential complexity[1]. The virtual IP network is a fully connected mesh topology, but the physical network is hub-and-spoke a.k.a. hybrid star plus bus[2] (this is gained via efficiency).

Conservation of Energy thus makes your statement impossible. ▮Q.E.D.

That slam dunks also my point about the general definition of efficiency.


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_complexity_theory#Important_complexity_classes
     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_complexity#Sub-exponential_time

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_topology

---

P.S. this is why the internet has radically changed the economics of the universe and is ushering in the Knowledge Age. The powers-that-be can not shut off this entropic force. Impossible. Nature will route around them. Raise your fist Knowledge age people, we win. No chance we fail.

Indeed. Has your generation lost common sense?

Back in my day we sort of knew if you play with hand grenades, you will be maimed.

Your generation is so fucking entitled.

Who the fuck goes working in a danger zone without adequate security? An idiot.

How much more duh! can you be.

George Carlin joked that why do those people in Hawaii who build their houses next to active volcano wonder why they have lava in the living room. 

About responsability and judgement: in france, it seems they've chosen the path of considering the whole population as dumb as fuck.
i.e. they put people to announce the closing of the doors of each train's wagons that go to the suburbs (i think its a way to hire people from bad cities so they dont burn everything otherwise it makes NO sense, nobody is that dumb) ; in the train they make vocal announcement to tell you there are pickpockets (gypsies in reality, but they want want to discriminate) in the train and you have to CLOSE your bags ; and then on every media whenever somebody makes a nuance point he's immediately attacked as you were attacked by coinits and insulted of fascist (very annoying as they are the fascists) or racist or sexist. i think they do this because they dont think we can grasp nuance points.

whats worst is the more they keep doing this the more people get dumb

also, i wanted you to know that i used to think socialism was the way to go and the problem was just politicians, if only we could find a good one everything will be fine! now i realize its the government that is the problem. i dont think i would have ever understood that without learning about cryptocurrencies and reading your posts. how could i ? there is no other alternative that is looked at within our education system. the whole point of our education system is to JUSTIFY the present ideology.

this is also the reason i think why the only way for those that still live within the socialism paradigm is to crash and burn, though thats not even a sufficient guarantee for change. humanity crashed and burn made times during its history and every single time we made the same mistake. its like we are addicted to sucking the government tities like we sucked our mommy tities. we still are at a children stage : refusing to aknowledge our own responsability and judgement and decisions and mistakes.

thank you for showing the way

on the other hand, what do you think of buenos aires for moving short term?

PS: please keep posting your price predictions for bitcoin, you have an AMAZING track record

Monero (CryptoNote) planted by the NSA?

https://criticl.me/post/what-nsa-created-cryptonote-2292

This essay has illuminated one of the greatest flaws of altcoins — they don't share the same network thus they don't have the security-of-scale to resist 50% attacks.

Those who have paid attention know I have already wrote about what I think the solution is. It is a paradigm shift. And it will help Monero and all the altcoins.

I also don't fully trust the cryptography in CN's ring sigs, especially when combined with the theoretical combinatorial attack I presented to the Monero devs. I think we could improve on that. But it doesn't necessarily mean I wouldn't use CN as is, if nothing better was available.

That was true in the Industrial Age where stored monetary capital was paramount because production require large fixed capital investments and the mental assets were very insignificant portion of the costs of production.

The Knowledge Age changes this entirely. Click the link the quote post below.

You entirely ignored the entire point of my essays in the opening post of this thread.

I am getting tired of repeating this same damn concept over and over. Why can't commentators read the thread before commenting?