Topic: Economic Totalitarianism - page 82. (Read 345738 times)

Awesome! Let's see how could the 1/10 rule of the Bank's fiat work now; now I'm thinking of it, this might actually render the Banking System obsolete (at least for a while)! Let's call Draghi to make another stress test, this time at the Swiss Banks! Hilarious!

It's coming fast gentlemen.

$1000 dollar currency notes ($1 = 0.98 franc):

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/35977

Many people will approve. I actually didn't like that my mother and step father smoked in the car.

Yet I see the creeping attack on our individual freedoms, using children as a weapon against the parents.

Perhaps this will increase the demand for convertible top cars.

I really need to discipline myself to go quiet. If y'all don't hear from me, it just means I am being productive. Also I'd prefer to see the community doing more talking. I've dominated the discussion too much lately and that is embarrassing for me (was necessary to reach my goal of getting my ideas for innovations moving forward with sufficient economy-of-scale ... apologies).

I am posting this in multiple threads where it is relevant because I think I achieved a good summary of the overview of what I think is the future.

Note I observe a correction that the USA won't breakup in our lifetimes. The computer model projection is for a breakup within 83 years from now. Instead we will enter a morass of a declining West. There will be a mixed bag of struggles, and society will chaotic as the dying Industrial Age is at odds with the fledgling individually autonomous Knowledge Age:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/smoking-in-vehicles

You're one of the very few in here who can sense my taste of humor. I'm having a beer too. Here's to your idea's success then!

That goes for you too Vokain!
Cheers!

Critical code paths need to be highly scrutinized on any change. After the code is stabilized, the community should be alerted when a change is made to the so identified "critical paths".

Checksums need to be enforced with a block chain to create a Web of Trust.

Being open source, you can't kill it. You can Whack-A-Mole one protocol but another protocol pops up instantly. When the economy becomes valuable then hackers will be there to keep it running. Protocol tweaks can be made independent of critical paths.

There are many defenses, but the question is do we as a community pool the resources to get 'er done. That has been my point all along as to why I was dissatisfied. We are not moving fast enough with our immense resources as a community.

The sooner it is not hinged on one person, the better. Looks like in private it is becoming dehinged from me as we speak which a major development. I suppose it was necessary for me to speak recently. But I hope y'all understand I like to go back to being just the many names of AnonyMint.

Note even compromised compilers can be defended against:

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/01/countering_trus.html

In terms of return on investment for the community, the key to scaling beyond bitcointalk, crypto, and dark markets is to enable new popular markets that can't be serviced by Bitcoin nor credit cards nor existing altcoins.


Lol can I at least finish my beer first.

Magick

I try to be cognizant of my ignorance as much as possible

Many of us have convinced everybody we're geniuses. I assure you; this is a trick. We're just egotistical fools but we're very good at manipulating people. That's all.

Posted it again for reference, bolded it and red it out. I don't want to be misunderstood; I *FULLY* agree. The real question remains though; what happens when they (TPTB) notice? What's the countermeasures such an initiative should introduce to maintain its integrity; and most importantly, how could one rule out a (future) "chief software engineer" retaliate and alter a piece of code making a fork and dreadout the project together with the whole community?

PS: Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental (or not).

...

generalizethis and TPTB

Excellent observation and comments re designer drugs and knowledge.

*   *   *

Now might be the time for me to observe that I cannot find this kind of thinking at any other forum I belong to (Zero Hedge and PMBug).  High caliber thinking about world financial topics on a Bitcoin website.  Bitcoin must have a "High IQ" set of users and fan base...

That is the end-to-end principle of Knowledge Age networking. Your example in spades.

They need the tools to communicate and trade, i.e. anonymous internet and anonymous money. They need both. Economies-of-scale in knowledge don't work if you can only exchange with your physical neighbors.

In the designer drug game (continuing metaphor), even if the state could outlaw drugs as quickly as a drug was presented to them, you could release 3d printer plans for new drugs as soon as the drug was outlawed and even have chemists (at home and of their own volition) modifying the drugs as they get the plans. The whole thing should and could be made effectively automated+autonomous+rigorously-modified and resistant to day-late-dollar-short countermeasures.

Once you put unbreakable crypto technologies out in open source, TPTB can possibly filter one protocol but a 1000 others will sprout, because where there is a demand supply will go. (And with steganography and perhaps alternative wireless networks, they may not be able to filter)

The smart fork would enable spending the coins from the destroyed protocol into the new protocol, so it is a continuation of the preexisting value and distribution. TPTB can then play Whack-A-Mole.



The more the government stomps on commerce, the more demand for those technologies.

I don't think they can break the core math quickly. And we'll always be driving ahead towards stronger math. Our community hasn't been organized. We haven't been funding mathematicians.

My goal was to get the snowball rolling downhill. I sense the past tense is accurate now.

Edit: TPTB rely on something not being too popular or co-opting the popular movements. How can they convince the people they are stomping on to prefer their walled gardens and jails? The count on being able to divide-and-conquer or pick off a few from the herd at a time, so the rest of the herd doesn't react. But if you do decentralization very well, then any individual can effect his own choice. One problem with Bitcoin from my view, has been we rely so heavily on network miners being not co-opted and thus the battle over BitcoinXT (aka GavinCoin).

If you look at designer drugs, you will see the blueprint. Every time the government has one controlled, the labs (always a few moves ahead) just release the next one. One coin to rule them all is about a good a plan as one drug to rule them all. Let the mother fucker burn--survival doesn't belong to the strongest (network), the fastest (confirmation-time) or the smartest (contracts), it belongs to the most adaptable.

IMHO, TPTB will always have the excuse to get their hands into the "next gen" tech of currency. Anonymity, decentralization etc can be achieved when -atleast- one of the cryptocurrencies you can buy/sell with the rest has those characteristics. -IF it's a free market, and that's a great IF- the people will always come around problems in order to get their job done. What will they have to face, in order to achieve it, is a whole different story...

So, in any case, those ideas are not dead; and frankly they won't be dead when at least one person has the ability and will to do otherwise. It has happened before many times throughout history. I think, there's no reason at all for not happening again in cryptoworld.

Popular game currencies have threatened the State enough that overtly totalitarian States had to outlaw them:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2009/06/china-outlaws-use-of-virtual-currency-for-real-world-items/

And insidiously totalitarian States in the West have effectively outlawed them by forcing anyone who exchanges fiat for them to be registered money services businesses under the AML clauses in the asinine oxymoronically named Patriot Act.

So yes I agree virtual game currencies have shown promise but so far they lacked resiliency against the State (anonymity, decentralized exchanges, decentralized consensus that can't become centralized, decentralized scaling, etc).

ATM CryptoKingdom gold may make more sense than actual gold. VR worlds are on the rise as the physical world can't hide its costs in blood, sweat and tears. Some woman dangles a diamond in front of me and all I see is a CIA propped warlord, death squads and Nicholas Cage asking, "How do we arm the other 11?"

Follow up:

Trickle ICO meaning sell coins on an open exchange only when you have some development you need to fund and then document where the raised funds were spent to. This thread is supposed to be about solutions, so I guess this is not too far off topic. Also when developers know there is this large body of capital ready to fund, they should hopefully be knocking on the door, especially with the global economic collapse (renewed from and worse than 2008) just around the corner.

There is an issue of follow through. Ways to deal with that are pay-for-performance, not funding repeat offenders, and prefer funding experts in their demonstrated fields.

In that way investors know their funds are not being spent on hardware and electricity and they also know there is a transparent process and the controlling group isn't hoarding coins. Hoarding is anti-distribution which is anti-currency. Power law distribution of wealth means some investors will try to accumulate. Coins need sufficiently wide distribution to drive its use as a currency while also protecting the store-of-value (and appreciation of value as adoption increases). Realize that the top altcoins have market caps roughly less than $100 million. I doubt Ethereum will hold its market cap, thus really most altcoins (Litecoin and Ripple excepted) are less than $20 million market cap. And there is a $40 trillion global economy out there. The market is wide open for growth. Apparently the ways it has been done isn't working well. In private, I have referred to a "fair launch" as sort of a circle jerk. It sounds nice but using that as a marketing crutch does not grow the coin's market cap to $1 billion and beyond. Of course, the coin should try to show it was fairly launched, but that can't be its main claim to fame. All the endless tit-for-tat verbiage between coin fanboys is useless noise. Instead I posit a coin needs to open new markets and to do that it could fund developments to kickstart its ecosystem imparting sufficient economy-of-scale (remember currency needs widespread adoption before it can get over the hump between useless and utility needed to gain momentum).

OTOH, this would make the coin somewhat centralized during the extended period in which that resource has to be managed (this was the reason I originally rejected trickle ICO but now I've returned to it). And management of a large resources can lead to politics and even attempts to capture the resource. So the tradeoff is moving the trickle ICO along fast enough. It is difficult to find qualified, trustable people to fund and also difficult to find trustworthy people to form a controlling group that won't do evil.

The goal for a coin launched this way would be to get the trickle ICO completed and get the funds dispersed into needed developments asap, and then have the coin running decentralized on auto-pilot. The best intentions ('plans') of mice and men.  

P.S. It is also difficult to find team members who will ignore trolls and not create wars in Bitcointalk, but that is a separate issue to address. I've been guilty of that myself (yet you will notice I rarely go on and on and on endlessly with a troll so at least I contained myself that way .... e.g. I made peace with Cypherdoc and left his thread ... this is because I want results and I notice when I am wasting my time and stop).

P.S.S. The four letter domain name (not fuck.cum nor shit.con, lol) was not lost.  

I hope this is the last public discussion of my work from me. Again I am available for private messages (at least for now).

---

Edit: We as a community are fighting for a mutual goal against a very well funded TPTB who control mass media and thus have annointed Bitcoin because they know they can control Bitcoin via its centralized mining and lack of anonymity. I posit we are wasting our resources by throwing our money into hardware and electricity when we could be using our resources to fund the developments for economies-of-scale needed to overcome.

Btw, I am not referring to the consensus algorithm above but rather launch distribution and network security is a related factor but I have an innovation on that. I reiterated my thoughts about proof-of-stake recently here:

Proof-of-Work vs. Proof-of-Stake