Topic: Freedom (Read 1478 times)
Different protocol = different coin.
You may just be right.. After a bit more research, it shows that I completely missed digital signing, public keys, message digests, basically everything else which is essential to cryptography hashing.
I hate to admit defeat, but at least I've learned more about bitcoin and friends. Will continue reading as encryption and cryptography is highly fascinating, politics aside.
Well... Keep thinking outside the box and you might just come up with something eventually. We can only do what we believe we can do
Different protocol = different coin.
You may just be right.. After a bit more research, it shows that I completely missed digital signing, public keys, message digests, basically everything else which is essential to cryptography hashing.
I hate to admit defeat, but at least I've learned more about bitcoin and friends. Will continue reading as encryption and cryptography is highly fascinating, politics aside.
Crypto-protocols that aren't merged mining compatible cannot be merge mined
This is true, however would it not be possible to detect the requested work by the mining software and serve the protocol requested? The coin type is simply a name, but as an afterthought I suppose multiple blockchains would also be needed. Could you merge the blockchains as well?
So far you have no way of controlling the value of "Crypto" and no adoption strategy that has a chance
Putting a gun to everyone's head is definitely off the table; my proposal was to offer the premined crypto to retailers first. My thinking is that retailers and consumers are fearful of the fluctuating price of Bitcoin, too much risk with no benefit to purchasing goods. Retailers could then hold crypto to the same value as the dollar, and consumers would be more apt to own crypto.
Please, read the bullet points. I want to have some solid challenges to overcome; not simply be insulted by a glancing dismissal.
Thank you.
Different protocol = different coin. There's no way you wouldn't end up with a lot of different coins which would have a value equal to how hard they are to mine(if anyone would adopt them - I don't see why anyone would, since you'd basically end up being the banker you're trying to avoid).
Unless you want to put down an equal amount of the value of what it takes to keep the US$ stable there's no way... And that way you'd end up with a fiat that also needs government regulation.
You're basically creating a "crypto without the benefits of crypto"
If you want anything to be stable in price you have to pay for it... A lot to avoid speculation.
http://pages.ucsd.edu/~jlbroz/Courses/PS245/handouts/fixed_rates_macro_policy.pdf
Crypto-protocols that aren't merged mining compatible cannot be merge mined
This is true, however would it not be possible to detect the requested work by the mining software and serve the protocol requested? The coin type is simply a name, but as an afterthought I suppose multiple blockchains would also be needed. Could you merge the blockchains as well?
So far you have no way of controlling the value of "Crypto" and no adoption strategy that has a chance
Putting a gun to everyone's head is definitely off the table; my proposal was to offer the premined crypto to retailers first. My thinking is that retailers and consumers are fearful of the fluctuating price of Bitcoin, too much risk with no benefit to purchasing goods. Retailers could then hold crypto to the same value as the dollar, and consumers would be more apt to own crypto.
Please, read the bullet points. I want to have some solid challenges to overcome; not simply be insulted by a glancing dismissal.
Thank you.
Anders, did you even read anything past "just one"? Clearly not since you keep talking about communism like it belongs in this thread. Besides, wouldn't paying an ASIC miner more than a CPU miner (which has already been explained twice) be the exact opposite of how communism works?
Keep your narrow-minded trolling to yourself less you have something constructive to add; like giving me a reason why merging the available hash algorithms to output a single coin is impossible. Else, go back to making your shit apple wallet for your shit ios.
Keep your narrow-minded trolling to yourself less you have something constructive to add; like giving me a reason why merging the available hash algorithms to output a single coin is impossible. Else, go back to making your shit apple wallet for your shit ios.
Lol! I am trolling? I'll ignore your insults for now.
You are correct - paying miners unequally wouldn't be considered communism. The rest isn't far from it though.
Crypto-protocols that aren't merged mining compatible cannot be merge mined.. Simple as that. Look it up.
If some people pay 2$ in electricity costs to mine 1$ and others 10 cents it wouldn't make sense. You need a single protocol. The factoring would quickly turn out of whack too - as we've seen with ASICS the market quickly adapts.
So far you have no way of controlling the value of "Crypto" and no adoption strategy that has a chance - except maybe putting a gun to everyone's head... In that case I believe people prefer bankers, governments and maybe the more obvious choice: Bitcoin and a real free market where the price of things reflect the value of a product and the value of the currency.
Clearly my voice is being carried over deaf ears because the only thing you people keep talking about is communism and getting rid of alt coins.
Nowhere did I say any of these things; what I'm talking about is a coin with support for multiple hash algorithms. Take the time to read what is being said instead of jumping to conclusions based on the first two words of a sentence.
Nowhere did I say any of these things; what I'm talking about is a coin with support for multiple hash algorithms. Take the time to read what is being said instead of jumping to conclusions based on the first two words of a sentence.
Not cancel fiat, but have Crypto merge into the market as it's equal.
There would only be one, just Crypto.
Mining as it is now, gives users the choice of hash algorithm; SHA256, scrypt, nFactor. But they are all coded to output different coins. My thinking is to allow different algorithms mining out a single coin.
So, if you only have a few CPU miners available; choose nFactor; if you have a nice setup of GPUs, scrypt; and for current ASICs there is SHA256. There would be a central mining pool, with branch pools of the different algorithms. The central pool would pick up on your requested work type, and serve you with that work load. If you're mining SHA236, you would be paid more than the scrypt miners, and so on.
and how would we decide which crypto to use? 
There would only be one, just Crypto.
Mining as it is now, gives users the choice of hash algorithm; SHA256, scrypt, nFactor. But they are all coded to output different coins. My thinking is to allow different algorithms mining out a single coin.
So, if you only have a few CPU miners available; choose nFactor; if you have a nice setup of GPUs, scrypt; and for current ASICs there is SHA256. There would be a central mining pool, with branch pools of the different algorithms. The central pool would pick up on your requested work type, and serve you with that work load. If you're mining SHA236, you would be paid more than the scrypt miners, and so on.
lol! And how would you force people to use only what you tell them? OMG communists are hilarious...
exactly what I thought, what would happen to different coins, people use them from all over the worlds, you can't force every country to forbid alt coins
there is no possible way in which only one crypto could exist.
Anders, did you even read anything past "just one"? Clearly not since you keep talking about communism like it belongs in this thread. Besides, wouldn't paying an ASIC miner more than a CPU miner (which has already been explained twice) be the exact opposite of how communism works?
Keep your narrow-minded trolling to yourself less you have something constructive to add; like giving me a reason why merging the available hash algorithms to output a single coin is impossible. Else, go back to making your shit apple wallet for your shit ios.
Keep your narrow-minded trolling to yourself less you have something constructive to add; like giving me a reason why merging the available hash algorithms to output a single coin is impossible. Else, go back to making your shit apple wallet for your shit ios.
Not cancel fiat, but have Crypto merge into the market as it's equal.
There would only be one, just Crypto.
Mining as it is now, gives users the choice of hash algorithm; SHA256, scrypt, nFactor. But they are all coded to output different coins. My thinking is to allow different algorithms mining out a single coin.
So, if you only have a few CPU miners available; choose nFactor; if you have a nice setup of GPUs, scrypt; and for current ASICs there is SHA256. There would be a central mining pool, with branch pools of the different algorithms. The central pool would pick up on your requested work type, and serve you with that work load. If you're mining SHA236, you would be paid more than the scrypt miners, and so on.
and how would we decide which crypto to use?
There would only be one, just Crypto.
Mining as it is now, gives users the choice of hash algorithm; SHA256, scrypt, nFactor. But they are all coded to output different coins. My thinking is to allow different algorithms mining out a single coin.
So, if you only have a few CPU miners available; choose nFactor; if you have a nice setup of GPUs, scrypt; and for current ASICs there is SHA256. There would be a central mining pool, with branch pools of the different algorithms. The central pool would pick up on your requested work type, and serve you with that work load. If you're mining SHA236, you would be paid more than the scrypt miners, and so on.
lol! And how would you force people to use only what you tell them? OMG communists are hilarious...
Not cancel fiat, but have Crypto merge into the market as it's equal.
There would only be one, just Crypto.
Mining as it is now, gives users the choice of hash algorithm; SHA256, scrypt, nFactor. But they are all coded to output different coins. My thinking is to allow different algorithms mining out a single coin.
So, if you only have a few CPU miners available; choose nFactor; if you have a nice setup of GPUs, scrypt; and for current ASICs there is SHA256. There would be a central mining pool, with branch pools of the different algorithms. The central pool would pick up on your requested work type, and serve you with that work load. If you're mining SHA236, you would be paid more than the scrypt miners, and so on.
and how would we decide which crypto to use?
There would only be one, just Crypto.
Mining as it is now, gives users the choice of hash algorithm; SHA256, scrypt, nFactor. But they are all coded to output different coins. My thinking is to allow different algorithms mining out a single coin.
So, if you only have a few CPU miners available; choose nFactor; if you have a nice setup of GPUs, scrypt; and for current ASICs there is SHA256. There would be a central mining pool, with branch pools of the different algorithms. The central pool would pick up on your requested work type, and serve you with that work load. If you're mining SHA236, you would be paid more than the scrypt miners, and so on.
I agree with everything, especially the banks part, and if I understand correctly you would cancel FIAT and use only crypto?
it's okay but let me make one change
we are the people!
and how would we decide which crypto to use?
it's okay but let me make one change
Quote
I am the people.
we are the people!
and how would we decide which crypto to use?
If I understand you all correctly; a good idea means nothing without support from the community, and what the community wants right now is just a bunch of easy cash. I know that it will be increasingly difficult to gain acceptance simply because the norm has already been established.
I really do still want to manifest these ideas, regardless of the opposition received. Maybe it would be best to take a step back and collect the ideas in a more organized fashion to make my point more clear, or perhaps my voice is being carried over the wrong crowd.
I want to thank Mike Christ for providing some constructive advice; I have been reading on different types of economics now and will continue to learn myself. Indeed, the economics have not been considered; my focus was mainly providing a facilitated means for wider inheritance of Crypto by retailers and consumers alike.
I really do still want to manifest these ideas, regardless of the opposition received. Maybe it would be best to take a step back and collect the ideas in a more organized fashion to make my point more clear, or perhaps my voice is being carried over the wrong crowd.
I want to thank Mike Christ for providing some constructive advice; I have been reading on different types of economics now and will continue to learn myself. Indeed, the economics have not been considered; my focus was mainly providing a facilitated means for wider inheritance of Crypto by retailers and consumers alike.
Freedom is the right and capacity of people to determine their own actions, in a community which is able to provide for the full development of human potentiality. Freedom may be enjoyed by individuals but only in and through the community.
Only in community [has each] individual the means of cultivating his gifts in all directions; only in the community, therefore, is personal freedom possible. In the previous substitutes for the community, in the State, etc. personal freedom has existed only for the individuals who developed within the relationships of the ruling class, and only insofar as they were individuals of this class.
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels
Only in community [has each] individual the means of cultivating his gifts in all directions; only in the community, therefore, is personal freedom possible. In the previous substitutes for the community, in the State, etc. personal freedom has existed only for the individuals who developed within the relationships of the ruling class, and only insofar as they were individuals of this class.
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels
And the err in that is - we are individuals and not a community by default.
Freedom is the right and capacity of people to determine their own actions, in a community which is able to provide for the full development of human potentiality. Freedom may be enjoyed by individuals but only in and through the community.
Only in community [has each] individual the means of cultivating his gifts in all directions; only in the community, therefore, is personal freedom possible. In the previous substitutes for the community, in the State, etc. personal freedom has existed only for the individuals who developed within the relationships of the ruling class, and only insofar as they were individuals of this class.
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels
Only in community [has each] individual the means of cultivating his gifts in all directions; only in the community, therefore, is personal freedom possible. In the previous substitutes for the community, in the State, etc. personal freedom has existed only for the individuals who developed within the relationships of the ruling class, and only insofar as they were individuals of this class.
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels
OP, I recommend taking a look at Austrian economics; it'll help balance the pro-Keynesian economics you learned in school, which I presume you're primarily operating from as you're not equipped with the knowledge necessary to see why this idea is not optimal in the context of "freedom".
I also recommend this video to help you understand why you do not want a currency tied to the worth of any fiat, and especially not the dollar.
I also recommend this video to help you understand why you do not want a currency tied to the worth of any fiat, and especially not the dollar.
I'm thinking starting with a rant wasn't the best idea, now I'm getting the jist that people are ignoring the proposed ideas; I'll strike the rant to point focus towards proposal.
You're basically saying you want to control how much things are worth
Quite the contrary, I'm saying that people shouldn't worry about the deflation value of the currency they buy things with on a day-to-day basis.If you want something to cost the same today and tomorrow you'll have to pay for it and the only way that can happen is with a bank or government guarantee.
In point three; distributing crypto through retailers will cause the value of crypto to mimic the value of a dollar. What about the billions of people that have no bitcoins?
I'm sure people just don't know where to start with Bitcoin. The solution proposed was to facilitate access by distributing Crypto through retailers.What about the people that don't even have a computer?
This is where the 1:1 value is important, since crypto and fiat are valued equally there is a fair choice in payment; cash, debit or crypto?And here's the kicker, the same bankers we despise of now can very easily buy massive amounts of bitcoins and remain at top. What would be different?
The difference is that Crypto wouldn't be backed by oil, you can't buy tanks with Crypto, and the banks don't have the computing power to keep printing more.How are you free if you constantly have to work for the will of others to make your way? People should be doing what they believe in, not what others believe in.
Bitcoin was a great project, it did what it needed to do but it's time for us to realize that we will continuously see greed exploited for capital gain if we base our society around money.
What about the billions of people that have no bitcoins? What about the people that don't even have a computer? Bitcoin does not fix the disparity of wealth, all it does is change wealth into new hands.
And here's the kicker, the same bankers we despise of now can very easily buy massive amounts of bitcoins and remain at top. What would be different?
Bitcoin was a great project, it did what it needed to do but it's time for us to realize that we will continuously see greed exploited for capital gain if we base our society around money.
What about the billions of people that have no bitcoins? What about the people that don't even have a computer? Bitcoin does not fix the disparity of wealth, all it does is change wealth into new hands.
And here's the kicker, the same bankers we despise of now can very easily buy massive amounts of bitcoins and remain at top. What would be different?
The reason I find Star Trek unrealistic has nothing to do with the space ships, the aliens or the occasional time travel... It's the fact that the guy who scrubs the toilets on the Enterprise appearantly doesn't get paid and does it for "self-enhancement". Communists always expect someone else to do the toilet scrubbing - and they always fail to mention that the ones doing the toilet scrubbing will usually be the ones who still don't believe in the "master plan" of communism.
As long as we have freedom there will be a market. If there is no market, there is no freedom.
How are you free if you constantly have to work for the will of others to make your way? People should be doing what they believe in, not what others believe in.
Bitcoin was a great project, it did what it needed to do but it's time for us to realize that we will continuously see greed exploited for capital gain if we base our society around money.
What about the billions of people that have no bitcoins? What about the people that don't even have a computer? Bitcoin does not fix the disparity of wealth, all it does is change wealth into new hands.
And here's the kicker, the same bankers we despise of now can very easily buy massive amounts of bitcoins and remain at top. What would be different?
Bitcoin was a great project, it did what it needed to do but it's time for us to realize that we will continuously see greed exploited for capital gain if we base our society around money.
What about the billions of people that have no bitcoins? What about the people that don't even have a computer? Bitcoin does not fix the disparity of wealth, all it does is change wealth into new hands.
And here's the kicker, the same bankers we despise of now can very easily buy massive amounts of bitcoins and remain at top. What would be different?
Jump to: