Topic: Gavin is an Agent (Read 9713 times)

Why does the timing of the halving have an implication over the timing of the forking? The two aren't really related are they?

Maybe Gavin is Neo and all the articles are the fog of the matrix...

It took time for me to realize that this is as true as can be. I really feel sorry for those who put in all the hours for bitcoin for little or no income (not including Gavin et. al here).

Good luck! Those people are Bitcoin.

This is what happens when you have something a bunch of conspiracy theorists and nutjobs jump on to. I love bitcoin but could do without these people.

"sausage running mate" is the phrase that activates my assassination mode! Must find Ben Bernanke.  Must find Ben!!
Whoa, snap out of it! Gavin has taken control of my mind. And I just found MY RECEIVING ADDRESS in Gavin's blockchain. MY ADDRESS!!!! Who does he think he is?

Both cases are examples of social control, but in the case courts the control
has become more complex and formalized procedure whereas in the case of
tribesmen it is more like an family affair. I would say that both instances originally
serve to protect the sacredness of ownership (see, I'm deliberately avoiding the
word "property") but as society becomes more complex, there may arise the illusion
that government, instead of being in charge of maintaining self-evident rights is
in fact the creator of them. And then it follows, as you point out, "property" is totally
arbitary and subject to whims of the powers that be.

I find such a situation to be a distressing and hope that we might be able to
take out human rights out of the domain of violence and instead uphold them by
voluntary associations that are governed by algorithmic consensus. So here I grant you
another semantic concession and merely propose that the government that is responsible
of upholding property rights be replaced by peer-to-peer networks or similar.

Regarding the crowdfunding example, after inspecting the code I realize that it
is not a very satisfactory example, as it still requires external non-algorithmic input to
resolve whether the terms of the contract have been fulfilled. But a progress is still
being made towards the goal of realizing autonomous smart contracts.
 

What difference do you see between the Sámi tribesmen enforcing his property rights, or the Finnish courts?  Just because the Finnish "tribesmen" pay someone to do that task for them?

In both cases, property rights exist because there is a third party that decides who (by their rules) is the proprietor, and has the power to ensure that he gets possession of the thing, by taking it away from anyone who has possession of it but (in their view) is not the proprietor.


Yes, I do claim that "property" requires an authority that can enforce it. 

Erm, I don't see how that works, sorry.  The recipient is supposed to spend that money while creating the something.  At the end of the allotted period he has spent it all, but there is no something, or it is only half finished, or it does not work.  What then?

Unless you mean a crowdfunded sale of something that already exists and is ready?  Even so, who is going to decide whether the something was delivered and meets the terms of the contract?

how the heck you got another copy? decipher it, it might contain s0me secret message from Gavin the Agent

It's wurst than that! I'm your sausage-running, mate.

Oh crap, it's worse than I thought. I ALSO HAVE A COPY ON MY COMPUTER!!!! WTF???
I must be some kind of "Manchurian candidate".

shit, i felt terrible, Gavin is an agent!

Where I live there are still nomadic people (the Sámi) and yes they do have personal things
like clothes and tools and flocks of reindeer as they have had for
thousand years. The major thing that distinguishes them is their
wandering pastoral lifestyle instead of agricultural-based one, that ties one to
the soil.

If the tribesmen come to the defense of someone who has been robbed
of his belongings, that does not mean some kind of primitive police
or government but simply the collective acknowledgement of intrinsic
right to primitive property.

My view is simply that notion of property predates legal formulations
upheld by government, whereas  you appeared to claim that it is created by them
and would not exist without them. And it follows from my premise that there are other
means to secure them than govermental or even social control.



Crowdfunding is an example that comes to mind - you transfer an amount
of value to a recipient, and the contract stipulates that if you don't get something
by some date, you'll get your amount back just as everyone else who contributed.
Such a contract is easily implemented algorithmically with just a few lines of code,
and everyone can instantly see that it works.

So which one are we likely to trust - impartial mathematics or some guy with a rubber stamp?

That simply transfers trust in the ability of the little low paid government functionaries that currently report to trust in the toolmakers. I suppose it's better because multiple people could review the proper operation of the tool. Then again, there are already private individuals/whistleblowers that review the government budgets. I see it as a wash.

Note that in Bitcoin-land there are a multitude of tools made publically available by people who had a modicum of skill.  They allow all manners of pretty general graphics, and simple queries for users which produce legible processed results.

I see no reason why a shit-load of such things would not be created to analyze [corp/]gov monetary flows if the data were as available as it is in the blockchain based Bitcoin system.

That sounds nice in theory but I doubt the average current Bitcoin user (more tech savvy than most) could effectively parse the blockchain to find their own transactions. Tracking the distribution of funds from central receiving to final expenditure would be a nightmarish task for Joe Blow. 

OMG, I just realized how serious this is. Did you guys know that Agent Gavin has a copy OF EVERY SINGLE BITCOIN Tx you have ever made! 

If it were available on a public ledger in real-time, it is likely that many people would find it practical to get this (theoretically) available information and reduce and publish it.  Bitcoin has demonstrated this.

It just dawned on me now that it actually would be pretty nice if people had to publicly register their own data if they wished to receive payments from the government so tax-payers could analyse the 'first hop' out of government control in tracking how our funds are being spent.

Neither privacy nor property are "natural".  Have a look at any of the hunter-gatherer people who still exist out there.  Nothing is more alien to their culture than "privacy", not even of thir bodies.  If they are nomadic, their material possessions are so scant that "property rights", even if they are present, play an insignificant role in their economy, and are restricted to the objects that they use and cannot be used by others at the same time.  Most of those objects need to be remade periodically.  The more settled tribes may have single family huts (without fences, walls, or locks), but many have instead big multi-family homes, and communal buildings where people spend most of their time indoors.

Most importantly, their "property rights" are not really rights, to the extent that there is no third party to enforce them.  Suppose that a bully takes the bracelet or bow from a weaker tribesman, "because I am strong and you are a wimp".  The victim will be unhappy, but so what?  If the rest of the tribe forces the bully to return the object, there you have governmet and laws, even if unformalized and unwritten.  If the others don't care, what would be the point of saying that the victim has "property rights" over the object?



Those tribes are proof that one thing does not lead to the other.


Bitcoin transfers "possession", not "property". 


I would really like to see a smart contract work without backing of police, laws, and courts.  (Note that contracts are like fire extinguishers: they are useful only when things fail to happen the way they were supposed to happen.)

Murricans should be able to see every dollar the government spends right now without using Bitcoin (except the CIA because their budget is classified). 

Hopefully you will get your wish.  I'm looking forward to a USG Federal level sidechain so I can use it to pay my taxes and so on.  Sidechains are a nearly perfect proxy for actual BTC, so it is completely accurate to say that using a sidechain is the same as using Bitcoin.

Also looking forward to a state-level on, county level one, and community level one.  I need to pay the state and the country independent taxes and am happy to do so as they both provide services that I appreciate and the citizens benefit from.

There would be, of course, very few legitimate reasons for these sidechains to not be quite transparent.  I've actually never complained a lot about taxes in the first place, but would be an even more satisfied tax-payer if I could see how the money I cough up is being used.