Or is it still imaginary?
Topic: IOTA - Permissioned ledger Russian extortion scheme - page 19. (Read 20175 times)
Has Come-from-Beyond actually released IOTA yet?
Or is it still imaginary?
Or is it still imaginary?
Nobody understands every interlocking element about crypto, whether it's the obscure differences in elliptic curves, economic theories, the legal system, whatever. One thing that's generally agreed upon by the people who spend a lot of time deciphering these elements is, they can all be categorized into one of two systems: permissioned ledger and permissionless. The fallacy of many of these crypto analysts is, they assign these two distinctions solely at a protocol level, if it's possible or not to interact with the system at all. In the case of IOTA, the economic variables alone can cause the same permissioned ledger distinction to take effect.
Yes, it is true, I can technically "interact" with IOTA on a "permissionless" level, but that interaction has no purpose unless you're first able to acquire the native token of the protocol. It doesn't really matter if you can interact with it in some meaningless way if you're not spending native coins. Since it's a currency and not a theoretical object on a drawing board, the interaction is required to be economically motivated in order for the permissionless attribute to apply. In this case, it is not a permissionless system because I cannot acquire native tokens in a permissionless manner...just like proof of stake.
Where do the native coins come from? Issued with the wave of a hand, for profit, just like central bankers do to enrich the issuer of course!
Many will likely not want to accept this conclusion, but I believe this is a shockingly obvious flaw of unprofitable PoW, to be relegated into the same permissioned ledger status as proof of stake. Because you're not circulating native coins in a permissionless manner, the external entropy to attempt to secure the underlying protocol, completely abstracted from coin creation and distribution layer, is kind of meaningless to begin with.
This is in addition to all the other issues of IOTA, such as limits of practical application concerning CAP Theorem, how the chain could find convergence without centralization or actually be secure at all without a huge tipping point of adoption, unprofitable PoW being easier to attack, the likelihood checkpoints would be required forever, etc.
TLDR version:
The permanent peg is absent in IOTA. It's not a decentralized currency or permissionless system.
But on another note, why is the word "extortion" in the title?:
Point two:
You have to give credit where credit is due, Russia is the leader in creating the two biggest, for personal profit schemes in cryptoland so far.
Yes, it is true, I can technically "interact" with IOTA on a "permissionless" level, but that interaction has no purpose unless you're first able to acquire the native token of the protocol. It doesn't really matter if you can interact with it in some meaningless way if you're not spending native coins. Since it's a currency and not a theoretical object on a drawing board, the interaction is required to be economically motivated in order for the permissionless attribute to apply. In this case, it is not a permissionless system because I cannot acquire native tokens in a permissionless manner...just like proof of stake.
Where do the native coins come from? Issued with the wave of a hand, for profit, just like central bankers do to enrich the issuer of course!
Many will likely not want to accept this conclusion, but I believe this is a shockingly obvious flaw of unprofitable PoW, to be relegated into the same permissioned ledger status as proof of stake. Because you're not circulating native coins in a permissionless manner, the external entropy to attempt to secure the underlying protocol, completely abstracted from coin creation and distribution layer, is kind of meaningless to begin with.
This is in addition to all the other issues of IOTA, such as limits of practical application concerning CAP Theorem, how the chain could find convergence without centralization or actually be secure at all without a huge tipping point of adoption, unprofitable PoW being easier to attack, the likelihood checkpoints would be required forever, etc.
TLDR version:
The purpose of mining (in bitcoin) is to create a permanent decentralized exchange peg, which thus results in a permissionless system.
The permanent peg is absent in IOTA. It's not a decentralized currency or permissionless system.
But on another note, why is the word "extortion" in the title?:
Please tell me, who throughout history has issued currency for profit besides central bankers? No wonder Come from Beyond wants to remain anonymous, because he wants to profit by impersonating a central banker and the legal system will eventually annihilate people doing such things.
PoS is a closed loop, recursive, permissioned ledger. I can just corner the market on coins and if anyone requires them, I can now extort them because there is no entry point into the system besides the extortioners. IOTA shares a similar fate. With unprofitable mining and no block rewards, you just issue the coin supply yourself, effortlessly create a monopoly out of thin air, attempt to pump the price, and now if anyone requires IOTA for some particular reason, you now get to extort them. In this regard, IOTA is also a permissioned ledger because there's no entry point into the system besides the extortioners.
In PoW, the coins are constantly being recycled by transaction fees acting as mining reward, meaning there is always a permissionless entry point. There is no permanent rich get richer scheme with interest or cornered supply and extortion scheme from day one like IOTA.
PoS is a closed loop, recursive, permissioned ledger. I can just corner the market on coins and if anyone requires them, I can now extort them because there is no entry point into the system besides the extortioners. IOTA shares a similar fate. With unprofitable mining and no block rewards, you just issue the coin supply yourself, effortlessly create a monopoly out of thin air, attempt to pump the price, and now if anyone requires IOTA for some particular reason, you now get to extort them. In this regard, IOTA is also a permissioned ledger because there's no entry point into the system besides the extortioners.
In PoW, the coins are constantly being recycled by transaction fees acting as mining reward, meaning there is always a permissionless entry point. There is no permanent rich get richer scheme with interest or cornered supply and extortion scheme from day one like IOTA.
Point two:
If people wanted to be paid in IOTA, they will in some way have to go through the Come from Beyond Russian extortion scheme, directly or indirectly. He is impersonating a central banker after all and cornered the market on day one. There is no way around that fact. We might as well call him Czar from Beyond.
The value of currency is denominated entirely by network effect. If only one person owns it, the value is zero. If only two or two hundred people own it, the value is still only slightly above zero. Given the fact that for the value to increase, it requires millions of participants to willingly submit to an extortion scheme, the whole thing becomes a joke.
Whether it's a central banker power grab scheme or not probably hinges entirely on whether the coins are distributed by a single entity or the protocol itself.
The value of currency is denominated entirely by network effect. If only one person owns it, the value is zero. If only two or two hundred people own it, the value is still only slightly above zero. Given the fact that for the value to increase, it requires millions of participants to willingly submit to an extortion scheme, the whole thing becomes a joke.
Whether it's a central banker power grab scheme or not probably hinges entirely on whether the coins are distributed by a single entity or the protocol itself.
You have to give credit where credit is due, Russia is the leader in creating the two biggest, for personal profit schemes in cryptoland so far.
Jump to: