Topic: Making PoW usefull - page 2. (Read 6557 times)

(Red colorization mine.)


Tribe is hyperreal and begets possession. Possession is real and begets money. Money is hyperreal and begets state. State is real and begets hyperreality.

In order to simplify the discussion here to its basic generative essence and somewhat conclude the argument, it would be appropriate to say that everything is defined in terms of its opposite and the Spirit has no opposite, that's how it is different from that which has (note the paradox here). Which brings us to the concept of Trinity.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Shield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.svg

In the most basic form we have a subject, an object and a connecting conduit which is both their sameness and their difference at the same time.

So, what I'm really trying to say, is that even if you don't use Bitcoin, it still loves you unconditionally. Peace.

So, you're probably saying that I'm thinking too much and I should just relax and let go, which I do sometimes .

Hyper-reality is part of everything. It is a template of some sort. It's good that we disagree though, because fully agreeing would mean erasing differences between us and thus destroying value, which in turn wouldn't even allow us to have this conversation, the experience of which was very real and brought me a lot of Joy.

We can probably say, that "words" are the symbols of hyper-reality, while "meaning" is the real thing. Words are always defined with other words, yet it is the words that carry meaning. In that sense, "words" are the money of "meaning" reality. It is possible that the meaning is created as the difference and relations between the words, or maybe it is a thing of its own. These are the two parts of the same oscillating paradox, and neither part can have an ultimate edge on another. That's why we have debates, that's why we are alive.


Money as a reality of its own does indeed grow and expand, but it does so within itself, not as itself, thus it itself remains changeless. As a part of self-similar system, in doing so (growing and expanding within itself) it simply takes its cue from the overarching reality of existence, which happens to dance the same dance. Change is subject to existence, existence is not subject to change.


Thinking about it more thouroughly, it seems that even infinity wants to be independent of itself, as it comes in two flavors - countable and continuum. Everything comes in pairs, thus everything can have an experience of itself, thus everything is alive. Non-existence always has a choice to wake up as the Infinite, and it always does. It constantly evaporates into existence, that's how it itself doesn't exist, that's how symmetry is broken.

God is the Infinite, but infinity is not singular and thus can have an experience of itself, therefore God is alive and you are the proof. Hmm... Did I just prove that God exists? Oops, I did it again!. Where do I sign up for the Nobel Peace Prize?

My disagreement with your assertions would seem to stem from my disdain of hyperreality (i.e., symbols referencing other symbols) and my affinity for "the real" (i.e., the subject of hyper-reality [as opposed to its content]). Your post contains to much in the way of "hyperreality" for me to concede its points---even in instances where I might otherwise do so.



Here is the quote in my forum signature however. I found the paragraph fairly poignant and have been utilizing here fairly often. (As well, I am particularly fond of its more concrete language.)

Thank you for your reflections!

I identify existence with having an experience. Having experience needs "something" and "something else", because it is the difference that is perceived as an experience, which (as we've agreed) constitutes value by the way. Therefore only parts of the whole have an experience of each other and thus exist. Non-existence doesn't exist in the sense that it doesn't have an experience. So it actually doesn't even know that it doesn't exist and thus couldn't care less. The whole as "The One" doesn't know itself and thus represents non-existence, but it contains "All-That-Is" which knows itself simultaneously as all the parts, which then represents existence. The fact that we can refer to non-existence, means that the idea of it is contained within existence, but it itself doesn't exist. So existence and non-existence contain each other recursively.

Everything is a paradox. Paradox exists. As paradox cannot settle one way or another, it must oscillate. This gives birth to vibrations and the differences in frequences thereof. Non-existence is a 0 frequency, it cannot sample any other frequency because the carrier needs to vibrate higher than the signal it carries. The infinite frequency can sample any finite frequency (including 0) which makes it omniscient (or God), however there is no such thing as an infinite frequency as it breaks down to a multitude of finite frequencies that can sample each other and thus have an experience. They are the ones alive. The infinite frequency in that sense is the same single "I am" presence that we all share, the all seeing "I" (eye), but it can only know itself as all the finite frequencies. The sum of all vibrations is 0, thus non-existence contains all of existence.

The two opposites (whatever they are: light-dark, creative-destructive, positive-negative, existence-non-existence) are equal in power and that is a condition for a choice. In other words, choice exists! That's what tilts the whole thing towards the positive, existential, unconditionally loving Universe, Creation and God. That's what creates all the motion in existence. Truth is Love. It is the greatest attractor. You have to struggle to keep away from it. Let go and you will literally fall in love.

PS: By the way, could you please post your entire signature, it's not fully visible in my browser.

1. a) No, one's perception thereof is.
1. b,c) "Bitcoin" is a philosophical hyper-reality: it corresponds to symbols, not the real.

2. No, it exists so long as hyper-reality may supplant the real.

3‒4. No, to not pursue something is to pursue anything.

1‒𝑛. Existence is comprised of the antithesis of nothing.

1. a) History (and the past in general) is the product of the present, because artefacts of history only exist in the "now" and so are our memories of the past. When you wake up every day, you don't know if yesterday really happened or you just remember it. However, as time has fractal structure (as any self-similar system should be), history usually repeats itself in a growing spiral until it doesn't. That's where it bifurcates and starts a new branched cycle.
1. b,c) Existence exists, non-existence doesn't. That's a necessity. Therefore, if idea of Bitcoin exists, it must be necessary, as there is no other place it could possibly be.

2. Eternization of possession is only possible if money is a singular static thing, which your definition doesn't state. However, as a branch of self-similar Universe, Money is actually a dynamic essence. It literally is alive. Change is the only constant (except for the first three laws). Note, how not only does the 4th law contain paradoxical statement (change == constant), but it also happens to be the only rule with exceptions (of the first three laws), which in itself is paradoxical as it contains its opposite (rule != exception).

3-4. To not have any goal (or purpose) is a goal in itself. If you enjoy staying away from joy, that is your joy then! Whatever path you choose to explore, you do it because you prefer it over any other. Yes, you exist because you love it. Can't change that.

1. a) Generally speaking, modern Homo sapiens sapiens are not privy to the totality of "human history."
1. b,c) The nature of its "menifest[ation]" is irrelevant to its necessity.

2. Money is a means to the eternization of possession. (See my forum signature for further details.)

3‒4. It does not aspire to purpose; therefor, it achieves sanity.

1. Bitcoin is an invention that hasn't existed before in the human history. Though it has always been there as an idea. The divine spark of Satoshi manifested it.

2. My original answer still holds. When you exchange goods for money, you convert one asset class into another asset class in a voluntary transaction. There is no debt involved, though there are always lessons to be learned. Picking up the right kind of money is one of them.

3. There are kilograms of bacteria in your body that you cannot live without. Spreading life across the Universe is the reason they both exist (Life and the Universe).

4. The purpose of a star is to produce stuff and go Supernova, that's when humans achieve the technological critical mass and move away from the confines of a single planet to live among the stars. The new life forms can then learn from this experience and improve on it. Absolute perfection resides in being able to seek it. Learn to be great. Greatness awaits! (psheyshtashion)

1. Bitcoin doesn't actually attempt to do anything. It simply manifested itself as an idea, and because it is so pure in its essence, it attracts people.

2. Money has value of its own as a universal value-carrier, but being universal also means being alive (as the Universe obviously is). Certain money life-forms simply become extinct, while new ones emerge. As long as transactions are voluntary there is no debt involved. The debt that you are talking about is the product of your expectations. Drop 'em.

3. People are like gas and dust particles in outer space. Only when they coalesce together, they form clusters of gravity, which then give birth to stars. It is the stars that give out light, heat and a whole ton of useful byproducts. There are two forces that play against each other within a star. The first is a gravitational confinement field (government) that holds the star from falling apart. The second is a thermo-nuclear reaction (businesses) that produces energy and stuff. States like stars are self-sustainable. You suggest we stay apart from each other in a dust cloud and freeze to death in the dark?

4. As things in a physical world cannot occupy the same space at the same time, they serve as constraints for each other. Absolute freedom doesn't exist in the realm of things, but rather in the way you choose to relate to them. It is always a constraint that we push against, that allows us to propel ourselves onto the next level of our infinite evolution. Reality is an illusion, but the experience of it is real. Life is meaningless, unless you give it meaning.

1. The Bitcoin-space attempts to do things that are already being done satisfactorily. I, therefore, believe it to be largely unnecessary.

2. Money is a debt of goods, services, or both that are owed to its holder following his or her exchange of, regarding their “market value,” more goods, services, or both than he or she received thereby.

3. A bacterium, as biologically successful as bacteria are, does not “self-organize.”

4. A state is a system of money, possession, and tribe—the whole of which are aberrations. An entity is a system whereof output does not, necessarily, correspond to input.

Ok, I agree with the bolded parts.
Only I argue that Bitcoin is useful (as money) and therefore its PoW scheme is necessary (for Bitcoin to work the way it does). In fact, Bitcoin actually derives its usefulness (as a form of money) from its PoW scheme, which allows it to stay neutral towards all the participants and be independent of any authority (central or distributed).


Not quite.

If we are talking about fiat, then the money itself is indeed a form of debt plus a promise from the authority to keep recognizing it for taxes and debt settlement. Thus fiat is a recognition that authority-backed debt can serve as a value-carrier, though it might not be suitable for all situations. It is fear-based survival money, which forces the economy to keep expanding not because it wants to, but because it has to. I'm now thinking that fiat is somewhat suitable (as a primary form of money) for developing countries, where society has a lot of work to do to get itself onto the next level (industrial revolution). In other words, if society is in survival mode, it is reasonable to use survival money in order to be able to keep up with other societies who also adopted it, or risk being left behind technologically (might be relevant to some recent discussions about poor people in Africa).

If we are talking about Bitcoin (or Gold for that matter), then the idea that you can exchange money for something else of value later doesn't represent "debt" unless you attach some expectations to it. Holding onto some bitcoins today is not debt because the exchnage for value thereof is voluntary. Bitcoin simply says: "hey, I will keep some value for you for as long as society wants to use and recognize the system, but I can't promise you it will". Which brings us to the ideas of "quality of money", "adoption curves" and "network effects". I argue that Bitcoin (in its structure) is the highest quality money we currently have, it still lacks in adoption, but that is changing in the positive direction as we speak. The network effect will take care of the rest.


I've come to believe that a good state is the best form of collaboration for people living in a resource scarcity environment. It is a way for society to self-organize in a self-sustainable way. In a good state, transparent and stable government maintains the rules for the competition, while businesses and entepreneurs compete for resources and profit, thus producing value. However, it is the lack of transparency in conjunction with burdens of ever-accumulating fiat debt that poisoned many states of today. My stance is to fix the state, not to abolish it. I see the idea of PoW-secured blockchain as a cure for the illnesses of humanity today.

If you enjoy corporeal life (living in a human body), then you will recognize your body as a state, which needs to seek balance and collaboration of inner parts in order to stay healthy. Humans were once seeded with "creative" DNA, that now separates them from the rest of the animal kingdom. It is time for Humanity as a whole to be seeded with blockchain DNA and become "creative" as a single healthy organism in ways we can only imagine.

Money can only be debt (i.e., deprivation received but not yet given). I prefer abolition of state, money, possession, and tribe.

Sounds reasonable.
So, are you in favor of neutral (useless) PoW or would you prefer it to be useful?

It seems that the difference between the two represents value (as we've just agreed), thus both are needed in order for that value to be preserved. This difference in systems in the Money Universe correlates to the difference of people's preferences towards each system in the People's Universe, thus existence of both money systems will help preserve overall value in the Universe. Correct me if I'm wrong.

But then again useful PoW is harder to implement in a robust way and it might become obsolete once a particular task is accomplished. My preference still remains with neutral PoW (as it is more stable and predictable) for as long as we need money in the first place. When resource scarcity is abolished, the idea of scarce money might no longer apply and people will instead seek greatness in knowledge, art, entertainment and other endeavors.

1. “Value” is derivative of deprivation, for, without deprivation, scarcity (and, therefore “value”) does not exist.

2. Money is an accounting instrument utilized in preventing the loss of value in unequal exchanges of “valuables” (i.e., resources subject to possession and, so, deprivation).

Now that I have experienced "The Singularity" (thanks to username18333's excellent remark) and momentarily become "All That Is", which in turn allowed me to sorta get "outahere" and kinda "Zoom out!" (thanks cbeast!), I'm booting back up with a sizeable core-dump of information of "How Everything Works".

In essense, the idea of "Money" as a "universal value-carrier" exists and is valid. However, the word "universal" doesn't mean that it is singular or otherwise simple thing. It actually means that "Money sub-system of the Universe" is similar in structure to the "Universe" itself, as any "self-similar" system should be. In other words, there is a whole "Universe of Money" outhere, in which Bitcoin represents the ideal pure form of it, or God, but absolute perfection isn't possible without there being a choice for something less perfect, which brings us to the idea of "value" actually being a product of the "difference". It is the "difference" that creates "value"!

Thus recognizing the differences between us all and various forms of money is what allows us to preserve value and multiply it. Thank you for being different!

Hmm... I'm puzzled with your response.
I usually agree with an argument or see where it's going wrong, but yours has put me back into superposition mode. You hacked VectorChief, congratulations!

So, you're basically saying that money satisfies sameness-in-difference principle, which I agree with. However, I argue, that presence of money in the system brings an "intrinsic" value of its own as being an independent value-carrier. Being able to carry value is also a kind of value as a service! Thus money gains value for simply being money. I believe Bitcoin is a representation of that idea.


Thinking about it more thorougly, it seems that even "independence" (as in the "independent value-carrier" which Bitcoin obviously is) wants to be "independent" of itself and in that sense it actually resembles the original structure of the Universe.

A proper money corresponds to differences in the “value” (VectrorChief) of one or more goods in an exchange thereof. It is this difference in “value-” (VectorChief) that money “-carr[ies]” (VectorChief).

I agree that a barter system can also work, where particular items of value act as value-carriers. However, the idea of money is that it serves as a common denominator and, in that sense, becomes independent of any particular kind of value. A measure of money in a system is a presence of a universal value-carrier. I mean the word "universal" as being "independent" rather than having anything to do with the Universe .

The money system which doesn't have any central or distributed (stakeholders) authority needs to be based on some kind of neutral (useless) work in order to become an independent value-carrier. I agree that a particular item of value can also serve as a universal value-carrier (provided it satisfies certain conditions), but the money part of it will reside in its otherwise uselessness. Bitcoin is a pure form of money, that has no other use.