Topic: [neㄘcash, ᨇcash, net⚷eys, or viᖚes?] Name AnonyMint's vapor coin? - page 31. (Read 95279 times)

I don't understand. Let's say Chinese adopt software that SUPPORTS large blocks, but configure it in a way where it mines zero-tx blocks on purpose, or very high fee txs that are top-priority for the senders, something like <50kb in txs per block. How will others "drive them out"? With what mechanism?

Wrong. Increasing that limit allows miners elsewhere (Bitfury, KnC, 21.co, etc.) to overcome their competitive advantage, and to even drive Chinese miners off the network altogether by mining larger blocks that China can't support.

We are being raped by the Chinese because we are too stupid to design and adopt a better block chain consensus design:

---

Yes we must redesign the block chain protocol so that the miners are the payers and so they don't have any centralized control.

On the likelihood of fixing Bitcoin:

With the existing game theory? Nah.

Just because the limit will go to 2-4-8-20, doesn't mean they *have* to mine >1mb, or even >10kb. There is nothing stopping them from mining 0-tx blocks even if blocks go to 10MB tomorrow morning. Some are mining zero tx blocks right now.

The fees lost would be insignificant because the fee market is underdeveloped and people would have even less incentive to pay if space is abundant. Oversupply of space = no need to pay. Miners mining 0-tx blocks would definitely compensate for any lack of fee revenue by getting a few blocks first, compared to their competitors who take time to propagate their finding as they attach a lot of transaction data to their their block solution and get REKT orphaned in the process.


Yep.

Maybe. Or maybe they are just doing it because it suits their economic interests to keep blocks small, as TPTB said. I consider that quite plausible, I'm surprised you don't.


Incorrect. (I think you meant "without overwhelming consensus' rather than "without consent"?)

@TPTB you can't really have it both ways. Either the miners hold the upper hand or the developers do. I think it is a former, and given that you don't need overwhelming consensus, there is no 'design by consensus'.

Now if Bitcoin actually worked in a more fully decentralized manner then miners would not hold the upper hand and then you might get something closer to design by consensus.

EDIT: What satoshi was shooting for by his own words was neither design decisions made at the whim of a mining cabal nor by an overwhelming consensus of developers, it was "set in stone". It wasn't even close to achieved.

Bitcoin's design is no where on the tract to removing the block size constant. And it was released ~6 years ago.

A truly centralized protocol would already be on that tract in its whitepapers and be trying to finalize its protocol within a couple of years of being popular and stress tested. This is one of the reasons I am trying to design a consensus protocol that is orthogonal to the data that is being put on the block chain. So the consensus protocol can hopefully be solidified sooner (but this is not an easy technological feat).

Decentralized consensus for a chronological ledger is a hard problem. Afaics, anonymity is an even harder problem.

Edit: design by consensus is often rigor mortis. Satoshi achieved the key design epiphanies BEFORE bringing on all the devs to do the refinement work.

If a coin has active development and the protocol is not finalized 100% and set in stone for eternity, there will always be developer-related centralization. And btc is still ver 0.something, so, it's a work in progress.

In a sense, the more development a coin will have the more centralized it will be. The less development it has, the more decentralized it can become but it will also be less and less relevant if it becomes a dinosaur. It seems development and centralization may have an inversely proportional relationship.

Bottom line is any global constant in the protocol is not decentralization. Period. End of story.

The protocol must be able to function in a free market dynamic.

All the arguments about consensus is moving forward from 1MB slowly are irrelevant, because if constants are not decided by the protocol, then the protocol is by definition under a 51% attack always.

Yes, that's true. But the miners here are not changing things right now. They are sticking with the 1MB version which exists since the days of Satoshi because

a) one proposal isn't ready
b) the other proposal is nightmarish
c) if either proposal is followed without consent, you have 2 competing coins / you have doubled the monetary base / diluted coins / led to mass dumping from unbelievers of the X or Y fork / created distrust for the future of the currency because such forks may repeat again and again.

That's a good story. If you support the status quo, that's the story you tell. But it isn't accurate.

If you have any kind of rough consensus, or even just lack of strong consensus to oppose a change, then support of the majority of miners is sufficient to make any change you want. That's the reality.

The thing works as follows. You have the code (Bitcoin) and for serious changes to be implemented you have to have a very large consensus.

The 1MB exists. Now. It's not a supported "small block solution". The question is what to do next for scaling.

Core has a roadmap with segwit and future block increases.
"Classic" says we hard fork it with 2mb.

So there is

a) what we have right now (this already exists, it's not something "planned" that needs supports to materialize)
b) two different plans for scaling which, if they don't have near unanimous agreement, will result to forking the currency because each one has different supporters.

The (big Chinese) miners have chosen sides here, whether they state it in those terms or not. They have stated they will use Core, which is itself not a consensus among developers, it is a small block solution supported by some of the developers.

There is no consensus between developers and it's the miners fault for not forking the coin to two competing coins? That's a 51% attack?

If there was dev consensus and they refused that would be a different issue altogether.

Note I do think there is a design that is a solution. And I agree value would increase much faster in this new design, because not only confidence, but the miners wouldn't be always dumping coins on the market (which what keeps BTC price low and siphons money away from speculators into the pockets of mining farms which have costs < $50 per BTC).

Given Bitcoin has been 51% attacked by Chinese miners now (refusing to allow an increase in the block size), Bitcoin appears to be on its death bed (but may take a while for confidence to collapse due to the  ignorance of Bitards). I wouldn't hold it long-term.



The Chinese are siphoning off our speculator money with their $50 per BTC mining costs:

Sorry that won't solve the problem, which as smooth pointed out in my vaporcoin thread recently is the generlized ability to move profit to externalities (where I was already mentioning shorting as an attack on PoS coins).

Checkmate.

---

As you all may know, I now consider this to be useless development. So please do continue!

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13514814
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13575205

---

Don't you understand that "fundamentally broken" means they don't work for the features they claim that are an improvement over Bitcoin.

The link I provided to you for Ethereum explains that afaik they never solved the primary economic issue facing scaling programmable block chains, which is that every full node has to verify the block chain, thus every full node has to run the programmable script. But the problem is who to pay the gas (ether) to so that all full nodes are paid for verification? This has DDoS implications as well. In short, they never solved the core economic problem and thus Ethereum is just a fucking toy that can't actually work.

Ditto Monero as explained below (the arguments were in the links I provided to you before but again I am always forced to repeat myself because readers are so clueless about technology that they can't even understand what I write).


You are a n00b and you don't do enough research to know what you are writing about. Why should anyone believe you?

Monero is not anonymous when your metadata can be correlated. One example of metadata which unmasks your anonymity is your IP address. And no, Tor and I2P mixnets do not hide your IP address from the government, in fact they are thought to be Sybil attacked honeypots that not only tell the government your IP address but also alert the NSA et al that you should come under extra scrutiny.

And IP address is not the only metadata that can destroy your anonymity in ring signatures. Other examples can include cookies in your browser and other activity you did on the web. Other examples also include telephone calls and other activity you did around that time, which have statistical significance.

I wrote about that in the link in the post I made upthread which is quoted below.


Ring signatures do not obscure everything. Only Zerocash can obscure everything so that then metadata is no longer a problem. I see Vitalik @ Ethereum has been reading my Bitcointalk posts, because now he has written a blog post to copy most of the points I have been making for the past months.

Additionally I have been making the point since the BCX incident that ring signatures can theoretically be unmasked by combinatorial analysis of the block chain. In the recent debate I had with Monero's cryptographer Shen-noether at Reddit about his white papers, I pointed out that his proposed solution to combinatorial unmasking was flawed. He and smooth did the usual ad hominem attack on my person, and then I rebutted them with logical facts and they were forced to finally put their tail between their legs.

Bullshit. So much bullshit in these discussions of cryptocurrency technology. Especially coming from all the Monero pumpers who haven't done their homework, because they are retarded, closed-minded, and boastfully so.


Just a (arguably plagiarized) copy of Cryptonote technology, so same conclusions as for Monero.

https://z.cash/ is the only potential solution for making metadata correlation irrelevant, but all I know about it is here:

http://zerocash-project.org/

Seems the project died or stalled? Afaik they've been quiet past months or most of 2015?

Also scaling issues will probably still apply thus it is possible that Zerocash doesn't scale to world wide use, or other problems such as DDoS. I won't know until I dig deeper into it. Perhaps they discovered such issues and stopped working on it.

Anonymity is very difficult to achieve. I would guess maybe impossible once all the technical factors are considered. But I am still willing to try. I personally will come back to Zerocash's technology later, after I finish fixing block chain scaling and decentralization (which is more important priority and more realistic).

Land of the free! 

Monero pumpers are difficult to control even by smooth:


I want to further reply to this (Polish-like family name for a username) asshole:


There is an old joke, how many Polish men does it require to change a light bulb. The answer is 5, one to stand on the table and 4 to turn the table. Monero has like 5 core devs right and they produce useless code right. Working smart versus working stupid.

What you perceive to be delusions of grandeur has been the daily struggle of fighting the total body dysfunction due to some sort of chronic illness of the digestive system, as documented in my posts recently above. You have no idea how much I have struggled on a daily basis. This is no where near my normal self. It is trying to be productive while hanging from a thread or shell of what I was formerly before becoming chronically ill. Nevetheless I have tried to focus my mental efforts on the most important design challenges and now I am being rewarded for that strategic prioritization.

You are damn lucky that I haven't been healthy. But I tell you this, your shithole attitude motivates me incredibly to try to get healthy so I may shove your words up your asshole with my coding prowess. Believe me, I am since last night thinking very out-of-the-box on my health and research last night reveals that actual Phase 1 medical human trials have shown that bitter melon and curcumin (possibly also moringa) actually shrinking pancreatic tumors and they are also known to be general agents for improving chronic digestive dysfunction. I had not yet tried taking these in high doses and I am now preparing to do so. Fortunately these dried powders are manufactured locally here in the Philippines so I can get this straight from the farms and processing plant. I am ordering it now and I am determined to get healthy.

As far as I know, you are just a person who speculates with his money and isn't actually in the trenches doing the coding and design theory work. Thus for me you are irrelevant. You want to think you have some special insight and that someone like me is irrelevant, but the reality of the serendipity of life is very likely to bite you in the ass. As it should be, because you Monero brow-beater assholes are so fucking overconfident and disrespectful to everyone.

The failure of Monero couldn't be more appropriate. Although Dash-tards may be more unethical and less technologically talented, the Monero-tards are the most inflated egos on the planet.

I attempted to make an appointment or walk in the clinic of a gastroenteritis / internal medicine doctor today. I proceeded to Brokenshire Hospital, Davao City at 11am and again at 1:30pm, and both the doctor Paolo Buenaventura and his receptionist failed to show up on the posted hours of M - F, 1 - 4pm.

The only other doctor was Alcasid which is the doctor who attended to me at Adventist Hospital in May 2012 during the acute peptic ulcer that I explained in more detail in the full version of the quoted post above. He office looks like toilet room (not even a bathroom). It is down in the basement and the office/clinic isn't even appropriately furnished (and the receptionist was addicted to her mobile phone and wouldn't even make eye contact). He is the one who screwed me up in 2012, because I told him about all the ongoing lower abdominal pain and issues and he said, "you must just be fatigued". No blood tests, no MRI, nothing. He screwed up another foreigner real bad as I documented in the full version of the quoted post above. He has offices at several hospitals and is always doing rounds at patient beds.

Also note I did make a special trip to Cebu in November 2012 to try to get a better doctor and testing. Unfortunately I was unable to locate a doctor that was available and so they did some general blood tests and other STD tests I requested. The blood test showed my lymphocytes were sky high. The STD tests had to be sent to Manila. I returned to Davao and they were supposed to email the results. They never did. I had to return to Cebu just to get the results, which were negative.

I am going to look for some other doctors at Davao Doctors and San Pedro Hospitals perhaps on Monday.

To elaborate on why I am hesitant to proceed with the doctors here in the Philippines notice how for this man who had pancreatic cancer the doctors were not able to be sure he had cancer until they had cut him open for surgery. Even with MRI, endoscopy, and ultrasound, even the Western doctors apparently can't see that area of the body well enough to see the tumor. And I don't know if I should trust a filipino doctor to do endoscopy on me. Maybe he will perforate my colon or organ in the process and make matters worse. I just have a huge lack of confidence in the doctors here.

Back in 1990s I broke my hand really bad when I punched a concrete wall after some local politician was acting very condescendingly to me in Moonlight bar in Davao (formerly owned by I think the daughter of Mayor Duturte who is now running for President this May). A doctor at San Pedro Hospital tried to make stint and cast for me, but this hand has never been okay since. He didn't even put metal stint or do the things really required to make sure it healed correctly. So unprofessional and nonchalant.

I still have a 1" hole in the top of my skull where I was hit with a hammer by a neighbor when  I used to live in the squalor area (when my ex-wife made a fight about a hammock

Note that my feces is not light colored, nor oily. And my urine is not very dark, thus not precisely the symptoms for some pancreatic cancers. Yet there are other pancreatic cancers which have different or no symptoms (until they spread to other organs).

So my point is it seems nearly pointless to proceed on diagnosis while I am in the Philippines.

And I don't think my funds are sufficient to go seek diagnosis outside the Philippines.