Pages:
Author

Topic: [neㄘcash, ᨇcash, net⚷eys, or viᖚes?] Name AnonyMint's vapor coin? - page 6. (Read 95231 times)

sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
- Proof of work: Benefits owners of large mining farms.
- Proof of stake: Benefits participants with large amounts of the currency.
- Proof of importance (e.g. NEM): Benefits participants which hold and actively transfer large amounts, mostly services like online wallets and exchanges.
- Proof of burn (e.g. Slimcoin): Like Proof of Stake, it tends to benefit people with large amounts of currency, but involves more risk for the participants and the amount of time to recover investments is larger than in most PoS variants.
- Proof of disk capacity (e.g. Burst): Like Proof of work, it benefits owners of large amounts of hardware, but a different kind of hardware than PoW itself.
- "Proof of time connected" (e.g. Timekoin): Benefits people who maintain a stable node with few interruptions.

Maybe there are more, but these are the ones I know.

Now - couldn't it be a way to lower the centralization degree if you combine many of these algorithms in one single cryptocurrency? It would not stop centralization totally. But there would be not a single group, but various groups benefitting from the block rewards. So the game theory could be more complex and attacks could be more difficult.

There is only one solution and I already outlined the design in my decentralization thread and in the thread where I explained Satoshi didn't solve the Byzantine Generals Problem:

UNPROFITABLE Proof of Work: Benefits the users of the currency who mine at a loss because they are forced to attach a PoW to every transaction. Note there are numerous details to making this design work, and I am not going to explain them all now. Some of the details were explained already in the linked thread.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
My logic on the coming one-world reserve currency and why it can't be Bitcoin nor any other crypto-currency (CC):

Enslave?  I think one wotld currency would be a good thing.   Anything to bring humanity together instead of dividing us. We need to tear down political boundaries and remake the world.   And hey, isn't that what bitcoin is for?

It would help a lot if you'd my prior posts in this thread (when I used to have the username 'iamback'):

I chose to agree. This would be the single biggest issue that would cause an enslaving of nations.
thats why we need country fiat and bitcoin.

I thought we are already in this situation.

*Ahem the US dollar? last time I checked everyone loves it, despite its covered bad value.

So why would it recourse into another world reserve currency.

The difference will be that the new one-world reserve coming approximately 2020, will not be controlled by any nation, but rather by a world government body.

This will be viewed by the world as more fair. But in reality it will be much less fair, because the world government will act basically the way the Troika does in the EU now, lending to the nations and never letting them default. They will lend in the world currency, but the people will be paid in their nation's shit currency which is debased like hell by the national politics. So then when the national currency loses value, the people are stuck paying back loans in the relatively more expensive world currency.

This is precisely what the Troika did to the PIIGS to destroy them. They will then do this on a global scale to enslave us all.



I hope everyone understands the implied point in the OP of comparing the Euro vs. Greece to the one-world reserve currency vs. nations.

Greece was forced to borrow denominated in Euros during the speculative inflow of investment at the turn of the 21st century, but as Germany was more productive they benefited more from the Euro and Greece had no way to devalue their debt. So they are repaying the debt with a lower productive economy with massive egress of speculative investment.

The same problem with happen when the reserve currency for debt is SDRs and then all nations will be repaying their debts in SDRs while they won't have the policy tools to inflate nor deflate their debt burdens to respond to volatility in relative productivity and speculative ingress and egress of capital. Effectively they become a slave to the international central bank who can issue fractional reserve debt denominated in SDRs, which the banksters will surely have in their back pocket again. Just like the Fed now is pumping debt into the developing world making them short the dollar, then it will pull the rug from under them by raising interest rates sending the dollar higher and causing them to repay debt in more expensive dollars.

The only solution to this problem is for the Knowledge Age to rise and say "I don't need stored monetary capital, I need knowledge". I will quote from myself about this as follows.

[...]



So Armstrong has been pitching this idea that governments could just print the money they need for taxes. So the model he is proposing is where national currencies float against an international reserve currency, so governments can then mess up their own currencies if they wish. He prefer the governments just print the money from their central banks, and the relative success of nations at managing their economic and fiscal policies will determine their relative value of the national currencies relative to the inevitable one-world reserve currency.

But by Armstrong's own admission, trade only accounts for 10% of the world's capital flows and thus the vast majority of the world's wealth will choose the one-world reserve currency as its unit-of-account and thus who ever has their hands on the levers for the debasement and fractional reserves rules of the one-world reserve currency (e.g. the elite who run the World Bank, BIS, IMF, etc..) can then speculate and manipulate the national economies at-will. This will be just Goldman Sachs take over of Europe and Greece but on a global economy-of-scale level.

For analogous reasons as to why the Euro failed, the one-world reserve currency with national government debts denominated in separate currencies will also cause the nations to fail just like Greece did. The bottom line is that who ever controls the reserve currency of the world, holds the power to destroy and enslave the other nations.

Also Armstrong is contradicting himself on claiming above that the impetus for a move to a one-world reserve currency will be only for economic reasons and "not political".



coinits, calm down you are preaching to the choir. You perhaps don't realize I wrote the syndicated essay Bitcoin : The Digital Kill Switch. I am the one who has been writing that Bitcoin is owned by TPTB.

In spite of the arguable fact that Bitcoin is controlled by the global elite, my guarantee that it won't be the "winner take all" global currency remains certain.

First of all, simpleton readers don't seem to understand the distinction between a reserve currency and a circulating currency. Crypto-currencies are the latter. Dollar and Euro cash are examples of the latter. US Treasury and Euro-denominated bonds are the former (Tier 1 reserve assets in the BIS Basel model). IMF SDRs are the former.

The global elite are planning for a national (or regional) currencies floating against a global reserve currency. And they are planning for circulating currencies which are all digital. Bitcoin is one gambit in that mix.



Nope, but it would probably enslave Russia. Just look at what happened to the Ruble!

Incorrect! The one-world reserve currency will enslave all of the nations. Study my post #11 more carefully. You didn't comprehend it.



I suggest you relate that to "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins. And also relate that to the Asian crisis in 1998, which was caused by speculative international capital flows fleeing to Europe to take advantage of the ingress in investment that corresponded with the launch of the Euro.

Nations are inherently prone to short-term capital ingress and egress. Without their own central bank to inflate out of an egress crisis, they are enslaved by the unit-of-account which is imposed on them by investors.

The problem is fundamentally rooted in the ability of stored money to be a claim on future production. Instead when profitable production results from a diversity of knowledge innovations that are DIRECT (e.g. the customer uses your software, or they 3D print your design) and not just proxies diluted by mass production (e.g. factories make a million copies of your design), then stored money becomes incredibly difficult to invest. The more stored money you have, the faster it withers in relative value.

This is the paradigm shift coming on now due to the Knowledge Age.

In short, investing will become active instead of passive, and investing will be small and numerous (i.e. bottom-up) instead of large economy-of-scale fascism (i.e. top-down).

Sorry Armstrong! Storing capital in money instead of fine-grained (maximum division-of-labor) knowledge thus causing international capital flows that are the problem! That paradigm must be eliminated! We need capital flows to be instead actual finely-grained, bottom-up knowledge exchange, where capital becomes knowledge and not stored claims on future production.

Then there won't be any more nations, nor any one-world top-down slavery.

You say "no one will save and be productive"? Wrong! They will save up their knowledge gained by being productive instead of lazy! This is the paradigm shift of epic proportions and nearly no one sees it is happening.



I am very surprised that Armstrong can not conceptualize what I wrote above. He responded by pretending to himself that I am some simpleton who is only learning from him. He failed to understand I am not talking about the existing debts. I am talking about the new debts that will form after the global monetary reset (restructure or default).

My point is if we look at Greece, it sold its sovereign bonds denominated in the Euro(pean) reserve currency and thus it suffered pernicious (and self-reinforcing downward spiral of) austerity because it was not able to devalue the debt it owed by printing money to devalue its own currency and stimulate its economy by lowering the international cost of its exports and tourism industries.

Even more importantly as we can see with the dollar reserve currency now, countries that sell debt in denominated in their national currencies pay an interest premium compared to when they sell debt denominated in the reserve currency. This is one example of many reasons[1] that those who have control over the reserve currency's central bank, have enslaved the other nations. This is why a USA Treasury official famously said to his Third World cohort, "its our dollar, but it is your problem".

Armstrong is failing to understand that a reserve currency is inherently an enslavement paradigm. And the only possible way to eliminate this paradigm, is to make debt not profitable for investors. I explained how that will become the case with the shift from an Industrial Age to a Knowledge Age. But I think Armstrong is not smart enough to grasp the concept. Or he is too lazy to read the essays I wrote, which I had provided him links to.

Additionally I am shocked that Armstrong is conflating unit-of-account with unit-of-exchange. That is the most basic error. The coming one world reserve currency will not be a circulating currency that is used for retail transactions. If that were the case, then the nations wouldn't even have their own currencies any more. The reserve currency will be used for settlement internationally for exchange between the national currencies which will float against the one world reserve currency. I don't think the nations will agree to give up their control over their national currencies, rather they will just agree to a reserve currency that isn't controlled by the USA exclusively.

[1]   http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/economic_studies/an_exorbitant_privilege
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2009/09/cohen.htm
http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/john-butler/curse-reserve-currency-triffin-dilemma



you mean reserve is a backup?

Read the thread!

Replies from others are emphasizing the use of BTC for gambling, but the keyword in my subject title is "reserve".

My point is that BTC is the unit-of-account by which everyone measures their gambling success, not fiat.

When someone gambles on an altcoin "investment" (speculation), they are hoping to get more BTC. They don't cash it out to fiat, they HODLit to gamble some more altcoin "investments". Even if you include gambling sites that accept Bitcoin, the gambler is likely HODLing their BTC gains (if any) and not cashing out to fiat.

Unit-of-account doesn't mean backup. You need to learn what reserve currency means.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
Found this old "stream of consciousness" essay I wrote quickly "off the cuff" in March 2009. Interesting to read the entire essay because it was the first time I publicly mentioned Martin Armstrong in a very poignant way, and also I was clearly looking for Bitcoin. I'll quote the portion that claims I had 17,000oz of silver:

P.S. If anyone wants to buy Buffalo 0.999 1oz silver rounds, I am selling them for $1 over spot in lots of 100oz. Contact me via email for how to order at this price ([email protected]). There are photos at VaultOz.com. These are brand new in mint tubes of 20 from the Highland mint, stored at a reputable depository that ships within 24 - 48 hours of your payment. I manufactured about 17,000oz and have about 9,000oz remaining to sell. I am no longer planning to do this as a business and am liquidating at a loss, so I can move my silver assets outside the USA.

P.S. beach party this Sunday afternoon and night:

http://waterworlddavao.com/photo-gallery/
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
This is yet another reason why we need a successful decentralized social network:

Illegal immigrant is arrested over murder of American nanny in Austria after she took him in to stop him being deported - and is revealed to have raped underage girl



(nb: facebook owns the © on her picture. You know who owns your digital stuff after you get killed.)
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
Looks like I have to take a 2-3 month diversion to create my own programming language that can compile to Javascript. The programming language would be rudimentary in its first incarnation, compiling only to Javascript and no other tools such as no debugger (can use the Javascript debugger). I am working on the LL(k) parser grammar now...

Progress:

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/design-patterns-for-composability-with-traits-i-e-typeclasses/5569/57 (read the post and the subsequent one in the linked thread)




Interest rates may or may not matter to Venture Capitalists , but it does matter to individuals that can think and want a profit while keeping their principle intact.  Smiley

Only an idiot would believe a checking/savings account is a safe place to keep money right now.

Those so-called idiots outnumber your VCs and they are risk averse.
They will trust their cash in a mattress before BTC.
And they will determine if BTC ever reaches true Utility.  Smiley
BTC has still got years of Public Relations efforts to go thru before the majority of the public trusts them.


 Cool

And the governments can clamp down on BTC at any time using capital controls on the exchanges, because if the most of the world doesn't accept BTC unless they can immediately convert it to fiat as has been explained upthread by smooth (e.g. Bitpay, etc), then BTC becomes an illiquid asset once the government issues capital controls. BTC is not immune to government action (especially G20 coordinated action) because BTC is not a widespread unit-of-account.

However, BTC has apparently become the unit-of-account of crypto-gambling, but it is not yet certain if the demand for that will remain if people no longer believe they can cash out to fiat unfettered when they want to, and the risk of CC failure due to centralization is a big factor that would cause speculators to be hesitant about thinking they could HODL/gamble in BTC long-term until capital controls cease.

This is my goal is to fix the centralization problem with my CC design and also I am going to make CC a very popular unit-of-account for social network payments. But first I am creating a new programming language, then I have to create the social network, and then finally the CC, so hell may freeze over before I am done.  Undecided

Note I also contributed the key technical insight[1] into how to make decentralized exchange work so it can't be jammed.

[1] Find my posts in this thread and note that TierNolan is one of the original inventors of the DE protocol, but it had a jamming flaw until I fixed it: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/atomic-swaps-using-cut-and-choose-1364951
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
iCEBREAKER you so quiet now:

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/does-rust-really-need-higher-kinded-types/5531/65

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/does-rust-really-need-higher-kinded-types/5531/51

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/design-patterns-for-composability-with-traits-i-e-typeclasses/5569/53

Kindly please read those and understand why I am not your ordinary programmer. I am in the top echelon of programmers, perhaps 1 in 100 or 1 in 1000 level.

My intuition is smooth and I are peers, although I haven't checked his code and he doesn't have access to enough of my code as well (so he may or may not have an opinion or agree/disagree, I dunno). I don't know about fluffypony et al, as I haven't studied their code nor interacted significantly with them. It is clear that Shen Noether (noblesir at Reddit) and gmaxwell are more thoroughly educated mathematicians than I am, yet it is true that I 100% independently invented RingCT (in June/July and I think before RingCT was fully cooked) and based on CCT and ostensibly fixed CCT in the process (which may be more efficient than RingCT based on Blockstream's CT). Ah still hoping to find time to clean up that ZKT whitepaper and publish it so the claims can be peer reviewed. I am proud of myself that I could achieve ZKT with my lack of formal education in cryptography, abstract algrebra, abstract geometry, and number theory.



Anyone have any idea what rule ^that post^ violates?   Huh

The rule of karma.

Remember your oft employed "crying over spilled milk meme", lol.

Actually I think it is rule of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which basically insures everything returns to random disorder eventually.

Don't try to control it man, throw out the rear view mirror and enjoy the ride.

(There is a lot more random shit coming to your well controlled plans.)
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
Very interesting and fascinating insights within your postings. Thank you. When will your project approximately be released? Also many good name suggestions along the lines.

I don't have an ETA yet. See the description below of what I am trying to accomplish.

Perhaps JAMBOX the social distribution network can be released this year. The Jambits probably early 2017 if I can stay on schedule and do coding 14 x 7.

Looks like I have to take a 2-3 month diversion to create my own programming language that can compile to Javascript. The programming language would be rudimentary in its first incarnation, compiling only to Javascript and no other tools such as no debugger (can use the Javascript debugger). I am working on the LL(k) parser grammar now. Refer to the prior posts upthread on programming languages. The choice of programming language is critical to the success of JAMBOX because I am targeting both music distribution initially and more widely JAMBOX will be a mobile app platform. In other words, you won't code to iOS or Android APIs any more. You will code to the JAMBOX API. I am attempting something very ambitious and could change the entire computing world. More details will be in the crowdfunding campaign when ever I get around to doing that. I probably won't announce the crowdfunding here, because I don't want to be perceived as promoting to speculators nor planning a P&D. This will be a long-term multi-year project for me. I am creating a company, not just a CC. The CC will be open sourced and decentralized. I will not give more details now. The whitepapers will be published when I am ready.

Ransomware operators might keep some BTC too, though I doubt it is much. No one other than speculators wants BTC; everyone who uses it just seems to treat it like a hot potato.

That is why I have said the only economy where Bitcoin is the unit-of-account is the crypto gambling market.

That is why I am going to attempt to create a new microtransactions economy for CC with my JAMBOX wherein the users do not cash out and their unit-of-account are the Jambits or Jamcash. The distinction from GetGems will be there will be actual use cases that drive the users to do these microtransactions. Also I intend to solve all the scaling and centralization problems of Bitcoin, by employing my clever modification to Satoshi's proof-of-work by employing unprofitable mining with a perpetual tail block reward. The math is irrefutable, that Bitcoin's spendable supply will asymptotically trend to 0 due to lost coins. Monero and Jambits will both trend to constant spendable supply due to the tail reward. The difference is Jambits' mining will be unprofitable and mined by the millions of users. I will explain in a white paper why this will remove the tendency to centralize mining and why it will circulate the coin from the power-law savers to the spenders in a virtuous cycle that is necessary otherwise unions and socialism forms to do that job.

P.S. my health is much improved, but only because of the oregano oil taken sublingually. If I miss a dose of the oregano oil, my chronic fatigue malaise returns. Even with oregano oil, I still getting bouts of diarrhoea and I have weakness/pain in my hamstrings. My head is great (about 80% of normal). So I think this is good and sustainable. Hopefully over the months, I will finally be able to clear out the gut dysbiosis that seems to the root of my multi-year struggle with chronic illness. My sleep is still variable. Often I can only stay sleepy for 5 hours but other times I get 8 or 10 hours. That I am working so much on computer night and day is another fact. I will take a vacation for 10 days in first half of May and I won't be on the computer.

Additionally I hope everyone understands that one of my goals is to replace the web browser:

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/design-patterns-for-composability-with-traits-i-e-typeclasses/5569/55

Ambitious much.  Tongue
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
Very interesting and fascinating insights within your postings. Thank you. When will your project approximately be released? Also many good name suggestions along the lines.

I don't have an ETA yet. See the description below of what I am trying to accomplish.

Perhaps JAMBOX the social distribution network can be released this year. The Jambits probably early 2017 if I can stay on schedule and do coding 14 x 7.

Looks like I have to take a 2-3 month diversion to create my own programming language that can compile to Javascript. The programming language would be rudimentary in its first incarnation, compiling only to Javascript and no other tools such as no debugger (can use the Javascript debugger). I am working on the LL(k) parser grammar now. Refer to the prior posts upthread on programming languages. The choice of programming language is critical to the success of JAMBOX because I am targeting both music distribution initially and more widely JAMBOX will be a mobile app platform. In other words, you won't code to iOS or Android APIs any more. You will code to the JAMBOX API. I am attempting something very ambitious and could change the entire computing world. More details will be in the crowdfunding campaign when ever I get around to doing that. I probably won't announce the crowdfunding here, because I don't want to be perceived as promoting to speculators nor planning a P&D. This will be a long-term multi-year project for me. I am creating a company, not just a CC. The CC will be open sourced and decentralized. I will not give more details now. The whitepapers will be published when I am ready.

Ransomware operators might keep some BTC too, though I doubt it is much. No one other than speculators wants BTC; everyone who uses it just seems to treat it like a hot potato.

That is why I have said the only economy where Bitcoin is the unit-of-account is the crypto gambling market.

That is why I am going to attempt to create a new microtransactions economy for CC with my JAMBOX wherein the users do not cash out and their unit-of-account are the Jambits or Jamcash. The distinction from GetGems will be there will be actual use cases that drive the users to do these microtransactions. Also I intend to solve all the scaling and centralization problems of Bitcoin, by employing my clever modification to Satoshi's proof-of-work by employing unprofitable mining with a perpetual tail block reward. The math is irrefutable, that Bitcoin's spendable supply will asymptotically trend to 0 due to lost coins. Monero and Jambits will both trend to constant spendable supply due to the tail reward. The difference is Jambits' mining will be unprofitable and mined by the millions of users. I will explain in a white paper why this will remove the tendency to centralize mining and why it will circulate the coin from the power-law savers to the spenders in a virtuous cycle that is necessary otherwise unions and socialism forms to do that job.

P.S. my health is much improved, but only because of the oregano oil taken sublingually. If I miss a dose of the oregano oil, my chronic fatigue malaise returns. Even with oregano oil, I still getting bouts of diarrhoea and I have weakness/pain in my hamstrings. My head is great (about 80% of normal). So I think this is good and sustainable. Hopefully over the months, I will finally be able to clear out the gut dysbiosis that seems to the root of my multi-year struggle with chronic illness. My sleep is still variable. Often I can only stay sleepy for 5 hours but other times I get 8 or 10 hours. That I am working so much on computer night and day is another fact. I will take a vacation for 10 days in first half of May and I won't be on the computer.
sr. member
Activity: 497
Merit: 251
Very interesting and fascinating insights within your postings. Thank you. When will your project approximately be released? Also many good name suggestions along the lines.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
Uh oh. Not many programmers still coding after age 45:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4Gsl8sVgdQ#t=1001

But that may be because they are so rich by that time, they retire. I am bankrupt with no retirement plan, so I must continue producing.



10 year anniversary of the murder of my sister approaching. Just want to remember her in public this one time (she was slim partially due to chain smoker, not just body type although she and I are both slim):

[...]
Son you talk too much[1]. K.I.S.S.  Cheesy

[1] that was one of the my sister's favorite songs,  Cry

sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
Today afaics I have completely solved Philip Wadler's famous Expression Problem in the remaining area where it wasn't solved which are collections! A known unsolved problem in computer science for at least a decade and half.

Philip Wadler is the famous computer scientist professor co-creator of Haskell.

Essentially afaics my proposal is combining first-class type unions, first-class trait intersections, a global hash dynamic dispatch, and optional immutability to allow for first-class heterogeneous collections which are open in both dimensions of Wadler's Expression Problem, i.e. can add new data types and new interfaces orthogonal without restarting from before what one already has at any location in the source code. And this apparently eliminates subtyping entirely (which typeclasses didn't have any way, e.g. Haskell, Rust, and PureScript).
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
I think this demonstrates my fairly deep knowledge of programming at this stage in my career:

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/most-coveted-rust-features/324/65

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/does-rust-really-need-higher-kinded-types/5531/32

I am driving closer to knowing which features I want in my ideal high-level programming language.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
The purpose of mining is to create a permanent decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissionless system.

And even better than Bitcoin will be the coin where those newly mined coins are mined by the millions and billions of users, not by few 100s of professional miners (which is where Bitcoin is rapidly centralizing to). The only way to achieve this is to make mining unprofitable. I've explained this design, yet so many people remain skeptical. I'll finish the 'plaining in a white paper after it is too late to copy the design.

Absent an automatic means in the economy where money naturally moves from the power law distribution wealthy back to the masses, then Socialism erects to do the job, which is then captured by the same power law which ends up in periodic 600 year Dark Ages.

It is time for something better. Even better than Bitcoin. At least we have a somewhat decentralized Bitcoin in the meantime.

I have work to do.



The purpose of mining is to create a permanent decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissionless system.
The only way to achieve this is to make mining unprofitable.

You should probably clarify your statement with some kind of exception because you've said you don't think IOTA is a functional system, but that quote in the context of this thread gives the appearance that you endorse it when you obviously don't.

Well I didn't mean to remove the tail reward, i.e. retain ongoing issuance of coins in exchange for mining even though mining is unprofitable. Btw, Bitcoin has no tail reward but that isn't a problem for another 10 years or so.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
My very abstract way of thinking really seems to dumbfound even very smart people:

https://users.rust-lang.org/t/high-order-function-with-type-parameter/3112/114
https://users.rust-lang.org/t/high-order-function-with-type-parameter/3112/119

I don't know it is a problem with elucidation, or if it is just really difficult for humans to grasp abstraction that someone else thought of and is trying to write down. Maybe abstract concepts don't transmit well.

Edit: follow up discussion seems to indicate it is more of an issue of keean not seeing any utility in my abstraction.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
I guess my "dealing with it" is avoiding it almost entirely and thus not being a modern "coder". Ah well, fuck it. Something more sane will come along at some point.

As a related, but not entirely to the same point, question: Is there any tool that you can do central management on a non-gui c program that has multiple libraries, subdirectories etc? For example a multi-algo cpu miner program might have 100 files in it dealing with multiple algos, network transmission / stratum, etc. How is the programmer able to coordinate all sources, definitions, variables, dependencies (ifdefs / arch-related triggers and sub-scenarios)? Is there a way to automate all these or a way to centrally control a project? Something where I can open the central .c file and it automatically shows me the relations and internal co-dependencies... ?


Sorry I have to start moderating this. I can't allow my thread to become for teaching modern development practices now branching out into module/repository systems and paradigms for version control. You are welcome to start your own thread for that. That no longer has even a semblance of relevance to my decision about choosing a new programming language for my project, nor about coding an ASIC-resistant memory hard hash function. I can't see any relevance to my project of that tangent you want to discuss.

Modern methods exist because they are necessary to handle the complexity of things that we program. For example, we now need asynchronous programming because the network has latency. Back in the day, there was no network and we ignored latency+concurrency+parallelism because there weren't complications such as multi-core processors.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
The software back then was way more reliable than today's.

The problems have become much harder. Just to properly make or service a request on the web probably requires more code than his entire word processor, and it may not even be close.

You can step back and say, "Who needs this shit?" and to an extent you would be right, but it's here and we have to deal with it. The tools have to evolve accordingly. Large code libraries (both public and private) are essential to most modern programming, and good methods of abstraction are essential to creating effective libraries.

sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 262
In any case I think you said one of the applications you created was in assembly.

yeah WordUp was a fully featured WYSIWYG word processor with multi-columns and the whole she-bang. It was a major pita and very, very inefficient to code that way. I was young and had boundless time and energy.
Pages:
Jump to: