"Peerless Monetary Framework" as competitor to Bitcoin?

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: iamnotback on November 20, 2016, 10:46:27 AM

The paper does not solve the double-spending problem. It presumes a global clock and a global search for duplicates, but because this is unbounded then you can never determine when your transaction is final.

The author is a kook with some training in math:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_A._Dembski

These kooks seem to be proliferating now that Bitcoin has a centralization problem. HugoStone makes the same mistake:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16928999

Username18333 made the same mistake:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16921783

Readers you are not as technically knowledgeable as I am. Do NOT invest or believe in any money system that claims everybody can mint their own money without a global ledger. It CAN NOT work. It violates the laws of Physics. My coming whitepaper will explain this very clearly.

Opposition to evolution. Oh man, this guy's biography is funny. I wonder if anyone is going to want to work with such a person to help bring his brainchild to life.

He seems to be a creationist, and involved in various controversies involving Christianity throughout his career.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

Quote from: stevekreizl on November 20, 2016, 04:07:43 PM

having a universal clock the reliable timestamping is supposed to remove the double spending problem

Timestamping requires a bounded participation, bounded latency, and other forms of synchronization. The author doesn't understand Byzantine fault tolerance.

I can claim any timestamp I want if it isn't recorded in a globally consistent ledger.

Implicitly he is asking us to all depend on one universal timestamping server which signs all transactions in a total ordering. I analyzed that in 2014 and 2015 and realized that timestamping is not a solution. This timestamping myopia has also been discussed in the Longest Chain Rule thread in the Bitcoin Technical discussion forum:

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on May 08, 2014, 02:22:43 PM

Utter nonsense. It is sad that they wrote a paper based on the premise that timestamps can be used to solve the double spend problem (they can't) and then never did any research as to why Bitcoin doesn't rely on timestamps. I mean it isn't a minor note, it is the core claim of the article.

European Central Bank

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1087

your problem is that there may well be better coins than bitcoin right now but no one's using them and maybe no one ever will. without users the finest coin ever made is irrelevant.

stevekreizl

newbie

Activity: 4

Merit: 1

Double spending certain would be a problem, but I'm not sure I'm seeing it. In Dembski's scheme, A spends by giving B a private key and B invalidates A's cash, then C can try to use the private key likewise to invalidate but can't because B has already invalidated it -- it's a question of temporal priority -- having a universal clock the reliable timestamping is supposed to remove the double spending problem. It seems to work unless people double spend at exactly the same time.

My interest in this? I'm not a big fan of Bitcoin and am looking for something better.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

The paper does not solve the double-spending problem. It presumes a global clock and a global search for duplicates, but because this is unbounded then you can never determine when your transaction is final.

The author is a kook with some training in math:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_A._Dembski

These kooks seem to be proliferating now that Bitcoin has a centralization problem. HugoStone makes the same mistake:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16928999

Username18333 made the same mistake:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16921783

Readers you are not as technically knowledgeable as I am. Do NOT invest or believe in any money system that claims everybody can mint their own money without a global ledger. It CAN NOT work. It violates the laws of Physics. My coming whitepaper will explain this very clearly.

Snorek

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1001

So they basically promising you everything you want to have but can't due to limitations of our current legal framework.
Let's face it guys totally anonymous coins won't reach total adoption. There is a reason why Monero or Zcash are not topping the market charts.
Their whitepaper is full of empty promises and offers near zero feasible solutions so far, but I wish this project grow some more, it is interesting.

clickerz

hero member

Activity: 1414

Merit: 505

Backed.Finance

Quote from: franky1 on November 19, 2016, 05:48:54 PM

Quote from: BurtW on November 19, 2016, 05:35:09 PM

What is your connection to this?

the "whitepaper" is 90% rant.. i gave up reading about all the flaws of other systems and then a sudden injection of what this "peerless" thing meant to do.

i think its more of a brownpaper Cheesy

than a whitepaper. definitely needs a major re-write

Thanks for the feedback

i would not read that whitepaper anymore. Though it has a good plan and intentions oh, all coins I think has the same good plans and intentions

But still I think his is stil in planning stage, we will see to it that it is launching next year.

iamnotback

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 265

The paper does not solve the double-spending problem. It presumes a global clock and a global search for duplicates, but because this is unbounded then you can never determine when your transaction is final.

The author is a kook with some training in math:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_A._Dembski

These kooks seem to be proliferating now that Bitcoin has a centralization problem. HugoStone makes the same mistake:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16928999

Username18333 made the same mistake:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16921783

Readers you are not as technically knowledgeable as I am. Do NOT invest or believe in any money system that claims everybody can mint their own money without a global ledger. It CAN NOT work. It violates the laws of Physics. My coming whitepaper will explain this very clearly.

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Do we know who this Bill Dembski is? It matters to know who this is all coming from because first of all, they let it be known that this is whitepaper is published on the website of a friend and secondly, where are the references? We don't know if the author has an understanding of either economics, programming or even cryptography and I don't see any notable references to external sources. I don't know if any idea at this level should be considered a competitor to bitcoin, which has went far beyond than just being a concept at this point.

BurtW

legendary

Activity: 2646

Merit: 1138

All paid signature campaigns should be banned.

Quote from: stevekreizl on November 19, 2016, 01:39:07 PM

I ran across a newly proposed cryptocurrency that promises to dispense with the blockchain and peer-to-peer network. It's called "Peerless" (very subtle). Have a look at http://www.peerless.money, though this URL forwards to an educational site (strange). But it's a monster white paper, and it promises digital cash that's completely secure, anonymous, and decentralized. Is this a serious competitor to Bitcoin?

So far, I have found nothing of technical merit in this paper.

Bill Dembski is obviously a sharp guy and knows a lot about a lot of things.

The proposed system has a huge double-spend problem and relies heavily on trusted third parties.

ffe

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

"By encapsulating ownership, Peerless dispenses with all such third-party registries. This is a huge advantage to Peerless, anticipated to some degree by Bitcoin and the blockchain technology, but with the promise here of being carried to fruition. Peerless removes the need to rely on third parties because the individual can handle the task of reassigning ownership directly without their help."

You dispense with third party registries but you do not show how an individual is kept from double spending. Since things can be anonymous (good thing), there is no way to even know if a double spend occurred (very bad thing).

MingLee

hero member

Activity: 490

Merit: 520

Quote from: stevekreizl on November 19, 2016, 01:39:07 PM

I ran across a newly proposed cryptocurrency that promises to dispense with the blockchain and peer-to-peer network. It's called "Peerless" (very subtle). Have a look at http://www.peerless.money, though this URL forwards to an educational site (strange). But it's a monster white paper, and it promises digital cash that's completely secure, anonymous, and decentralized. Is this a serious competitor to Bitcoin?

I wouldn't even worry about this. Sounds like someone is trying to dig up their own competitor to Bitcoin, mostly sponsored by some government agency, and yet fairs to understand what it is he's trying to say.

This is personally going to be ignored by me, it seems like it's someone trying to make something without knowing what it is they're actually doing.

BurtW

legendary

Activity: 2646

Merit: 1138

All paid signature campaigns should be banned.

Quote from: franky1 on November 19, 2016, 05:48:54 PM

Quote from: BurtW on November 19, 2016, 05:35:09 PM

What is your connection to this?

the "whitepaper" is 90% rant.. i gave up reading about all the flaws of other systems and then a sudden injection of what this "peerless" thing meant to do.

i think its more of a brownpaper Cheesy

than a whitepaper. definitely needs a major re-write

I also gave up reading through the brown paper. I may try again later.

European Central Bank

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1087

there's a vast amount about bitcoin that could do with tweaking or binning, but it works and it's still here. it's one thing to write a paper, a whole other thing to put it into reality.

but maybe one day relatively soon there will be something that addresses the most pressing flaws. i wonder whether it arrives before 'good enough' has already won out. that day might be arriving relatively soon too.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: BurtW on November 19, 2016, 05:35:09 PM

What is your connection to this?

the "whitepaper" is 90% rant.. i gave up reading about all the flaws of other systems and then a sudden injection of what this "peerless" thing meant to do.

i think its more of a brownpaper Cheesy

than a whitepaper. definitely needs a major re-write

Scott J

legendary

Activity: 1792

Merit: 1000

Sounds interesting. Will certainly give this a read.

BurtW

legendary

Activity: 2646

Merit: 1138

All paid signature campaigns should be banned.

What is your connection to this?

stevekreizl

newbie

Activity: 4

Merit: 1

I ran across a newly proposed cryptocurrency that promises to dispense with the blockchain and peer-to-peer network. It's called "Peerless" (very subtle). Have a look at http://www.peerless.money, though this URL forwards to an educational site (strange). But it's a monster white paper, and it promises digital cash that's completely secure, anonymous, and decentralized. Is this a serious competitor to Bitcoin?

Topic: "Peerless Monetary Framework" as competitor to Bitcoin? (Read 625 times)