rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) - page 159.

Biodom

legendary

Activity: 3892

Merit: 4331

Quote from: MatTheCat on June 29, 2014, 10:18:18 AM

Quote from: Miz4r on June 29, 2014, 07:58:29 AM

I believe the Universe is absolutely teeming with (intelligent) life, but not all life is in the form we can see or recognize yet. However I think we will make great discoveries in this matter within the next 100 years which will turn our entire world view upside down, if we don't kill ourselves beforehand that is. I actually wouldn't be surprised if we are already being visited, studied and observed by more advanced forms of life, and that they're keeping a low profile on purpose.

This 'revelation' of being part alien came to me...

I don't know......
However, every human carries on average 2.5% neanderthal DNA with some outliers 5% or above.
I believe that Ozzie has the high percentage, which he is very proud of...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcoweoZ6jpM

On a more serious note:
Multicellularity has evolved independently at least 46 times (on earth)
Eye (an organ of sight) has evolved independently 40-65 times
True Intelligence with sustained ability to create and manipulate environment-only ONCE in one or two primate species
If something happens just once-you don't know the probability of this event because of the observer bias. It could be 1:100000000000 chance or even lower.

MatTheCat

hero member

Activity: 840

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Miz4r on June 29, 2014, 07:58:29 AM

I believe the Universe is absolutely teeming with (intelligent) life, but not all life is in the form we can see or recognize yet. However I think we will make great discoveries in this matter within the next 100 years which will turn our entire world view upside down, if we don't kill ourselves beforehand that is. I actually wouldn't be surprised if we are already being visited, studied and observed by more advanced forms of life, and that they're keeping a low profile on purpose.

Or perhaps 'we' have been visited, and studied by more advanced lifeforms tens of thousands of years ago, and modern man is the result of a little alien manipulation on a 'naturally evolving' ape species. Perhaps this is why modern man is alone in both his tendency and ability to exploit and detach himself from the environment which ultimately created him and sustains him.

This 'revelation' of being part alien came to me on a DMT trip. Although it seemed realer than real at the time, I don't know if its true or not. If it were true, how would we possibly know or 'proev' it, if this alien entity operated on a completely different plane of reality and time scale from what we can comprehend? Would a soldier ant in an ant colony in some university research station be able to even begin to fathom the existence of the teams of scientists who were responsible for ensuring the foundation of the ant colony (perhaps genetically engineered) or what their objectives might be? Of course not.

Miz4r

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Biodom on June 27, 2014, 05:53:51 PM

It is diffucult to calculate the unknowable probabilities.
As an example, Drake equation together with Kepler data suggest that life should be all over the Universe, but so far-no indication of intelligence being present anywhere else-Fermi's paradox. My point is-it is diffucult to calculate the true probability of an event when too many variables are involved.

I believe the Universe is absolutely teeming with (intelligent) life, but not all life is in the form we can see or recognize yet. However I think we will make great discoveries in this matter within the next 100 years which will turn our entire world view upside down, if we don't kill ourselves beforehand that is. I actually wouldn't be surprised if we are already being visited, studied and observed by more advanced forms of life, and that they're keeping a low profile on purpose.

Sandia

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: aminorex on June 27, 2014, 02:04:38 PM

In Adam's thread, I posted this, but I'm looking for actual rational intelligent feedback on updated BTC risk factors, so I repost here:

On a scale of 0 to 100, my risk factors are something like this:

Satoshi coins - .001% probability or less, impact 10, duration 3 = .0003
ECDSA vulnerability - .01% or less, impact 10, duration 2 = .002
Implementation vulnerability - 1% or less, impact 8, duration 1 = .008
Bitstamp defection - .1% or less, impact 8, duration 2 = .016
Social apocalypse - 1% or less, impact 6, duration 10 = .6
Mining centralization - 5% or less, impact 5, duration 5 = 1.25
Nuclear war - 2% or less, impact 8, duration 10 = 1.6
US AML Fungibility crisis - 20% or less, impact 9, duration 10 = 18
unknown unknown - NaN

Being rational, a hodler should try to plan for the risks, starting with the largest. How do we deal with the US fungibility issue?
Do you see this as forcing ID to address mapping? White- and black-listing addresses?

Is it time to anonymize our coins? Would anonymizing the coins be likely to put us on the blacklist?

Personally, I like privacy. Right now, there are too many people who can map me to my addresses. I ought to fix that.

Driv3n

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Some interesting discussion in here, thanks to everyone contributing.

pa

hero member

Activity: 528

Merit: 501

Quote from: aminorex on June 27, 2014, 06:01:26 PM

Quote from: Biodom on June 27, 2014, 05:53:51 PM

It is diffucult to calculate the unknowable probabilities.
As an example, Drake equation together with Kepler data suggest that life should be all over the Universe, but so far-no indication of intelligence being present anywhere else-Fermi's paradox. My point is-it is diffucult to calculate the true probability of an event when too many variables are involved.

If you were intelligent, would you call Earth?

As in Frank Herbert's "Dosadi Experiment," perhaps the Galactic civilization views us as so virulent that they're actively jamming signals that would allow us to infer their existence.

Biodom

legendary

Activity: 3892

Merit: 4331

Quote from: aminorex on June 27, 2014, 06:01:26 PM

Quote from: Biodom on June 27, 2014, 05:53:51 PM

It is diffucult to calculate the unknowable probabilities.
As an example, Drake equation together with Kepler data suggest that life should be all over the Universe, but so far-no indication of intelligence being present anywhere else-Fermi's paradox. My point is-it is diffucult to calculate the true probability of an event when too many variables are involved.

If you were intelligent, would you call Earth?

I would text..[to Satoshi]

aminorex

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1030

Sine secretum non libertas

Quote from: Biodom on June 27, 2014, 05:53:51 PM

It is diffucult to calculate the unknowable probabilities.
As an example, Drake equation together with Kepler data suggest that life should be all over the Universe, but so far-no indication of intelligence being present anywhere else-Fermi's paradox. My point is-it is diffucult to calculate the true probability of an event when too many variables are involved.

If you were intelligent, would you call Earth?

Biodom

legendary

Activity: 3892

Merit: 4331

It is diffucult to calculate the unknowable probabilities.
As an example, Drake equation together with Kepler data suggest that life should be all over the Universe, but so far-no indication of intelligence being present anywhere else-Fermi's paradox. My point is-it is diffucult to calculate the true probability of an event when too many variables are involved.

aminorex

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1030

Sine secretum non libertas

Quote from: Queeq on June 27, 2014, 03:38:35 PM

Isn't nuclear war probability too big? Impact would also depend on its scale.

I have an atypical view on this. I think a Russian first strike is far more likely than just about anybody thinks, and getting likelier. Any scale which would kill me I don't worry about, and just average the rest.

notme

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Bagatell on June 27, 2014, 03:47:45 PM

Quote from: Queeq on June 27, 2014, 03:38:35 PM

Isn't nuclear war probability too big? Impact would also depend on its scale.

And if you include nuclear war shouldn't you also include Harrington events, meteor impacts, plague, famine, etc?

I think you mean Carrington events: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_1859

Bagatell

hero member

Activity: 722

Merit: 500

Quote from: Queeq on June 27, 2014, 03:38:35 PM

Isn't nuclear war probability too big? Impact would also depend on its scale.

And if you include nuclear war shouldn't you also include Harrington events, meteor impacts, plague, famine, etc?

Queeq

sr. member

Activity: 427

Merit: 250

Isn't nuclear war probability too big? Impact would also depend on its scale.

kdrop22

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: aminorex on June 27, 2014, 02:04:38 PM

In Adam's thread, I posted this, but I'm looking for actual rational intelligent feedback on updated BTC risk factors, so I repost here:

On a scale of 0 to 100, my risk factors are something like this:

Satoshi coins - .001% probability or less, impact 10, duration 3 = .0003
ECDSA vulnerability - .01% or less, impact 10, duration 2 = .002
Implementation vulnerability - 1% or less, impact 8, duration 1 = .008
Bitstamp defection - .1% or less, impact 8, duration 2 = .016
Social apocalypse - 1% or less, impact 6, duration 10 = .6
Mining centralization - 5% or less, impact 5, duration 5 = 1.25
Nuclear war - 2% or less, impact 8, duration 10 = 1.6
US AML Fungibility crisis - 20% or less, impact 9, duration 10 = 18
unknown unknown - NaN

What is your timeframe for probabilities. If you have a long enough time frame 2 to 5 years, I would assign greater probabilities to - Implementation vulnerability(>1%) and ECDSA (>0.01%).

aminorex

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1030

Sine secretum non libertas

Quote from: pa on June 27, 2014, 02:13:02 PM

Is your scale really 0 to 100 or 0 to 10? Looks a bit off to me. . .

The maximum possible score is 100% probability * 10 impact * 10 duration.

I'm looking for things that could lead to a "bitcoin is dead" consensus over the next 365 days, and trying to exclude all else.

pa

hero member

Activity: 528

Merit: 501

Quote from: aminorex on June 27, 2014, 02:04:38 PM

In Adam's thread, I posted this, but I'm looking for actual rational intelligent feedback on updated BTC risk factors, so I repost here:

On a scale of 0 to 100, my risk factors are something like this:

Satoshi coins - .001% probability or less, impact 10, duration 3 = .0003
ECDSA vulnerability - .01% or less, impact 10, duration 2 = .002
Implementation vulnerability - 1% or less, impact 8, duration 1 = .008
Bitstamp defection - .1% or less, impact 8, duration 2 = .016
Social apocalypse - 1% or less, impact 6, duration 10 = .6
Mining centralization - 5% or less, impact 5, duration 5 = 1.25
Nuclear war - 2% or less, impact 8, duration 10 = 1.6
US AML Fungibility crisis - 20% or less, impact 9, duration 10 = 18
unknown unknown - NaN

Is your scale really 0 to 100 or 0 to 10? Looks a bit off to me. . .

aminorex

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1030

Sine secretum non libertas

In Adam's thread, I posted this, but I'm looking for actual rational intelligent feedback on updated BTC risk factors, so I repost here:

On a scale of 0 to 100, my risk factors are something like this:

Satoshi coins - .001% probability or less, impact 10, duration 3 = .0003
ECDSA vulnerability - .01% or less, impact 10, duration 2 = .002
Implementation vulnerability - 1% or less, impact 8, duration 1 = .008
Bitstamp defection - .1% or less, impact 8, duration 2 = .016
Social apocalypse - 1% or less, impact 6, duration 10 = .6
Mining centralization - 5% or less, impact 5, duration 5 = 1.25
Nuclear war - 2% or less, impact 8, duration 10 = 1.6
US AML Fungibility crisis - 20% or less, impact 9, duration 10 = 18
unknown unknown - NaN

Mervyn_Pumpkinhead

legendary

Activity: 876

Merit: 1000