Topic: Synereo - page 3. (Read 10211 times)
TPTB is one special little flake. His time is allegedly extremely "precious" (his words, not mine), yet he keeps stalking crypto-communities with his weird convolution of crypto-anarchist social justice warrior and yet stockholm-syndrom induced fetish for US securities laws. He is an obnoxious paranoid troll trapped in the body of some wannabe Satoshi who happens to have a higher IQ than the average forum user and thus impresses many of these kids. That`s pretty much it.
Btw, Synereo is releasing its beta any day now. Take a look at these guys -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU They're going to dominate this space.
Lol, yes these dorks are going to dominate by requiring bloggers to learn Github.
You must have a lot of time on your hands... you've posted the same comment in three Synereo threads.
Btw, Synereo is releasing its beta any day now. Take a look at these guys -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALtgkpIDRU They're going to dominate this space.
Lol, yes these dorks are going to dominate by requiring bloggers to learn Github.
Then @ 26mins we have Greg Meredith raving about recruiting an economist and hiring a former Ethereum developer who talks about Oleg's monad blogs. As if this focus on eggheads has anything to do with wide-scale adoption of a social network.
At @30min, Greg admits that the "Lively Gig" team has stated, "Synereo doesn't know what they are doing".
At @38min, Greg points out that there is an insoluble problem in that the value of AMPs will be siphoned off to ETH or BTC units. And he admits Synereo can't scale for 18 months, because current block chain model won't scale and will need to be replaced.
You think all "ICOs" are manipulation.
I am confident they are ILLEGAL if publicly marketed to USA investors.
Maybe that's why it's important to know that the managers of these are not in the US, and in this case, neither is the company.
However, regardless of either of our ideas, if they were truly as "illegal" as you state (out of context), then there would be action being taken, and I don't see that going on. (not to say that there are not scams, and intentional fraud, etc - a small %, like in every industry)
Also: citation? If it's illegal, it has a link stating so clearly. Of course, you've employed circular reasoning by using the term "investment", and begged the question. Crytpocurrency is neither a currency, nor an investment in the eyes of the law.
Details of USA Securities Law is covered in the following thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-altcoin-topic-everyone-wants-to-sweep-under-the-rug-1218399
Making AMPS publicly available for sale to non-accredited USA investors makes the unregistered investment securities illegal even if issued by foreigners.
Greg Meredith will have a difficult time arguing that he was not promoting this, and he is a USA citizen. In my opinion he is taking a huge risk.
Greg @ Synereo is avoiding explaining all the specification and technology to us in terms we can understand. No excuses you can make for that which are valid. He is selling AMPs and not giving us information we can verify. That is an illegal prospectus. If Synereo didn't sell AMPs to the public, Greg et al would have no obligation to explain the technology in detail to us in terms we can understand and verify.
Edit: it is rather useless if I go expend my scarce time to become an expert in process calculi so that I could find game theory flaws in Synereo's process calculi approach to their hyped Attention Model feature. Because it would still be an asymmetric information market for the investors, as then they would be required to trust either my conclusions or Greg's (Synereo's). The only solution is for Greg to do proper disclosure by explaining the technology in terms that all AMP investors can understand. They have the time to produce a very exquisite website and consume hours every week on video Hangouts that do hyped handwaving on technical details, then they should also have enough time to explain the technology in sufficient detail that we can analyze without requiring us to become one of the few process calculi researchers on earth.
Edit: it is rather useless if I go expend my scarce time to become an expert in process calculi so that I could find game theory flaws in Synereo's process calculi approach to their hyped Attention Model feature. Because it would still be an asymmetric information market for the investors, as then they would be required to trust either my conclusions or Greg's (Synereo's). The only solution is for Greg to do proper disclosure by explaining the technology in terms that all AMP investors can understand. They have the time to produce a very exquisite website and consume hours every week on video Hangouts that do hyped handwaving on technical details, then they should also have enough time to explain the technology in sufficient detail that we can analyze without requiring us to become one of the few process calculi researchers on earth.
Greg never avoids explaining. In fact, I've never heard him not add an invitation for more explanation if needed, to what he says in hangouts.
Verbal handwaving is not technical explaining. It is clever marketing to fool n00bs, but I know better.
Ask an informed question, and you'll get an informed answer.
I have stated what is needed. When the appropriate technical documents are made available, which expert programmers such as myself and smooth can understand and verify without needing to become process calculi researcher. We need sufficient technical detail so that we can verify if the system will do what he is claiming it will do.
Please don't reply to my post with more diversionary bullshit. It is getting very repetitive.
You think all "ICOs" are manipulation.
I am confident they are ILLEGAL if publicly marketed to USA investors.
Maybe that's why it's important to know that the managers of these are not in the US, and in this case, neither is the company.
However, regardless of either of our ideas, if they were truly as "illegal" as you state (out of context), then there would be action being taken, and I don't see that going on. (not to say that there are not scams, and intentional fraud, etc - a small %, like in every industry)
Also: citation? If it's illegal, it has a link stating so clearly. Of course, you've employed circular reasoning by using the term "investment", and begged the question. Crytpocurrency is neither a currency, nor an investment in the eyes of the law.
Greg @ Synereo is avoiding explaining all the specification and technology to us in terms we can understand. No excuses you can make for that which are valid. He is selling AMPs and not giving us information we can verify. That is an illegal prospectus. If Synereo didn't sell AMPs to the public, Greg et al would have no obligation to explain the technology in detail to us in terms we can understand and verify.
Edit: it is rather useless if I go expend my scarce time to become an expert in process calculi so that I could find game theory flaws in Synereo's process calculi approach to their hyped Attention Model feature. Because it would still be an asymmetric information market for the investors, as then they would be required to trust either my conclusions or Greg's (Synereo's). The only solution is for Greg to do proper disclosure by explaining the technology in terms that all AMP investors can understand. They have the time to produce a very exquisite website and consume hours every week on video Hangouts that do hyped handwaving on technical details, then they should also have enough time to explain the technology in sufficient detail that we can analyze without requiring us to become one of the few process calculi researchers on earth.
Edit: it is rather useless if I go expend my scarce time to become an expert in process calculi so that I could find game theory flaws in Synereo's process calculi approach to their hyped Attention Model feature. Because it would still be an asymmetric information market for the investors, as then they would be required to trust either my conclusions or Greg's (Synereo's). The only solution is for Greg to do proper disclosure by explaining the technology in terms that all AMP investors can understand. They have the time to produce a very exquisite website and consume hours every week on video Hangouts that do hyped handwaving on technical details, then they should also have enough time to explain the technology in sufficient detail that we can analyze without requiring us to become one of the few process calculi researchers on earth.
Greg never avoids explaining. In fact, I've never heard him not add an invitation for more explanation if needed, to what he says in hangouts. There are other class-like videos with more in depth info as well. Analogies are a great tool to broaden understanding, and taking the workings of something like BitTorrent can give you an idea of how content distribution works on a decentralized basis.
Ask an informed question, and you'll get an informed answer. Ask a vague question that expresses your lack of mental investment in a subject, and you'll likely be directed to some reading material. Some amount of personal responsibility needs to be taken.
Investors regularly rely on the opinions of experts, including 2nd or 3rd opinions by independent parties.
Otherwise, we'd have no inventions like smart phones or computers, and we'd never had landed on the moon or mapped DNA, simply because "everyone could not understand it", so no funding. Innovation and breakthroughs are by nature, beyond the reach of complete understanding by those not intimately familiar with the components already.
One thing that might help, is to understand how other terms are used instead of the perhaps more familiar "hashtag". It is just a content identifier. You will find this represented by other terms, like "channels", "syntactic entities", or terms specific to pi-calculus like "persisted queues", or even the word "network", as this does not apply to "gods-eye" perspectives here - so these sub-groups are most typically defined by a topic, or keyword.
So in short, Greg is using a private language for technobabble.
That is sure helpful for peer review.
Well, if you don't understand something, maybe I can help? You are the only one saying it's "technobabble" - which just means you don't recognize it. I understand it just fine. Content management, including "hastags", is sophisticated, and thorough in Synereo. Your "hashtags" are not left out, even though that concept does not appear in Twitter-language form.
And yes, you will find the same expressions in peer-reviewed papers, textbooks, etc.
TPTB_need_war will never admit that he really isn't that smart.
You think all "ICOs" are manipulation.
I am confident they are ILLEGAL if publicly marketed to USA investors.
And no those weren't just my opinions. You will always try to distort what I wrote. How about you just state what you think about Synereo and stop trying to tell readers what I said. They can read my posts to see what I wrote.
Greg @ Synereo is avoiding explaining all the specification and technology to us in terms we can understand. No excuses you can make for that which are valid. He is selling AMPs and not giving us information we can verify. That is an illegal prospectus. If Synereo didn't sell AMPs to the public, Greg et al would have no obligation to explain the technology in detail to us in terms we can understand and verify.
Edit: it is rather useless if I go expend my scarce time to become an expert in process calculi so that I could find game theory flaws in Synereo's process calculi approach to their hyped Attention Model feature. Because it would still be an asymmetric information market for the investors, as then they would be required to trust either my conclusions or Greg's (Synereo's). The only solution is for Greg to do proper disclosure by explaining the technology in terms that all AMP investors can understand. They have the time to produce a very exquisite website and consume hours every week on video Hangouts that do hyped handwaving on technical details, then they should also have enough time to explain the technology in sufficient detail that we can analyze without requiring us to become one of the few process calculi researchers on earth.
One thing that might help, is to understand how other terms are used instead of the perhaps more familiar "hashtag". It is just a content identifier. You will find this represented by other terms, like "channels", "syntactic entities", or terms specific to pi-calculus like "persisted queues", or even the word "network", as this does not apply to "gods-eye" perspectives here - so these sub-groups are most typically defined by a topic, or keyword.
So in short, Greg is using a private language for technobabble.
That is sure helpful for peer review.
Well, if you don't understand something, maybe I can help? You are the only one saying it's "technobabble" - which just means you don't recognize it. I understand it just fine. Content management, including "hastags", is sophisticated, and thorough in Synereo. Your "hashtags" are not left out, even though that concept does not appear in Twitter-language form.
And yes, you will find the same expressions in peer-reviewed papers, textbooks, etc.
There is no manipulation whatsoever.
An ICO is inherently manipulation.
I need to bow out of this debate now because I have important work to focus on. Don't expect further replies. Good luck.
Again, your opinion is yours - but we're not having a one-on-one conversation here; you are broadcasting.
A link to your opinion does not justify, or excuse your claim. You think all "ICOs" are manipulation. No one else does.
Best of luck to your project.
I need to bow out of this debate now. Don't expect further replies. Good luck.
Lol... once your position becomes untenable you abandon the conversation. Hilarious.
One thing that might help, is to understand how other terms are used instead of the perhaps more familiar "hashtag". It is just a content identifier. You will find this represented by other terms, like "channels", "syntactic entities", or terms specific to pi-calculus like "persisted queues", or even the word "network", as this does not apply to "gods-eye" perspectives here - so these sub-groups are most typically defined by a topic, or keyword.
So in short, Greg is using a private language for technobabble.
That is sure helpful for peer review.
There is no manipulation whatsoever.
An ICO is inherently manipulation.
I need to bow out of this debate now because I have important work to focus on. Don't expect further replies. Good luck.
Synereo has no technology because both Bitcoin and Ethereum currently do not scale to the capacity Synereo will need. They are waiting for Ethereum 2.0. They are also working with Ethereum to create Ethereum 2.0.
Has no technology? And I suppose the Sun has no Helium?
We not need the scalable blockchain to launch Beta, and introduce several unprecedented features into the market. So there is no "waiting", only building and creating.
$AMP is super over priced and has always been. Unfortunately there is big money involved in cryptocoins. They make deals in the background and manipulate markets to ensure they establish a free position while others are unable to obtain many coins.
Complete rubbish. The price of anything is subjective. If you think something is overpriced, fine. But please refrain from simply badmouthing other people's work for other reasons. It's really not cool.
There are no "background deals", or you would not have heard of them. There is no manipulation whatsoever. Synereo does not pay attention to short-term speculators, or daily price.
..my observation that they would need to structure rep different for different #hashtags, which is no where in the whitepaper.
Sure it is. That is explained across several sections in the white paper.
2.2.2
2.2.7
and more in 2.7 - within pi-calculus.
One thing that might help, is to understand how other terms are used instead of the perhaps more familiar "hashtag". It is just a content identifier. You will find this represented by other terms, like "channels", "syntactic entities", or terms specific to pi-calculus like "persisted queues", or even the word "network", as this does not apply to "gods-eye" perspectives here - so these sub-groups are most typically defined by a topic, or keyword.
Content delivery is one of the true innovations of Synereo; it is baked into it deeply. REO functions with it, and based on it.
Have I not explained my stance now?
Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.
Because they have only provided hand-waving technobabble and no specification that could be peer reviewed by anyone here.
The rest of your post was a combination of disingenuous drivel and more hype to pump some technobabble. Good luck.
While I agree completely that more formal up do date publications would be nice, there are some pretty awesome innovations weekly and no paper submitted for publication would be out of date before it came out. Greg's academic credentials are beyond question and there is more formal definition behind synereo than 99% of the decentralized applications out there. Greg has done some recent papers http://www.mathpubs.com/author/Lucius+Gregory+Meredith have much more meat than the "hand waving" you characterize. I consider Greg's time better spent on developing Synereo which is why the community is taking on expressing Greg's abstract mathematics in terms you might understand.
Jim, you might as well not waste your time on this guy. He likes to make a lot of outlandish claims, but in reality, he knows nothing. He's full of hot air and not a rational individual. Anyone with any common sense can tell that he's not stable.
Synereo has no technology because both Bitcoin and Ethereum currently do not scale to the capacity Synereo will need. They are waiting for Ethereum 2.0. They are also working with Ethereum to create Ethereum 2.0.
$AMP is super over priced and has always been. Unfortunately there is big money involved in cryptocoins. They make deals in the background and manipulate markets to ensure they establish a free position while others are unable to obtain many coins.
This is the new scene. If you like the idea of Synereo "Social Contracts" combined with Ethereum "Smart Contracts" then you may want to check out the DAO that is starting to take off. They plan to use both technologies (once they are released)
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anndcodco-decentralized-co-op-1365958
Have I not explained my stance now?
Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.
Because they have only provided hand-waving technobabble and no specification that could be peer reviewed by anyone here.
The rest of your post was a combination of disingenuous drivel and more hype to pump some technobabble. Good luck.
Again you are speaking nonsense. There is ample material for review and comment at http://blog.synereo.com/ and the basic information at http://www.synereo.com/learn-more/, in the weekly hangouts and on the slack.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-waving
I tried to extract the details from those various resources and was unable to. It is hand-waving technobabble. You can continue to lie to readers. That is your prerogative.
While I agree completely that more formal up do date publications would be nice, there are some pretty awesome innovations weekly
Formal paper won't help us to vet it. We need a layman's explanation of the math. And pretty awesome technobabble hype is hand-waving.
I consider Greg's time better spent on developing Synereo which is why the community is taking on expressing Greg's abstract mathematics in terms you might understand.
Okay you can delay the inevitable wherein it will be shown to be a flawed technology. That will not help you.
There is a huge gulf between abstract theory and practice. Every homebuilder knows this. Greg will be cut down to size by reality later.
Have I not explained my stance now?
Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.
Because they have only provided hand-waving technobabble and no specification that could be peer reviewed by anyone here.
The rest of your post was a combination of disingenuous drivel and more hype to pump some technobabble. Good luck.
While I agree completely that more formal up do date publications would be nice, there are some pretty awesome innovations weekly and no paper submitted for publication would be out of date before it came out. Greg's academic credentials are beyond question and there is more formal definition behind synereo than 99% of the decentralized applications out there. Greg has done some recent papers http://www.mathpubs.com/author/Lucius+Gregory+Meredith have much more meat than the "hand waving" you characterize. I consider Greg's time better spent on developing Synereo which is why the community is taking on expressing Greg's abstract mathematics in terms you might understand.
Have I not explained my stance now?
Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.
Because they have only provided hand-waving technobabble and no specification that could be peer reviewed by anyone here.
The rest of your post was a combination of disingenuous drivel and more hype to pump some technobabble. Good luck.
Have I not explained my stance now?
Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it. You do see some merit but doubt there will be strong adoption. You raise the specter of potential legal issues with what is emerging as best practices in the crypto DAO arena. You begrudge the founders of a truly revolutionary idea a share of the action. They are not the least bit greedy in my book and are creating an environment that algorithmically trickles wealth down to the participants for the attention they generate, not to their pocketbooks.
You have been pointed to what you can do with synereo for almost a year but keep insisting there is nothing there. Why? http://blog.synereo.com/2015/08/12/top-5-things-you-can-do-with-synereo-now/
Where do you get all the time for all this nonsense? Are you trying to keep me busy to slow Synereo progress? It seems to be a destructive activity with no up side. How is it that you do not have better things to do?
...
Synereo was launched as a vaporware ICO and the math whiz on the project is Greg Meredith who is into process calculus research and was one of key persons apparently on Microsoft's BizTalk design. Greg is into using Scala and also is collaborating on the math modeling of Ethereum's upcoming, promised Casper design (which btw several of us, excluding smooth, have criticized in the Ethereum Paradox thread for its fundamental insoluble flaws).
Synereo was launched as a vaporware ICO and the math whiz on the project is Greg Meredith who is into process calculus research and was one of key persons apparently on Microsoft's BizTalk design. Greg is into using Scala and also is collaborating on the math modeling of Ethereum's upcoming, promised Casper design (which btw several of us, excluding smooth, have criticized in the Ethereum Paradox thread for its fundamental insoluble flaws).
You are greatly misinformed here. The technology behind Synereo, Greg's SpecialK, the persistent distributed process calculus machine, had been proven in production for more than two years. They also had the distributed Splicious social networking app prototype of Synereo running on SpecialK. I believe you know all this but continue to repeat that Synereo was vaporware. Why?
I've seen something running on Greg's computer screen in Hangout videos. Is that what you mean? If so, how does that exhibit anything that I can significantly verify. Is there a website I can load now and play around with? How many users are on that social network now?
Greg work in process calculus leading BizTalk was also a bases for business process orchestration standards including BPEL, the workhorse of Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) used by enterprises today. Greg disowned BPEL when it deviated from his model limiting its application. But that its the best thing out there we owe in no small party to Greg.
I have no idea what that does and how it has been used. I can't find concise explanations of the use cases and technology. Seems all like technobabble to me and I am reasonably astute in technology.
Greg work on Casper with Ethereum is the tip of the iceberg of the blockchain research Greg is doing. He has devised architecture capable of thousands of transactions per second. He is leading an evolution of the blockchain that is scalable, objectively fair, incorruptible and mathematically proven. Watch the hangouts, they are awesome. Synereo is blockchain agnostic and it is not planned to have its own blockchain initially, the point of the research is that synereo is guarenteed to scale and will be able to offer blockchain innovations to users in the future.
Ah more technobabble. I already listened to several Hangouts and it was always handwaving. Let him write a technical paper that I and other mere mortals can understand. He hasn't done that.
Privacy is important to many who would rather not use facebook who will insist their contacts use a private decentralized system nobody owns or controls.
Bwahahaha.
Many users do not want a user experience that is dictated to them without the opportunity to branch their own. Many do not want others to control their streams.
Customization is a potential compelling feature. But you've still got to hurdle the chicken-or-egg dilemma of users not using a social network where their contacts aren't already there. They need a compelling reason to use even if their contacts aren't there.
If everything was spelled out completely in the original whitepaper they would have had it already and not need any funding. The whitepaper spells out sufficient justification for the approach, not every detail. You are asking for a book, not a whitepaper.
That sort of funding is best raised in an ongoing crowdfunding (not for tokens) and/or private investing from angel investors. By publicly offering an investment security, there will be more demands to make full disclosures.
If you are suggesting that the average person does not understand what synereo is doing, that's very true. Its quite abstract and the average person or investor isn't going to see the real value it offers without a lot of research and theoretical mathematics. Dumbing it down is one of Synereo's major initiatives currently along with autonomous governance, UX design, etc. It's a BIG job but the community is committed and additional funding opportunities are presenting themselves.
You just admitted that this is technobabble being sold as an investment security (you even mentioned the price going down so you are insinuating it is for investment). Not good. You could get Synereo in legal trouble by admitting that.
Precisely my point is don't go selling investment securities to people they can't understand.
It you have been following the hangouts or Gregs posts you should know the #tag or "filter" does control perceived REO. A religious evangelist, for example might have high REO with respect to his community, but not mine, due to my #filters. Filters are #hashtags on steroids!.
Good, but again generalized statements/goals are not verifiable technology specifications.
In the Synereo model, @channel are addresses representing bi-directional channels, while #filters are composable general formal social contracts in a language of decentralized mobile communicating process calculus consisting of only @'s (objects) and #'s (code). Once you see the whole picture is is gorgeous. Everything is type safe and algorithmically verifiable. Program behaviour is formally provable Greg is willing to answer anyone's questions. Don't give up on synerio because it is not one of those shallow ideas that generate a lot of excitement but have no meat behind them.
I have no idea what is provable and what is gameable. I don't trust his magic wand technobabble. It needs peer review. He needs to be able to teach the math to all of us in a way we can reason about it ourself and verify if it is gameable or not. I don't have time to go learn all the foundational research on process calculi.
But, I think you know most of this so I really wonder what your motivation is to disparage synereo. You appear to agree with my arguments and then seem to ignore them. If your point is that synereo will not succeed by tomorrow you are correct. The beta will not be for three months. Adoption may start slow but I anticipate exponential growth. Resistance is futile :-p
You need not war with synereo, but thanks for keeping the AMP price low.
You need not war with synereo, but thanks for keeping the AMP price low.
Have I not explained my stance now?
...
Synereo was launched as a vaporware ICO and the math whiz on the project is Greg Meredith who is into process calculus research and was one of key persons apparently on Microsoft's BizTalk design. Greg is into using Scala and also is collaborating on the math modeling of Ethereum's upcoming, promised Casper design (which btw several of us, excluding smooth, have criticized in the Ethereum Paradox thread for its fundamental insoluble flaws).
You are greatly misinformed here. The technology behind Synereo, Greg's SpecialK, the persistent distributed process calculus machine, had been proven in production for more than two years. They also had the distributed Splicious social networking app prototype of Synereo running on SpecialK. I believe you know all this but continue to repeat that Synereo was vaporware. Why?Synereo was launched as a vaporware ICO and the math whiz on the project is Greg Meredith who is into process calculus research and was one of key persons apparently on Microsoft's BizTalk design. Greg is into using Scala and also is collaborating on the math modeling of Ethereum's upcoming, promised Casper design (which btw several of us, excluding smooth, have criticized in the Ethereum Paradox thread for its fundamental insoluble flaws).
Greg work in process calculus leading BizTalk was also a bases for business process orchestration standards including BPEL, the workhorse of Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) used by enterprises today. Greg disowned BPEL when it deviated from his model limiting its application. But that its the best thing out there we owe in no small party to Greg.
Greg work on Casper with Ethereum is the tip of the iceberg of the blockchain research Greg is doing. He has devised architecture capable of thousands of transactions per second. He is leading an evolution of the blockchain that is scalable, objectively fair, incorruptible and mathematically proven. Watch the hangouts, they are awesome. Synereo is blockchain agnostic and it is not planned to have its own blockchain initially, the point of the research is that synereo is guarenteed to scale and will be able to offer blockchain innovations to users in the future.
Quote
I have pointed out that there are numerous P2P (aka distributed) social networking projects, so the idea of Synereo being the first and able to sweep the world, is very slim, especially they have no compelling features afaics. Thus I have criticized them for preselling tokens ("AMPS") with no adoption and on hype. Their major claim as an innovative feature is an "Attention Model" which is composed of reputation ("Reo") and a counter-vailing force of being able to pay to override reputation with the AMPS tokens. In other words, they aim to make the content that the users share more relevant. I had pointed out that the Reo needs to be fine-grained on for example #hashtags, and Elokane indicated that although that is not in the white paper they are implementing something like that, yet there is no holistic public specification afaik. They are claiming to be very close to beta, but I've pointed out that doesn't mean they are any where near adoption. I have also pointed out that Facebook users don't seem to have major complaints about the relevance of shared content on feeds, thus I doubt anyone will adopt Synereo (because their friends won't be there and much less content sharing and other chicken and egg dilemmas).
You seem to have ignored all the reasons for adoption I have given. Privacy is important to many who would rather not use facebook who will insist their contacts use a private decentralized system nobody owns or controls. Many users do not want a user experience that is dictated to them without the opportunity to branch their own. Many do not want others to control their streams.If everything was spelled out completely in the original whitepaper they would have had it already and not need any funding. The whitepaper spells out sufficient justification for the approach, not every detail. You are asking for a book, not a whitepaper.
If you are suggesting that the average person does not understand what synereo is doing, that's very true. Its quite abstract and the average person or investor isn't going to see the real value it offers without a lot of research and theoretical mathematics. Dumbing it down is one of Synereo's major initiatives currently along with autonomous governance, UX design, etc. It's a BIG job but the community is committed and additional funding opportunities are presenting themselves.
It you have been following the hangouts or Gregs posts you should know the #tag or "filter" does control perceived REO. A religious evangelist, for example might have high REO with respect to his community, but not mine, due to my #filters. Filters are #hashtags on steroids!.
In the Synereo model, @channel are addresses representing bi-directional channels, while #filters are composable general formal social contracts in a language of decentralized mobile communicating process calculus consisting of only @'s (objects) and #'s (code). Once you see the whole picture is is gorgeous. Everything is type safe and algorithmically verifiable. Program behaviour is formally provable Greg is willing to answer anyone's questions. Don't give up on synerio because it is not one of those shallow ideas that generate a lot of excitement but have no meat behind them.
But, I think you know most of this so I really wonder what your motivation is to disparage synereo. You appear to agree with my arguments and then seem to ignore them. If your point is that synereo will not succeed by tomorrow you are correct. The beta will not be for three months. Adoption may start slow but I anticipate exponential growth. Resistance is futile :-p
You need not war with synereo, but thanks for keeping the AMP price low.
Jump to: