The Ethereum Paradox - page 24. | Bitcointalksearch.org

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: StinkyLover on March 19, 2016, 08:27:11 PM

So you've concluded that those projects will be abandoned before release as there's no way to get them to work?

I am guessing they will release them but they will be plagued by non-adoption and to the extent their is significant ETH in play, they will be attacked either to steal ETH or short ETH and crash the ETH price.

I am expecting a centralized clusterfuck (much more dire than Bitcoin's current scalepocalypse) originally marketed as decentralized nirvana.

Of course it is also possible it could unravel before that and they abandon with their tail between their legs, but I doubt this because one assumes they raised more $millions in the recent pump.

The chance of them solving the underlying insoluble fundamental flaws is nil. There is no way to do sharding of smart contracts without breaking the Nash equilibrium that creates a majority consensus instead of many competing forks. There is no way to arrive at consensus of off-chain events without delegating consensus to trusted centralized entities. It is a huge clusterfuck that Vitalik weaved.

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 19, 2016, 10:33:06 PM

Quote from: pimpjuice on March 19, 2016, 10:13:28 PM

BTW - Here is a link that confirms "A rumor has been circulated recently that VB almost came to work for Ripple"
https://youtu.be/fbEtivJIfIU?t=11m7s

Listening forward to the end of the 15th minute, will if you are solid senior level software engineer with a strong economics expertise, start to make you realize that Vitalik is an unrealistic dreamer who doesn't think out the real world insolubility of his childish fantasies.

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 20, 2016, 09:15:38 AM

Quote from: pimpjuice on March 19, 2016, 11:08:04 PM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 19, 2016, 10:33:06 PM

Listening forward to the end of the 15th minute, will if you are solid senior level software engineer with a strong economics expertise, start to make you realize that Vitalik is an unrealistic dreamer who doesn't think out the real world insolubility of his childish fantasies.

Maybe you are too logical... What is an unrealistic dreamer?

“Imagination is more important than knowledge...

I am extremely creative (did you not look at CoolPage.com or Corel Painter on which I created or worked on as a programmer and graphic artist). How about my essays[1]. How about the print ads I did for WordUp which I also programmed. The difference is I am a realistic dreamer with a realistic plan who has proven I make products that end up used by millions. Vitalik lacks the realistic grounding (and no experience!) to choose viable goals and implement them effectively. What a horrible destruction of a math nerd to allow him to enter this fantasy world where he can sell childish, unrealistic fantasy technobabble to gullible speculator n00bs.

[1]	http://unheresy.com/ https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/economic-devastation-355212 http://web.archive.org/web/20140225115821/http://www.coolpagehelp.com/index.html?row2col2=developer.html

[...]

StinkyLover

sr. member

Activity: 454

Merit: 250

This industry is pure fiction

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 19, 2016, 08:18:18 PM

Quote from: StinkyLover on March 19, 2016, 08:08:26 PM

Won't work AT ALL??

It was explained upthread. Helps if you know how to read.

I'm illiterate. So you've concluded that those projects will be abandoned before release as there's no way to get them to work? Or are you and others not prepared to sign your name to that conclusion?

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: StinkyLover on March 19, 2016, 08:08:26 PM

Won't work AT ALL??

It was explained upthread. Helps if you know how to read.

StinkyLover

sr. member

Activity: 454

Merit: 250

This industry is pure fiction

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 19, 2016, 07:12:59 PM

Quote from: StinkyLover on March 19, 2016, 06:48:27 PM

The perfect piece of technology will not ever exist.

The internet isn't perfect but it scaled to billions.

Ethereum won't work for anything that will scale to more then a few users. And smart contracts are nonsense that has no use cases. Slock and Augur won't work AT ALL.

Yeah no perfection, but don't invest in rocks. They are pretty much useless.

Won't work AT ALL??

Will you eat your words if they do?

StinkyLover

sr. member

Activity: 454

Merit: 250

This industry is pure fiction

Quote from: r0ach on March 19, 2016, 07:14:41 PM

Quote from: StinkyLover on March 19, 2016, 06:48:27 PM

The perfect piece of technology will not ever exist. Not in this industry, or any other industry. Forget the ETH Paradox, This is the paradox of being a technologist. All you can do is aim for perfection. You will never achieve it.

The perfect decentralized crypto will never exist simply because it is not possible to create perfect technology. Humans will always use what is available at any given moment in time, and make the best use of what they are presented with.

Stone Age, Iron Age, Internet, Blockchain. PC's, Macs, UNIX, (or any computing item you care to mention) is only a process of moving forward with available tech until something better comes along to replace it.

ETH will be made to work within the confines of what is possible within the scope of it's blockchain restrictions. Anyone who thinks that ETH does not, or will not work is fooling themself, and just as the death of DOGE (predicted by the same type of people back in 2014) never came to pass, so it will be with all these 'ETH doesn't work' threads.

Get it out of your systems now. Nobody is listening. The industry moves forward, as ever.

Nice try Eth pumper, but the coin has no fundamentals due to the reasons we've been over in this thread for hours. The market can remain irrational for a long period of time, but it's eventually going to implode back to those fundamentals. The Eth pump was just an attack on Bitcoin in the first place.

Are you really going to resort to calling me an ETH pumper?? Next I'll be trying to drive the market down to get 'cheap ETH', yes? This board is so full of tired soundbites. Can you come up with some new ones please.

Like I said, I heard it all before with DOGE. Thread upon thread discussing and predicting DOGE's most definite and expected death, about it dropping like a stone, about the market eventually coming to it's senses, and how it will return to the shitcoin abyss from whence it did birth.

It's still in the top ten.

smooth

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 1198

Quote from: angaper on March 19, 2016, 06:03:24 PM

Investing in any ~~altcoin~~ cryptocurrency means to make a big bet for a future that may never come.

FTFY

r0ach

legendary

Activity: 1260

Merit: 1000

Quote from: StinkyLover on March 19, 2016, 06:48:27 PM

The perfect piece of technology will not ever exist. Not in this industry, or any other industry. Forget the ETH Paradox, This is the paradox of being a technologist. All you can do is aim for perfection. You will never achieve it.

The perfect decentralized crypto will never exist simply because it is not possible to create perfect technology. Humans will always use what is available at any given moment in time, and make the best use of what they are presented with.

Stone Age, Iron Age, Internet, Blockchain. PC's, Macs, UNIX, (or any computing item you care to mention) is only a process of moving forward with available tech until something better comes along to replace it.

ETH will be made to work within the confines of what is possible within the scope of it's blockchain restrictions. Anyone who thinks that ETH does not, or will not work is fooling themself, and just as the death of DOGE (predicted by the same type of people back in 2014) never came to pass, so it will be with all these 'ETH doesn't work' threads.

Get it out of your systems now. Nobody is listening. The industry moves forward, as ever.

Nice try Eth pumper, but the coin has no fundamentals due to the reasons we've been over in this thread for hours. The market can remain irrational for a long period of time, but it's eventually going to implode back to those fundamentals. The Eth pump was just an attack on Bitcoin in the first place.

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: StinkyLover on March 19, 2016, 06:48:27 PM

The perfect piece of technology will not ever exist.

The internet isn't perfect but it scaled to billions.

Ethereum won't work for anything that will scale to more then a few users. And smart contracts are nonsense that has no use cases. Slock and Augur won't work AT ALL.

Yeah no perfection, but don't invest in rocks. They are pretty much useless.

StinkyLover

sr. member

Activity: 454

Merit: 250

This industry is pure fiction

The perfect piece of technology will not ever exist. Not in this industry, or any other industry. Forget the ETH Paradox, This is the paradox of being a technologist. All you can do is aim for perfection. You will never achieve it.

The perfect decentralized crypto will never exist simply because it is not possible to create perfect technology. Humans will always use what is available at any given moment in time, and make the best use of what they are presented with.

Stone Age, Iron Age, Internet, Blockchain. PC's, Macs, UNIX, (or any computing item you care to mention) is only a process of moving forward with available tech until something better comes along to replace it.

ETH will be made to work within the confines of what is possible within the scope of it's blockchain restrictions. Anyone who thinks that ETH does not, or will not work is fooling themself, and just as the death of DOGE (predicted by the same type of people back in 2014) never came to pass, so it will be with all these 'ETH doesn't work' threads.

Get it out of your systems now. Nobody is listening. The industry moves forward, as ever.

angaper

hero member

Activity: 966

Merit: 507

Actually all this alternate economy based on cryptocurrencies involves a great paradox, because we are trying to look for a better financial stability to solve the current economic chaos, when it is well known that emerging technologies tend to be rapidly displaced.

Investing in any altcoin means to make a big bet for a future that may never come.

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 19, 2016, 05:29:46 PM

...

Btw, proof-of-stake will never scale out user adoption, because it is a vested interest paradigm, and thus will be destroyed by its stake holders. No stake holder (in any context or business model) allows a competitor to profit. Only permissionless, decentralized systems scale.

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 18, 2016, 10:50:07 AM

Quote from: d57heinz on March 18, 2016, 09:52:52 AM

This coin has a 15 second conf time bitocin is 600... just that alone their is a 40x increase in network capacity

Hey technological idiot. Please stop writing about things you do not understand. Because some n00bs might believe you.

Decreasing the block period, does nothing to decrease the propagation delay for any particular block size. Since the orphan rate is function of both propagation delay and block period, it is wash in terms of one must use smaller block sizes at lower block periods, in order to have the same resistance to centralization of mining (due to the economies-of-scale around winning your own blocks more often, thus avoiding the lost hashrate on orphans and waiting for propagation).

Spoetnik

legendary

Activity: 1540

Merit: 1011

FUD Philanthropist™

@banano

Quote

community size is worth more than tech

Doge coin ? ahahhahahha

It was left for dead by the so called "Community" as i predicted it would long ago.
Hell the Doge dev guy even posted a message saying he quit the coin..
Because the community failed to support Doge coin.

Please less verbal diarrhea for the sole purpose of defending ETH
And go back to your main account chicken shit.

All of you cowardly little bullshiting greedy shills are *NOT* Noobs that just showed up.
You are bunch of older users here who are trying hard to hide so you can scam on with ETH.
Case in point, user "tokeweed"
I had caught him a bunch of times defending ETH around here then he simply vanished
..as these other new accounts popped up (talking like they know more than us who have been doing this for years)

Shit spinning cowards don't get any cred sorry.
Want some ? put your neck on the line and grow some balls and act like an adult.

The only reason many of you ETH spammers are hiding is because you know what your doing is wrong
..and you KNOW damn well it's going to turn out bad in the end.
People HIDE for a reason !

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Dapp Koolaid:

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 16, 2016, 05:33:21 PM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 14, 2016, 01:11:12 PM

Quote from: Minecache on March 14, 2016, 01:01:35 PM

Re: Arcade City Uses Ethereum to Decentralize Taxi, Delivery and Roadside Assistance

http://allcoinsnews.com/2016/03/14/arcade-city-uses-ethereum-to-decentralize-taxi-delivery-and-roadside-assistance-services-and-launches-mobile-app/

There is no way for a smart contract to form an objective consensus about events that occur external to a block chain.

All voting is a power vacuum that fails due to the Iron Law of Political Economics.

This press release is bullshit with no adoption and is merely to sell more ETH tokens to fools.

Augur and Slock.it and 99% of the apps/contracts announced for Ethereum are so flawed they can never work.

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 14, 2016, 01:55:00 PM

Furthermore, ArcadeCity does not use ETH for payment. Cash, credit card, debit, and Paypal are accepted.

The Ethereum integration is primarily to sell tokens to drivers, i.e. a way to do public offering (let's hope they comply with SEC regulations):

Quote

Arcade City will use Ethereum to issue ‘crypto-equity’ to drivers, allowing them to own up to 100% of the company by 2020.

It has nothing to do with using Ethereum to enable some new technology that improves upon Uber. It is about governance and creating a copycoin P&D in the Uber space.

More information:

http://cointelegraph.com/news/arcade-city-decentralized-blockchain-based-answer-to-ubera

They could use a block chain for drivers to sign a record of the price they are offering, and for riders to sign records giving reviews of the drivers, i.e. a decentralized database that verifies the signers so that reputation can't be faked.

But reputation can be Sybil attacked, unless a resource must be consumed in order to establish a reputation.

Payments from riders to drivers on the block chain would not be a consumed resource, because drivers could pay themselves from fake rider accounts. Proof-of-stake does not consume a resource and thus it has attack vectors.

The solution is for riders to form a Web of Trust, where they trust friends and friends-of-friends and this reputation is the only reputation they trust.

But none of this needs atomic Smart Contracts. All we need is a way to sign hashes on the block chain and keep the data on a DHT. Which is I think the correct design for a 2.0 block chain.

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: tromp on March 16, 2016, 10:07:08 AM

Quote from: generalizethis on March 16, 2016, 02:44:07 AM

When five MAD men carrying box cutters and riding camels buy ETH from themselves to create the illusion of a $billion market cap, I know crypto has turned into a cess pool going no where.

They can't just be buying from themselves. All the miners must be paid as well...

I bet the mining is largely a set of insiders who were told to borrow money and mine the shit out of it, because they would be part of the P&D. So I do believe the majority of the miners are cooperating with those who are executing this P&D.

Mining with GPUs doesn't mean widely held.

hv_ conjectured upthread that the Chinese are trying to obtain ETH in order to monopolize the coming switch to proof-of-stake consensus in Casper. Thus they would not be selling and they may be involved in the P&D by taking huge short positions, so they can scoop up the coins cheaply.

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 16, 2016, 01:54:59 AM

Quote from: generalizethis on March 16, 2016, 01:31:13 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 16, 2016, 01:17:19 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 16, 2016, 01:15:54 AM

Bottom line is that the block chain is applicable for recorded state transitions that can be proved to be correct from data internal to the block chain. It is not applicable to anything which requires subjectivity about data external to the state in the block chain.

So most everything people are proposing for Dapps, can't work without breaking the objective census mechanism and thus destroying the Nash equilibrium security of the consensus due to a Prisoner's dilemma over which is the consensus choice.

And validation will always end up centralized for any block chain (smart contracts or crypto currency) no matter which consensus design is chosen.

Ethereum will crash and burn eventually. For a while, they might be able to keep the market fooled with technobabble and centralized training wheels.

This even applies to the Internet of Things as you (or a hacker or the manufacturer) can program your things to lie, correct?

I was thinking on how to defend autonomous cars from hackers and thought a decentralized consensus network offered the best chance of secure/safe driving, but reading your posts, makes me think that it will either be a state system or off-ramped to a corporate system, but it can't be decentralized because the blockchain can only verify its chain in a decentralized manner--hope I'm reading this aspect correctly.

The only way to have an external data feed that is not binary is to delegate to a centralized source, because even if we use reputation (or stake deposits) to prevent Sybil attacks and take a vote, the problem is that such a vote only surely converges to a majority outcome if the choices are only binary (e.g yes or no). Otherwise we can get forks which disagree on the consensus choice.

So conceptually an Augur-like prediction market could work if the bet outcomes are binary. But this reputation consensus has to be integrated with the block chain consensus and can't be orthogonal to it. Augur's mistake is building a reputation consensus on top of Ethereum's separate (but not orthgonal!) consensus protocol, which thus destroys the Nash equilibrium and creates a Prisoner's dilemma over which is the consensus choice.

But an additional problem, is that reputation systems are a power vacuum that ultimately centralize to a winner-take-all due to the Iron Law of Political Economics.

And the flaws of proof-of-stake have been enumerated.

I'd be interested in seeing a proof-of-work consensus for binary outcome predication bets. But that will have serious problems if the binary outcomes are not objectively clear to all miners.

Whoops:

Quote from: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ethereum-powered-augur-brings-its-beta-microsoft-azures-blockchain-cloud-1549630

"The other thing we added was the ability to create multiple-choice markets. In the alpha we only had binary yes or no markets."

tromp

legendary

Activity: 990

Merit: 1108

Quote from: generalizethis on March 16, 2016, 02:44:07 AM

When five MAD men carrying box cutters and riding camels buy ETH from themselves to create the illusion of a $billion market cap, I know crypto has turned into a cess pool going no where.

They can't just be buying from themselves. All the miners must be paid as well...

generalizethis

legendary

Activity: 1750

Merit: 1036

Facts are more efficient than fud

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 16, 2016, 02:04:48 AM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 16, 2016, 01:15:54 AM

Dapps, can't work without breaking the objective census mechanism and thus destroying the Nash equilibrium security of the consensus

And validation will always end up centralized for any block chain (smart contracts or crypto currency) no matter which consensus design is chosen.

Ethereum will crash and burn eventually. For a while, they might be able to keep the market fooled with technobabble and centralized training wheels.

Who cares,

the contract will still get processed

the central controller has no incentive to steal anyone's money and scatter the billion dollar community that was just created

community size is worth more than tech, case in point: bitcoin

"decentralization" is overrated

distributed liability is all that really matters today. In other words, having the ability to move the physical geographic location of the central node to another country without service disruption in order to escape government control is all that matters. That my friends is what the average Joe considers "adequate decentralization"

Nobody gives a shit about John Nash.

So until there is a better non-vaporware alternative to Ethereum (when they eventually crash and burn), the hype continues unabated

You don't seem to understand the failure caused by vested interests (case in point: Bitcoin's scalepocalypse) which makes your $billion adoption market implausible, which was the reason we needed decentralization. Case in point: Apple Pay's inability to scale because it competes against other vested interests.

Market caps are not adoption valuation. They are greater fool illusions, especially when one can't even calculate a P/E ratio in the case of crypto trash. When five MAD men carrying box cutters and riding camels buy ETH from themselves to create the illusion of a $billion market cap, I know crypto has turned into a cess pool going no where.

The slow game (or so fast you lose your lunch money) game of "I'm making money; who cares if the tech is real or not?" is dangerous, not only for your bank account, but for those of us who want to look in the mirror and see that we are being as truthful as possible to ourselves in life. Lying to oneself by ignoring the flaws of a technology in an attempt for short term financial gains is the Russian roulette of bag-holding-- more luck than skill and more "you got what you deserve, dumbass" than "I admire his courage."

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 16, 2016, 01:15:54 AM

Dapps, can't work without breaking the objective census mechanism and thus destroying the Nash equilibrium security of the consensus

And validation will always end up centralized for any block chain (smart contracts or crypto currency) no matter which consensus design is chosen.

Ethereum will crash and burn eventually. For a while, they might be able to keep the market fooled with technobabble and centralized training wheels.

Who cares,

the contract will still get processed

the central controller has no incentive to steal anyone's money and scatter the billion dollar community that was just created

community size is worth more than tech, case in point: bitcoin

"decentralization" is overrated

distributed liability is all that really matters today. In other words, having the ability to move the physical geographic location of the central node to another country without service disruption in order to escape government control is all that matters. That my friends is what the average Joe considers "adequate decentralization"

Nobody gives a shit about John Nash.

So until there is a better non-vaporware alternative to Ethereum (when they eventually crash and burn), the hype continues unabated

You don't seem to understand the failure caused by vested interests (case in point: Bitcoin's scalepocalypse) which makes your $billion adoption market implausible, which was the reason we needed decentralization. Case in point: Apple Pay's inability to scale because it competes against other vested interests.

Market caps are not adoption valuation. They are greater fool illusions, especially when one can't even calculate a P/E ratio in the case of crypto trash. When five MAD men carrying box cutters and riding camels buy ETH from themselves to create the illusion of a $billion market cap, I know crypto has turned into a cess pool going no where.

TPTB_need_war

sr. member

Activity: 420

Merit: 262

Quote from: generalizethis on March 16, 2016, 01:31:13 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 16, 2016, 01:17:19 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on March 16, 2016, 01:15:54 AM

Bottom line is that the block chain is applicable for recorded state transitions that can be proved to be correct from data internal to the block chain. It is not applicable to anything which requires subjectivity about data external to the state in the block chain.

So most everything people are proposing for Dapps, can't work without breaking the objective census mechanism and thus destroying the Nash equilibrium security of the consensus due to a Prisoner's dilemma over which is the consensus choice.

And validation will always end up centralized for any block chain (smart contracts or crypto currency) no matter which consensus design is chosen.

Ethereum will crash and burn eventually. For a while, they might be able to keep the market fooled with technobabble and centralized training wheels.

This even applies to the Internet of Things as you (or a hacker or the manufacturer) can program your things to lie, correct?

I was thinking on how to defend autonomous cars from hackers and thought a decentralized consensus network offered the best chance of secure/safe driving, but reading your posts, makes me think that it will either be a state system or off-ramped to a corporate system, but it can't be decentralized because the blockchain can only verify its chain in a decentralized manner--hope I'm reading this aspect correctly.

The only way to have an external data feed that is not binary is to delegate to a centralized source, because even if we use reputation (or stake deposits) to prevent Sybil attacks and take a vote, the problem is that such a vote only surely converges to a majority outcome if the choices are only binary (e.g yes or no). Otherwise we can get forks which disagree on the consensus choice.

So conceptually an Augur-like prediction market could work if the bet outcomes are binary. But this reputation consensus has to be integrated with the block chain consensus and can't be orthogonal to it. Augur's mistake is building a reputation consensus on top of Ethereum's separate (but not orthgonal!) consensus protocol, which thus destroys the Nash equilibrium and creates a Prisoner's dilemma over which is the consensus choice.

But an additional problem, is that reputation systems are a power vacuum that ultimately centralize to a winner-take-all due to the Iron Law of Political Economics.

And the flaws of proof-of-stake have been enumerated.

I'd be interested in seeing a proof-of-work consensus for binary outcome predication bets. But that will have serious problems if the binary outcomes are not objectively clear to all miners.

Topic: The Ethereum Paradox - page 24. (Read 99876 times)