Topic: Where are you 'Iamnotback'? - page 6. (Read 35318 times)

Stupid idiot.

The main primary purpose of bitcoin is NOT to financially milk the sheeps, BUT to digitally track the activities and properties of them.
What you are analyzing is based on what is happening TODAY.
In the future, things will change.
That's why they are testing out PoS and other non-PoW proposals.
The moment bitcoin activates segwit, your whole stupid thesis falls apart in your face.

Scum.

He has several accounts all banned for ban evasion. It seems that the underlying offense which caused him to initially get into trouble (and often the thing which causes his alts to get noticed) is excessive multi-posting. But when he was warned and/or temporarily banned for this minor thing, he kept evading his bans. This forum cannot operate unless its few rules are followed, so ignoring the warnings and temporary bans that you receive and continuing to do the same stuff is unacceptable. People who do so are not welcome here.

His bans will not automatically expire, and any future alts we see from him will be permabanned. I may manually reconsider his ban if he promises to actually try not to break forum rules. The rules are not meant to silence anyone, but to keep the forum usable and fair. When someone multi-posts excessively, it monopolizes a thread in a way which harms everyone else's ability to communicate. Based on his posts in this thread, I think that he will just continue to break rules if unbanned, so I will not unban him at this time.

bitcointalk.org is not a normal for-profit company. Even if banning iamnotback somehow stopped all future ad revenue, he would still be banned, since his rule-breaking is disrupting the forum's mission of hosting free discussion of Bitcoin and related topics. (As explained above, "free discussion" is not "unmoderated discussion".) Similarly, I would welcome effective competition from decentralized forums, and I would be thrilled to be able to shut down bitcointalk.org in favor of a better-in-all-ways decentralized alternative. But although decentralized forums have existed for a long time (eg. Freenet's FMS is almost exactly what iamnotback keeps describing, and has existed since before Bitcoin), they have unfortunately not been widely used since the era of the semi-decentralized Usenet system, mainly due to vastly inferior usability.

How could someone who is acting like B-lister by trying to bait me into an argument possibly have any comprehension of what an A-lister does. An A-lister wouldn't waste his time doing what you're doing.

Eric Raymond is certainly a A-lister, and if you posted some crap like that to his blog, he would also either humiliate you or delete your post.

Unfortunately the Ignore feature of this forum doesn't work very well. It continues to show me the blanked out posts of those I Ignored and replies to those I ignored. I want an Ignore feature that erases you entirely from my view, so you can't come back to haunt me when someone I don't Ignore decides to reply to you. It is an unfortunate feature of this forum that is subjects us to trolls we don't want to have to deal with. That is why for example, you won't see an A-lister such as Eric Raymond posting extensively in a forum where he can be torn to shreds in a battle of attrition by 100s of anonymous newbie trolls who want to take pot shots at the top dog. I participated in BCT because I wanted to learn everything I could about the blockchain technology and the community. It was a necessary sacrifice that subjected me to a lot of strife that A-listers would refuse to get mired in. But sometimes we have to step down to be subjected B-lister activity in order to attain the grassroots knowledge that can aid us to accomplish A-lister paradigm shifts.

The most appropriate quoted from that essay that pertains to me is (and with the italic emphasis on the word lonely), especially given I've been trapped in the Philippines since 2006 (a country where it is impossible for me to find a technological peer):


And yet you still don't comprehend the essay as you continue to exhibit B-lister activity.

Elevate your game if you can. And stop the elbows and acrimony.

---

And here is another example of where I would just decide to make this guy entirely disappear from my view so I never see anything he writes ever again, because he is delusional:


He has been told that I don't have sockpuppets yet he persists in making a false allegation while the irony is he is anonymous and I am not anonymous.

The insanity of this forum.

Sometimes I wonder if these guys are paid to disrupt all productive activities.

a huge number of sock puppets.  this guy literally loves to talk to himself.

I am shocked at this decision to ban him. I did not see any trollish posts. One of the reason I was attracted to these forums was because of the openness of discussion, which is not present in other places. Obviously it makes sense due to the culture of the cryptocommunity.

I'm sure this decision will negatively impact bitcointalk in the future more than iamnotback, who is being banned.

One more major issue about Bitcoin's coming transaction fees that needed to be clarified and was about to refute @Dorky, but got banned. So here is the missing information so @Dorky can hopefully understand his error:


That is mathematically impossible if the block size remains 1MB, then there will be increasing transaction demand competing for limited block size space, thus miners must prioritize those transactions which pay the highest fees.

Since whales will have transactions which are say 1000 times higher in transferred value than minnows, so if whales are willing to pay 0.1% fee, then minnows will pay a 100% fee (i.e. they can't transact any more).

For example, when I withdraw BTC from Poloniex, Poloniex merges that output into a transaction with many outputs for other clients, thus one of Poloniex’s transactions can be worth much more than one individual’s.


At the point that miners are making too much profit off of whales, the whales are economically incentivized to rent hashrate, mine their own blocks, and pay the fees to themselves. Thus ultimately, the miners and the whales are economically the same entities.


The whales and the miners are economically the same entities, per the math above. Your imaginary dialogue is complete nonsense from an economics analysis perspective.

And that is why I stated that the dolphins (the $millionaires) will be paying the fees for the whales. The whales will pay no fees. And the minnows will be kicked off the blockchain by the high fees.

My analysis was mathematically cogent. You simply couldn't visualize the math without me spelling it out for you ABCDEFG.

Enjoy the inane, centralized control privilege that enables idiots (janitors who produce nothing and only burn books) to obstruct production, because the end is near of that nonsense clusterfuck arrangement. It is a typical behavior these days of debt-funded, socialism, entitled Westerners (especially high prevalence amongst the Millennials youth) to whirl away their time on lolz activities which produce nothing-at-all. Men have turned into females wherein they pay more attention to attitude than who can produce the most and wage war most effectively. I wrote that I don't really blame you for being a predicament of the dominant cultural and centralized technological paradigms, although self-responsibility dictates you will be victim of it if you don't find a way to break out of its deleterious effect on your brain.

I stumbled onto Szabo's Law of the Dominant Paradigm, and it is a reasonable conjecture and explanation for the value of the groupthink which is apparently enforced by Bitcoin's moderation policies as cited by @mprep.

---

Since our debate/discussions got cut off by the ban, let's make this 100% clear so as to set the foundation for any future discussion between us, such as if we continue on any future decentralized forum.

I have already stated upthread that my hope would be to only engage you on a decentralized forum wherein I could "edit your posts" for brevity and "delete" your insolent posts when they are accusing me of being deluded based on your unfalsifiable and unprovable theory of the confirmation bias you allege I have due to my investment of my effort over the past years in blockchain research and my Bitnet project. As I explained, these moderation actions would only appear for those who had chosen to have their forum client software follow me as a moderator. All your posts would remain fully intact on the blockchain, and any reader could view them if they want to. So in no way would I propose a system wherein I could censor you, yet if I am a popular moderator, I can influence you to structure your discussion to be more concise and to avoid adversarial ad hominem allegations that can't be falsified. You've demonstrated a tendency to jump to false confidence, which requires great effort on my part of unravel all the details necessary to point this out factually. It is too much of a distraction from the main work I need to be doing, as you have also acknowledged as quoted below wherein you are encouraging me to focus on "do your thing".

We both have a high intellect; and I detect that your broad knowledge base is likely greater than mine considering you're probably an academic. Whereas, my highly specialized (maximum division-of-labor) knowledge base in blockchains and consensus algorithms is more high-end state-of-the-art than yours at the moment, simply because I've been intensely working in that area for past years. For example, before the mods cut me off, I was planning to explain why your conceptualization of proof-of-stake is incomplete or flawed. But that is another intensely detailed discussion and frankly it would be better to do it on the Bitnet forum wherein we want to compare the Bitnet consensus design to other technologies such as PoW and PoS. So actually it is better I got cut off for the time being, so I can focus on coding, not talking, debating, and explaining.

You're intense, haughty, insolent skepticism/pessimism/fatalism about the (lack of) importance of blockchains and Bitcoin (as well the similar insolent, haughty attitude that refuses to admit the possibility of a future worsening banking and economics crisis in Europe) is a major turnoff for me, because for example similar myopia presumably (most certainly) existed at the dawn of the Internet and the Great Depression and its ensuing Holocaust. You'll attribute my reaction to the confirmation bias you allege I have, yet my point as a visionary has always been to not miss the exponential change that humans can't detect in its nascent stages wherein for example aliasing error (remember the broken clock example upthread) would cause someone to presume that Bitcoin and blockchains are only about unregulated illegal activities, gambling and speculation. I think you're going to be eating humble pie at the rapid transformation of the importance of Bitcoin and blockchains over the coming years.

Your closed-mindedness (abuse of Occam's Razor and skepticism towards all major transformation, except for your religious devolution to Kurzweil's Singularity fatalistic sensationalism wherein man is destroyed) is a major turnoff for a visionary personality like mine. So any use of the word 'idiot' as a poor/lazy (need for concision) attempt to summarize the above, is more or less about aliasing error due to your personality traits. Whereas, although I do have a visionary leaning confirmation bias, I am very much open to facts which invalidate my perspective or theories. I have a very open-mind always receiving new data points and re-calibrating.

The timing of technological revolutions coincide with some key enabling factor. For example, the Second Industrial Revolution (mass production in factories) was enabled by the First Industrial Revolution (e.g. steel fabrication). Szabo has written extensively¹ about enabling factors of the Second Agricultural Revolution and the subsequent industrial revolutions. The Internet made possible and even necessary to solve the problem of decentralized consensus, i.e. blockchains. This is a technological revolution in its nascent stage which is going to significantly transform the world.

That I put this much effort into clarifying this for you, means that I do acknowledge your high intellect, but it frustrates my interaction with you, that you combine that high intellect with a disrespect for the seriousness of my blockchain work (and thus you feel it is appropriate to consume my time on verbose diversionary debates as your recreational activity) and a haughty, fatalistic perspective on the fate of mankind. Szabo explained that the Singularity requires that the maximum division-of-labor be invalid. I was trying to explain this you before in our prior discussion on the Singularity. You have a high intellect but a very haughty, fatalistic, myopic, near-sighted, aliasing error bias. We necessarily can only exist in a relavistic universe, and thus there can't be any all encompassing superior intelligence. Any reference point which you try to use to compute your surety of the coming absolute superiority of machine intelligence is invalidated by the chaos of non-local hidden variables of in the unification of quantum mechanics and General relativity (macroscopic mechanics) via the relavistic quantum mechanics theory. Moreover, mankind exists because mankind perceives his existence. If you remove mankind, then perspective that creates the existence of the world that we currently perceive to be reality, will no longer be.

P.S. my Theory of Everything blog actually points out that time travel is realistic when we become purely information, i.e. there is some unification yet also contrast with the Singularity concept. Had to put that on the back burner for the time being. We really need to dive into relativistic quantum mechanics in future when the urgent blockchain work is completed. Note my health issue is fading away rapidly now, and is no longer a hindrance. I'm approaching age 52 in June, yet for the first time in years I did consecutive days of 12 x 75 meter 100% effort sprints. My former 4.5s 40 yard dash speed is coming back. Also I am feeling the crazy power to go out and want to run more sprints after 30 minute of rest. I had completely lost that during my TB infection. I have such crazy power coming now that I've been trading LTC non-stop for the past week or more without sleeping much more than a 1 hour cat nap here and there. And then go out and run 2kms following by 12 sprints without any sleep! That is what I was before the TB. My crazy intense athletics is back so I don't need this forum any more. I have an outlet now to release/satiate/regulate my high levels of dopamine.

1

http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2013/11/european-asian-divergence-predates.html http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2011/06/trotting-ahead-of-malthus.html http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2010/12/some-conjectures-and-facts-regarding.html http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2011/06/agricultural-consequences-of-black.html

Indeed.

If I am without knowing that myself, I REALLY need a psychiatrist !  

Hell, how am I going to find out ? 

^
I'm more convinced than ever that you are.  

I don't know if I should take that as a compliment, or whether I should hurry seeking a psychiatrist  

Seriously, I'm really not Shelby.  He's much more expert that I am, but he's also much more deluded than I am (and he considers me an idiot, which he would never think of himself).

To Shelby: go and do your thing now, that's much more important.

And yet you keep coming back as you prove yourself over and over to be weak willed and lacking in any self control.

Not to mention completely unfocused. You have so little self control that you allow your emotions to take you away from focusing on your more important project.

Funny. You exhibit every single trait outlined in that article about b-listers. Real A-listers and those that associate regularly with real A-listers recognize you as a b-lister. Your actions alone show a complete lack of A-lister personality traits.  You know what they say. If it walks like a b-lister, if it spouts off like a b-lister, it is a b-lister.

I was just having some fun. Considering his last response, I feel my work here is done since it's no fun discussing with someone who not only keeps repeating himself but also ignores any explanation to his inaccurate accusations. Guess this month's "poke the pompous prick" carnival ride broke and I'll have to wait for the next one.

There is an ignore button, and there is no need for anything else.

If offended by troll then anyone can mute anyone else.

We don't need gatekeepers.

Even for bot spam, but that is more nuanced, most reasonable persons agree that a mechanism could exist to delete none human spammers.

banning is too controversial

Editing where and what is allowed on each board is still a right Mods can have.

That's power enough.

You are too dumb to even begin to understand how you are contradicting yourself and what you have been saying for days now

I just want to reiterate that I am totally at peace with not posting to BCT. I don't want to come back. I will not come back. I want to instead improve the paradigm, so that I can have what I think I want in a forum so as to be able to be more efficient and for moderation to be nonexclusive, unprivileged, and incorruptible.

I actually don't blame @mprep for the problem. He is just a follower, not a leader. And his attitude about political correctness and ego metrics is quite prevalent now amongst the millennials (even including up to many of the boomers). I don't blame him for being indoctrinated and ostensibly having his brain programmed by the culture and school system.

Frankly, until I have the features I want that can enable me to be more efficient on a forum, it is better for me to be banned so I don't waste time in this inefficient system we have now.

Similar to many of you, I learned a lot while on BCT. From my perspective, it served its purpose but I simply outgrew it. It's just time to create something that can grow with me to much higher levels.

And I think that is enough about me. Stop already please. Please stop petitioning for me.

Let's go into work mode and see if we can actually launch something and not just more and more and more talk.


Can you please stop with your nonsense already. I will create a decentralized forum. Can't you read  


Your post exemplifies the ego issues of b-listers enumerated in the essay. Here you are all elbows and acrimony trying to convince yourself that I am not A-lister. It won't work out well for you though.


Right on cue with the metronome, here comes all the offended b-lister riff-raff.

Again it will get much more peaceful at the top where we A-listers operate once I have the features I want in a decentralized forum.

You riff-raff will have no voice and no one important will ever see your posts. You'll be permanently relegated to "riff-raff" jail where all you riff-raff and can read each others' posts that no one important ever sees due to our expert moderation. Decentralized of course, so it will be a free market outcome. If you can convince others to choose your moderation choices, then so be it. I am fairly certain that A-listers won't be choosing to follow your moderation and posts. A free market competition is all I need to falsify who are the b-listers and who are the A-listers.

Can confirm.

Posts like this still stand, while mine (with same quotation + additional replies) is deleted.
Another post (not mine) with same quotation was posted with "For posterity" message added, but is removed.
This was written after my post.

Nothing is more boring than watching sheep eat grass all day.

Throw in some wolves, and then you have something worth watching. 



 

^Technically he could start his own forum which could serve the same purpose without Theymos having to do anything at all. It'd actually be in his best interest because then there's no rules for him to follow and he is free to "centralize" his own forum as he sees fit. He supposedly already has a "giant following" & "thousands of readers", why not take them elsewhere if that is true?

The only thing I dislike about all of this is the fact that Spoetnik and others trolls are still around.. If you are going to ban for trolling, you can't ignore the self-proclaimed king of the throne. Equal punishment for similar offenses, that way we have less ammo as a community to be recreationally outraged with.

Nope ,

I had week long arguments with both, definitely two different guys.  




Which confirms what I posted earlier, whether you agree or disagree with him, he is probably the most entertaining poster in all of BTCTalk,
and his constant posting generates more ad revenue than others.

If Theymos wanted to play this a better way , would be to give Shelby his own Discussions forum and split the ad revenue with him for that forum.
Anyone that does not want to read Shelby thoughts can stay out of that specific forum.
Those that do, which are numerous , could enjoy it , without mods banning him for a rule system , that to be quite honest many here don't agree with anyway.
Permaban does nothing but kill a screen name as the technically literate can evade it, if they so choose.

Shelby brings up points that makes you think, some will agree some won't , but censorship of his thoughts in a forum that needs posts to gain more ad revenue is self defeating.

IMO, either kill the permaban or give the guy his own forum here and be done with it, because otherwise this meta forum will be the most popular of all your foums and take a lot of your Mods time that could be spent on better things.  
In trying to become another man's Jailer , you also imprison yourself with him.

 

This thread has become so entertaining. My favorite part is when Shelby quotes that ego article. It's like he's so convinced he's an A-lister that he fails to comprehend what a real A-lister has to say on the matter. Anyone that is or is close to A-listers knows without a doubt that Shelby is nothing more than a wannabe b-lister lol.