RE: In T̶h̶e̶f̶t̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶M̶a̶s̶s̶a̶c̶r̶e̶s̶ᵀʳᵃⁿˢᵖᵃʳᵉⁿᶜʸ We Trust
Too bad I didn't see this sooner. We're pretty much on the same page though it seems clear to me you've been thinking about this longer. I have doubts that bitcoin was some creation by the NSA though. Its technology, while dissolving the bordered properties of nations also has the same effect with all levels of authoritative control and would thus be self defeating.
I've heard conspiracy theories such as Katherine Austin Fitt's that bitcoin was allowed to be developed by the deep state so that it could have cheap access to the technology waiting later to take this over. The fact that the forks in bitcoin are so resistant to this level of control, and that consensus dominates, seems to make this impossible.
I've also written in my blog about DAC's and how they can replace centrally controlled governance models (in numerous places). We're pretty much on the same page politically, though I went the long way around before settling on anarchy as a practical matter.
Come out of her, not cum outside of her
lol. This is one of the problems of translating ancient Greek (or Hebrew, etc), which Schmidt talks at length about. Semantic fields often overlap and you can end up with bad translations.
The smallest transistor ASIC fabs will always be controlled by the elite behind the curtain. Thus they control the mining of Bitcoin, because electrical efficiency is paramount. Thus at the right time in the future, they can turn off your number (forbid you to transact and thus you die in digital world where cash no longer exists). That is absolute power and control exactly as described in Revelation.
See also the Gist I linked for you. That contains a lot of my research on consensus algorithms.
When we know more than most of everyone else on a particular subject matter, we look stupid in their eyes because they don’t know what we know so they presume we’re bullshitting or not correct. IOW those without sufficient knowledge of subject matter are incapable of judging whether someone else is expert or not.
It’s plausible that I’ve overlooked some factor, but I studied those issues much more deeply than most everyone else in our industry. I had to. I designed a new consensus algorithm which isn’t PoW, nor PoS, nor Iota’s DAG (which btw is a total farce that only converges because of centralized Coordinator). I mean if you don’t think so, then go for example and see my debate with Avi Zohar on Medium which received numerous upvotes. I had a thread on Bitcointalk about Decentralization and for example Come-from-Beyond (the core dev of Iota) participated.
My opinion is that she is correct. The forks of Bitcoin will all eventually die. I had explained the math of fungible finance in some thread at Bitcointalk. I could dig that up at some future time if there will be a serious discussion that will be sufficiently publicized to make it worth my time to revisit that distraction again. The tail doesn’t wag the dog.
Still studying your link on consensus algorithms. Thanks. Will have to take some time to mull all of this over.
I heard that about Iota a few months ago, never invested in that.
There’s a lot more of my thought process spread around in numerous comments here, on Medium, and Bitcointalk. Also that Gist I sent you is a truncated copy of a much longer document which includes analysis of many more consensus algorithms including Byteball, IOHK’s Ouroboros, and others. And also the secret extended document has an overview of my consensus algorithm design and explains what makes it unique. At this time that extended document is not yet for general dissemination.
At some point I need to try to collate all of those comments into a coherent whitepaper. Yet another task which could benefit from others helping me. I am always on the lookout for those who are capable and available who want to join the project and help. I wrote an initial whitepaper in Q4 of 2016 but didn’t release it and I added much to my understanding since then. And the next time I attempt to collate/assimilate all the information on decentralized consensus, I will probably gain a new level of understanding.
Still trying to wrap my mind around this. Why is this buried so deep? I would think such news would have created a lot more FUD than the BCH fork last summer. I feel like if I spend the next 6 months studying all the game theoretical concepts, I might eventually be a competent judge of the security models of various blockchains, but I'm just not there yet. I find it intuitively worrisome, but can't act as an independent node of truth.
My coding skills are very good but solidity/python/javascript is not something I've used much before (only some limited javascript on my web pages). I enter coding.ivanontech.com June 1. I haven't really used C/C++ that much over the last 25 or so years either. My main expertise is in Pascal Delphi. But I've found that changing personalities in RAD studio isn't really all that difficult.
Byzcoin claimed they had solved the problem, but I refute that to some extent although some still argue against my reasoning.
Also I presume/observe that most people who could understand aren’t as devoted to attaining true decentralization. They have other vested interests that cause them to have a confirmation bias towards “it can be fixed eventually” or some other rationalization. In any case, Bitcoin can’t scale on chain, and I already provided that link for you explaining the Lightning Networks leads to centralization.
I think all of us who have peered deep into it (including for example the venerable @smooth), have become pessimistic about whether any consensus algorithm could provably remain decentralized. @smooth says we can’t prove they won’t remain decentralized. I surmise they take the stance that even whales disagree with each other and thus none of them must defect otherwise they all lose. But I respond that yes they’re forced to cooperate to extort the most by maximizing transaction fees to the most that the market can bear. Those who refuse are defeated by those who do because the most ruthless will earn the most profits. There’s no exception in the history of mankind when it comes to the way power vacuums of fungible finance behave.
I think my variant is the most different and has a chance of remaining decentralized if the users want it to. My consensus algorithm presumes the users are invested in decentralization, and that is why I want to match it to very popular/profitable social networking so the users are motivated to sheepdog guard it. I’m aware that users are apathetic, so the design relies on community watchdogs. The high-level concept is that users can’t be fooled when objectivity is digitally verifiable. The details go much deeper than that of course.
The decentralization bugaboo is a very complex subject. I don’t know if anyone can claim to be 100% certain of their analysis of it.
Btw, I just made a point-by-point refutation of some exaggerated claims about Steem.
I think the only way to find out if you can be productive in a new PL and framework is to just dive in and see how it goes. I get the impression that you’re very smart, so it’s probably one of those things that clicks after an initial learning curve hurdle.
C++ is a complex beast now unlike when you and I used it back in the 1990s. The templates are Turing complete and type checking of templates can’t be reasoned about by looking at types. You have to run the compiler and just see what happens. I’m attempting PL design also but I don’t know yet what will come out of that effort.
Btw, I haven’t studied Solidarity or Ethereum programming in detail yet either. But I tend to pick up new languages and APIs very quickly.
I
usedplayed around with C++ the most around 2010 when I got the Rad Studio edition with both C++ and Delphi about 10 years ago. This was about the same time unicode compliance was introduced. I was motivated to get better at C primarily because of the situation that developed with the ACS Atlas and I wanted to use the Olson tz database directly. But I decided to instead use MyBase (tz data only omitting the code portion of tz data) and developed in the Delphi side anyway because I already had what I needed to calculate Julian dates and other time based procedures in my own software and the code side of the solution was redundant.That eventually blew up in a lawsuit because Astrolabe was trying to disadvantage my software. I blogged about that situation in the beginning at Steemit and that post got the attention of a lot of whales here. Basically my solution (the Terran Atlas) caused massive disruption to important internet protocols back in 2011 because Gary Christen was pissed that I didn't take up the offer to work for them. It almost made me famous in an "Edward Snowden" sort of way.
This is turning out to be quite the rabbit hole. Many concepts that I've never heard of before. @ivanli's blockchain academy covered the basics of various consensus algo's, but none of the nuances of how various blockchains might attempt to be defeated.
You should be aware that I don't work the long hours that I used to because of my health and the fact that I'm here on the homestead also taking care of my elderly father. I've had no shortage of job offers in recent years, but at this point I really don't need money. I'll be glad to help if I can free of charge.
Referring to your linked blog, I went through the homeless stage also and also camped in the desert at one point eating canned chili and baked beans.
We are fighting the good fight. I have to be careful I don’t spread myself too thin with the Mythical Man Month problem of communication overload. I’m admiring your dedication to your father.