Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[molecular]

@majamalu

> It is difficult to express myself in English

you're being overly humble! I really liked an earlier post of yours which is both very insightful and eloquently written. I'll quote a little from it because I'd like to expand on some points:

Maybe it's time to admit that, at this stage, each crypto has a kind of de facto oligarchy disciplined by the dynamism of a free market -- that is, free both to reward liberally and to punish without mercy. Because unlike political oligarchies, ours lack coercive power and can be abandoned almost effortlessly. That's a good thing.

Yes, I think it's time to admit that. And while it's true that there is no direct coercive power, I don't agree that those oligarchies can be abandoned effortlessly. It does both take effort and incur huge cost to pull off a fork. Also they usually have an ace up their sleeves: the ability to keep the ticker/name and the inertia of the users who mostly just ask: "how can I claim and sell my free fork coins?". It's an uphill battle for the dissenters.

The way to minimize abuse of authority by the leaders is not to apply internal "checks and balances", which are easily gameable, but to increase the cost of their mistakes.

I agree that setting up internal processes or institutions or whatever is an approach doomed to be captured. So yes, let the oligarchs act freely, but the problem I see here is that the cost of their mistake is not solely carried by them. It hurts the greater community and cause, too.

The possibility of a fork always hangs over the heads of the decision makers, discouraging their bad behaviour.

I was hoping this mechanism would work, but does the ABC dev team seem discouraged to you? I'm not sure it's working so well.

 

[cypherdoc]

Ok, even Matt Corrallo agrees that Liquid is centralized. isn't that what i was arguing from it's inception?

 

[cypherdoc]

 

[cypherdoc]

Bitmain had almost 2,000 employees working across its mining and blockchain development verticals. It is expected to drop to 300 by the time the reported sacking concludes.

no mo IPO

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bitmain-bitcoin-mining-giant-sack-230553700.html?guccounter=1

 

[majamalu]

you're being overly humble! I really liked an earlier post of yours which is both very insightful and eloquently written.

Thank you, but remember that you are judging a finished product. I would write ten times faster in Spanish.

Yes, I think it's time to admit that. And while it's true that there is no direct coercive power, I don't agree that those oligarchies can be abandoned effortlessly. It does both take effort and incur huge cost to pull off a fork. Also they usually have an ace up their sleeves: the ability to keep the ticker/name and the inertia of the users who mostly just ask: "how can I claim and sell my free fork coins?". It's an uphill battle for the dissenters.

You are right. Maybe I should have clarified that I was referring to established oligarchies. It is hard to be a pioneer, not so much to join a movement that already has a large number of adherents.

In any case, it is much easier to abandon a crypto-oligarchy than a political oligarchy. But I don't think it will ever be free of cost either, nor that it should be -- otherwise it would be very difficult to maintain the minimum cohesion required by this kind of projects.

For a fork to make sense and have potential, it is necessary that the dominant oligarchy fucks it up big time, e.g. shooing users while bragging about it. That's why, in my opinion, the fork that gave rise to BCH made sense and the one that gave rise to BSV did not.

I agree that setting up internal processes or institutions or whatever is an approach doomed to be captured. So yes, let the oligarchs act freely, but the problem I see here is that the cost of their mistake is not solely carried by them. It hurts the greater community and cause, too.
(...)
I was hoping this mechanism would work, but does the ABC dev team seem discouraged to you? I'm not sure it's working so well.

The ABC team want the biggest changes now, so that we don't have to make them later -- when they become almost impossible to implement. It's a dangerous bet, but nothing like the radical redesign of Core.

In the worst case, we will have learned a valuable lesson. There are no guarantees of success; We all know this. In fact, none of us would be here if we didn't prefer to take that risk than to be involved in an eternal and pointless conflict -- be it with central banks or with Blockstream.
[doublepost=1545753173][/doublepost]
@Zarathustra

I will take you seriously when you move to the jungle.

 

[bitsko]

' It's a dangerous bet, but nothing like the radical redesign of Core.'

Trying to bring stability guarantees to a permanent lesser work chain is a redesign, and it is radical.

 

[Zarathustra]

@Zarathustra

I will take you seriously when you move to the jungle.

Facts (science vs religion) don't depend on my dislocation to the jungle. Facts are facts and religion is religion. If someone wants to fight for anarchy and against collectivism, he should know what anarchy is and that individualism is a collectivist aquisition.

Gold to the moon.

Here, for you, the ultimate gold song from a thoroughbred musician:

 

[majamalu]

"individualism is a collectivist aquisition"

Are you talking as an individual?

 

[wrstuv31]

In contrast to the 'individualists', those self-sufficient communities are not dependent on the work of and the interactions with strangers, aliens and unknowns.

Could a self-sufficient community grow to the point where they become strangers to each other? Or would they then splinter apart?

 

[Richy_T]

I have to admit I'm having a hard time placing myself on this axis (or anyone else). So maybe it's not a good distinction to make?

I think it's broadly correct but there are some false dichotomies in there. It's possible to support individualism but bemoan the lost opportunity to grow the network effect. A volunteerist can help build a barn.

Libertarians are not Utopianist by any means. That tends to be a projection by collectivists who think they can order everyone around for a better world (and the recalcitrant can visit the salt mines).

 

[Zarathustra]

"individualism is a collectivist aquisition"

Are you talking as an individual?

I'm talking about scientific knowledge. These findings are based on the collections of the society, which is hypercollectivism, which transformed the homo sapiens into a caricature of himself, a homo oeconomicus, aka debt slave. Societies are per se 'problem solving societies' (Tainter), which is a tautology. All societies are destined to collapse by Tainter's law: Diminishing return on additional investment in additional complexity. Complexity problems are always getting 'solved' with additional complexity. That works always until it doesn't (when the tipping point is reached).

 

[Zarathustra]

Could a self-sufficient community grow to the point where they become strangers to each other? Or would they then splinter apart?

Independent communities did not grow beyond Dunbar's Number for a million years. Some communities of the Arctic tundra and rainforests still oppose the missionaries. Hypercollectivism is a relatively recent achievement. The birth of this tragedy came with the Neolithic Revolution: Domestication of animals and later women. Women have been forced to monogamous behavior and to live with a man in the same house. They invented marriage. A madness.

 

[bitsko]

I like marriage

 

[macsga]

Season greetings everyone; I wish whatever you wish and believe for, to achieve it within the next year. All the best from Greece. And take it easy. Life is nothing but a game.

 

[Zarathustra]

I like marriage

During the height of Mao Tse-tung's communist rule in the 1960s and '70s, China's hard-liners forced the Mosuo people to abandon their practice of "tisese" and adopt the practice of monogamy. But when China relaxed its tight social controls during the post-Mao era, the Mosuo people reverted back to their traditional sexual practices.

https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=130332&page=1

Women from the Mosuo tribe do not marry, take as many lovers as they wish and have no word for "father" or "husband". But the arrival of tourism and the sex industry is changing their culture.

It's the paleo lifestyle. They had healthier food and healthier sex.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/dec/19/china-mosuo-tribe-matriarchy

She said, What is history?
And he said, History is an angel
Being blown
Backwards
Into the future
He said: History is a pile of debris
And the angel wants to go back and fix things
To repair the things that have been broken

But there is a storm blowing from Paradise
And the storm keeps blowing the angel
Backwards
Into the future

And this storm, this storm
Is called
Progress

 

[majamalu]

It just struck me that Satoshi was the king of Bitcoinlandia during the first two years. It can be argued that our problems began when people not as invested as he was in the project took his place.

 

[Zarathustra]

Just an information: Chris Pacia, the new hyped leader of the BCH society, claimed to be an anarchist. But he is a big blocker, and a hypocrite in perfection, whining about blocking and banning, but himself blocking and banning BU members.

 

[RollieMe]

@Zarathustra re:
> Just an information: Chris Pacia, the new hyped leader of the BCH society

You wouldn't have a link to more info about this society or CP's involvement would you? My searching (duckduckgo, r/btc) isn't turning anything up.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

I don't think blocking other people on twitter is bad, it often is more of a survival tactic. I do it for myself, when confronted with people not arguing, but trying to smear. Chris blocked my before the hashwar, in which discussions on twitter heated up.

Something else: I posted this on another thread about BUIP101:
https://bitco.in/forum/threads/buip101-closed-set-the-default-value-of-max-blocksize-cap-hard-limit-to-10-terabyte.22424/page-3#post-86770

Now I understand ...

On the Bangkok meeting Amaury explained an attack: flood nodes with an infinite number of transactions, and as long as they have no blocksize limit, they don't know when to end and will consume all their memory.

With a terabyte limit as proposed with this buip, the node could be pushed to consume one terabyte of ram. If you don't have it, you'd need to reboot and change the limit.

There might be methods to get a rough blocksize from merkle tree and coin base transaction, but it is not implemented yet and it is unclear how concrete the estimation is.

More important at the moment: deadalnix and micropresident voted with 'yes' on this proposal - clearly knowing that it introduces an exploit in the bitcoin unlimited software delivered as default - clearly knowing that this will harm bu adoption with miners, exchanges and everybody, and that this will strengthen abc's position as the dominant bch client.

Therefore deadalnix and micropresident voted with the intent of harming bitcoin unlimited. They proofed hostile abuse of bu's voting system. I demand that their voting rights are suspended immediately.

@solex I really think the situation is such that there is no doubt left.

 

[Zarathustra]

> I don't think blocking other people on twitter is bad, it often is more of a survival tactic.

Yes, but being a hypocrite is bad. Lamenting about being blocked and banished, and then doing it himself.