Andrew_Quentin

Wow, this place has completely transformed then? More like pleb news nowadays I guess rather than hacker news. Shame.

Everyone is an outlier to an 'average.'

And it creates monopolies, perfect for gulag control of the people.

How does google know they hit back within three seconds? Oh yeah, monopoly. Break them up.

They decide by the Wired guys having a coffee with the Google guys or a chat in some party.

Google is people afterall. Corrupt as fuck. That's why plenty call it gulag.

Are you a bot? Where do you find those stupid words? No wonder you're attracted to useless positions for status.

I'm saying there are laws against foreign interference in domestic politics for obvious reasons, so if some foreign government for example - which can openly buy Twitter stocks as there is no legal restriction and can do so either directly or like with Reddit indirectly by getting Tencent to buy it off - is moderating the speech of the president, then there's a big problem.

Twitter is not a private company, it's a publicly tradable company that can technically even fully be owned by the Chinese government itself through perfectly legally buying their shares on the open market.

You don't see a problem here?

Ah, so that's why Google has added site speed to their ranking factors? Another brick to hit them with then in the anti-trust lawsuits.

The interface, as in the website, is often a centralized point. Admins can remove stuff from there which easily deals with CP reflecting to a large extent the current situation - sending CP stuff to some fringe.

In more grey areas, although admins can remove, say, free speech pictures, the picture remains there, with anyone free to create a new interface allowing the picture to be easily accessed. So it's a bit similiar to the internet where anyone can - or maybe now, could - create a new site and upload the info.

You can then add more user level jury aspects on top, but I doubt anyone wants to face that sort of stuff and moderate it if the network was to gain scale. If we go back to the centralized website though, it becomes a bit interesting.

Take Milo's banning example - just because it is the most recent and comes to mind. We have the twitter website with Milo banned. Under this scheme, we can have a twitter classic with Milo not banned. Both of them have the same network effect, the same users etc, they identical in all ways, but in one Milo is banned in the other Milo isn't with the only other difference being that they have different domain names.

When we all agree something is abhorrent, everyone uses the non cp network through the centralized website interface, while some go to... like now we have internet and tor, when something is in a bit of a grey area, however, there is an added benefit.

Say, for example, reddit took some action against everyone's opinion. The current option is for everyone to move to a new site. That's of course a bit difficult as it requires a change of habit and changing habits can be stupendously extremely hard.

With this, or more generally, with a blockchain based approach, you don't ask anyone to shift at all. There is no shifting. All users remain, the entire network effect is still there. There are no bootstrapping questions etc. No starting back from zero. All there is, is typing a new domain, far, far easier than persuading everyone to start a new town in a ghost desert place.

So, it is obviously not a utopia, but, it is a bit of an improvement. The whole thing is very much at a cable switching for phone calls stage though, so, everyone is sort of considering this matters.

This thing is so conceptually new, just thought to ask what people here, in the start-up, VC world, think it can best move forward.

So Wright is Hal Finney? Or, who else mined bitcoins seven or eight hours after it went live?

Problem is that if it was centralized it may be shut down. Moreover, the central entity would have to issue money and comply with aml etc and register accounts, thus turning it into a bank.

Some are working on a consensus system called proof of stake which does not use energy. It is not clear whether it will be fully secure, etc., but if you read about this stuff decades ago you might want to google and research primarily Bitcoin and Ethereum.

You'd require some (substantial) investment, but you can always just mine them. Tunisia should have some fairly cheap electricity. Not sure how you can get the Asics there though. Maybe contact one of the sellers directly. They'll probably accept btc.

That sounds like a lot of conspiracy theory with zero evidence. Mind producing some actual evidence of brigading, sock puppeting, etc, preferably before theymos started banning everyone and was downvoted to -1,000 by the bitcoin community, not by whatever your paranoid head imagines.

Moreover, didn't theymos say he would ban coinbase from r/bitcoin. I suppose coinbases is a sockpuppet too right and maybe they out to destroy bitcoin because it isn't bitcoin that gives them their business.

All we get from small blockers is conspiracies and conspiracies, all the while you engage in ddosing, banning, censorship, changing of sorting orders, secret honk kong meetings, backroom deals with miners and on and on.

There is an attack going on and that is the insanity of the small blockers - a tiny minority of only 10% - crippling bitcoin by keeping network capacity limited, creating a huge backlog, unreliable transactions, and now we on HN discussing it.

Congrats - nutheads.

Your post contains a number of allegations with no proof whatever. Can you provide evidence of any "fake" campaign, of "sockpuppets" of "voting bots".

I mean, your post is psyop, otherwise called a "mind fuck", just a number of statements with zero evidence to discredit valid opinions by not in any way engaging them.

While you of course use outright censorship, banning, ddosing of nodes, secret conferences, and other dark black hat social engineering techniques you should be ashamed of.

I don't think the bitcoin development community acknowledges bitcoin can not scale to Visa levels. Perhaps one of them has a crystal ball, but I do not think anyone can say how far bitcoin scales as technology improves.

I mean bill gates said 64kb is enough for everyone, now some bitcoin developers are saying 1mb is enough for everyone. History proved Bill Gates wrong. I'm sure it will prove whoever wishes to speculate as if they have a crystal ball wrong too.

To be fair, 8mb and 8mb doubling every two years are two very different things. I understand why 8mb with doubling was offered, but I also understand why the chinese miners expressed their concerns, concerns which you were unwilling to address.

I supported BIP101, but your unwillingness to compromise - they offered 4mb doubling every 4 years I believe - played a great part in it's eventual failure.

The situation now is very much different with almost 100% of miners saying they will support 2mb and some 50% already supporting bitcoin classic with more to come.

So, I share your concerns, but unfortunately mistakes were made, some of them grave mistakes, mistakes from which we learned, and are thus now well placed to move forward.

Welcome to HN

If you knew anything about Bitcoin Unlimited I am sure you would have come across its most fundamental aspect - moving the blocksize limited from the hardcoded centralised protocol layer to the transport or messaging layer thus allowing each node operator to choose the limit in a decentralised fashion so creating an emergent consensus.

In regards to your speculative economics, as I am sure you are aware, storage/bandwith/processing/validation and mining has costs. No one would therefore mine a transaction for free in 20 years because if they do so they would soon go bankrupt.

Bitcoin's design has an inbuilt long term solution. Reward miners early on - grow adoption - increase transactions to a "very large number" - charge pennies out of millions of transactions - profit.

Finally, LN may be secure for microtransactions. It is in no way secure for decent transactions. There are millions of ways it can be hacked even now that it only exists in speculative heads. Once it becomes hardcode implemented I am sure attack vectors will only increase much further.