Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - tipon

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
General Discussion / crypto & blockchain technologies for a post fossil/capitalist sustainable world
« on: April 30, 2014, 10:46:54 pm »
Capitalism is a cancer that is destroying the planet.
Thats because its based on infinite growth.
Growth means increasing productivity and increasing the use of natural resources and energies, it also increment the impacts of these processes in nature . These are in contradiction with the limited existence of natural resurces and the physical limits in our planet.
Capitalism is based on growth and thats why it cannot be sustainable ( in an ecological way).
Unsustainability means that its inevitable the collapse of capitalism. Or at least the structure of the actual world and the actual capitalist system is gonna change into something radically differente ( im not sure if calling this capitalism).
Our economic theory (liberal economics) decoupled energy and natural resources from the function of the economy and this mean all the economic theory and mechanisms are wrong and obsolete and we need to create a new economic system and theory.

I see theres a lot of people with interesting ideas trying to innovate with block chains technologies and crypto stuff.
But they are trying to integrate these technologies into the actual capitalist system.
I think the real potential is the opposite: Using these technologies for creating new kind of infrastructures that would allow communities and society to create a new  economic system parallel to capitalism that cannot be integrated to capitalism.
Using these technologies for building alternatives to capitalist system,  for example to create a new sustainable world.


what do you think?

17
General Discussion / Re: crypto currency based on energy or computation
« on: April 28, 2014, 06:32:51 pm »
hey biophil, one question : if you had a generally accepted way for accounting energy transfers, it would be possible for you to calculate an accurate energy balance?

...thats the basic idea behind emergy, putting different kind of energies into comparable units.

The problem with emergy is that is not 100% exact theres always uncertainty.

I ve read also that its possible to measure the amount of uncertainty of emergy calculations, but i dont know what can be this useful for.


If there is a margin of error in emergy calculation , what do you think about using all the nodes ( owners of emergy coins)  in the net to fix in a collaborative way this error and get a consensus of what is gonna be the fixed value?






Quote from: biophil on April 28, 2014, 02:20:59 pm
Tipon, emergy is a fun theoretical concept, but I'm guessing that in this system you're envisioning you'd need to tabulate emergy values for all different types of energy conversions. Do you have any idea how difficult that would be to do accurately? I worked in the renewable energy industry several years ago and we never were able to calculate an accurate energy balance for our product alone, much less for biofuels in general. The problem wasnt that we didn't try; it was that there is no generally accepted way to account for energy transfers. If we accounted for it one way we'd get vastly different values that if we accounted for it another way. I think emergy is a useful concept because it threatens our intuitions about how energy works, but I'm not sure it has great practical quantitative value.

Furthermore, how could you ever create a cryptocurrency that "knows" how much emergy this or that thing has, when humans can't even calculate precisely how much emergy it has?

I'm not trying to shoot down OP's idea, but I'd love for him to elaborate a little on how it might work.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

18
General Discussion / Re: crypto currency based on energy or computation
« on: April 28, 2014, 03:51:21 pm »
yes, good point.
Emergy of all processes and things in the earth can be calculated but not in a 100% accurate way.
I think this means that a mechanism should be developed in the block chain that allows the users of emergy coins to achieve consensus on what is the accurate value.
So the accurate value should be based on consensus  of the descentralized nodes (swarm intelligence).

Whats OP?

At this moment I  dont know how to elaborate the idea because im new with crypto currencies but i hope we all can elaborate the idea.






Quote from: biophil on April 28, 2014, 02:20:59 pm
Tipon, emergy is a fun theoretical concept, but I'm guessing that in this system you're envisioning you'd need to tabulate emergy values for all different types of energy conversions. Do you have any idea how difficult that would be to do accurately? I worked in the renewable energy industry several years ago and we never were able to calculate an accurate energy balance for our product alone, much less for biofuels in general. The problem wasnt that we didn't try; it was that there is no generally accepted way to account for energy transfers. If we accounted for it one way we'd get vastly different values that if we accounted for it another way. I think emergy is a useful concept because it threatens our intuitions about how energy works, but I'm not sure it has great practical quantitative value.

Furthermore, how could you ever create a cryptocurrency that "knows" how much emergy this or that thing has, when humans can't even calculate precisely how much emergy it has?

I'm not trying to shoot down OP's idea, but I'd love for him to elaborate a little on how it might work.

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

19
General Discussion / Re: New Economic Paradigm, Collaborative Commons
« on: April 28, 2014, 06:14:01 am »
When i talk about capitalism, i refer to the actual system.
The actual structure of the world.
Our system is based and depends of fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels are centralized ( it need to be centralized ) and tend to create centralized structures.
We could descentralize the production of energy (renewable energies ) , but that would go against the interests of big capital ( the economic elite) .
If we change into a descentralized energy production system, that would be a painful crash in the structure of the world that is gonna selforganize into something new.
And im not sure to call that post fosil system : capitalism.
It would be very different system.
I wont be based on competition or infinite growth..... it would be low energy system.

So the question should be:

how can we use these new technologies for constructing the post-capitalism world?

instead of :

how can we integrate these new technologies into the capitalist market?







Quote from: Troglodactyl on April 28, 2014, 05:56:48 am
Quote from: tipon on April 28, 2014, 05:15:15 am
I think theres a conflict between centralization and descentralization.
I think descentralization is against capitalism.
Capitalism tend to concentrate power and generate centralized structures of control and command with a top down approach.
We have now the technology for descentralize , miniaturize and integrate to human scale all the components of society but this go against the interests of big capital .

I dont think we are gonna shift from centralized to descentralized in a peaceful way.
Big capital is trying to centralize everything.  For example the internet , they are trying to finish with the "neutrality of internet". They want to recentralize all the architecture of internet.

Descentralization is dangerous for  capitalism.
...

Decentralization I think is a threat to monopolistic capitalism, crony capitalism, fascism, and probably a great many other things, but I don't see how it's a threat to capitalism.  Probably this is a question of what connotations "capitalism" has, depending on your political background.  Decentralization and flattening hierarchical structures doesn't undermine property rights, productivity, or investment, but it lowers the barriers to entry, which I think is a direct decrease on economic friction.  Basically I think it will increase the efficiency of the capitalist system, by making the market more free.

20
General Discussion / Re: New Economic Paradigm, Collaborative Commons
« on: April 28, 2014, 05:15:15 am »
I think theres a conflict between centralization and descentralization.
I think descentralization is against capitalism.
Capitalism tend to concentrate power and generate centralized structures of control and command with a top down approach.
We have now the technology for descentralize , miniaturize and integrate to human scale all the components of society but this go against the interests of big capital .

I dont think we are gonna shift from centralized to descentralized in a peaceful way.
Big capital is trying to centralize everything.  For example the internet , they are trying to finish with the "neutrality of internet". They want to recentralize all the architecture of internet.

Descentralization is dangerous for  capitalism.






Quote from: Troglodactyl on April 26, 2014, 03:01:24 am
Quote from: tipon on April 25, 2014, 02:00:54 pm
Compulsive neccesity of growth ( result from competition)  tends to centralization of power and control , gigantism and ecological unsustainability  .

Now humans have the possibility (as result of technological developments)  of generating a post capitalist system based on collaboration and descentralization of power and control, that works at small scale and in a sustainable way .
...

Technological developments can lower barriers to entry and non-scaling overhead costs, which can make decentralized or small scale approaches more competitive, but I don't see what that has to do with a "post capitalist" system.  People already collaborate when they think doing so is beneficial, and I expect that will continue.

See Fred Wilson's megatrends here: http://www.datafox.co/blog/fred-wilsons-talk-at-leweb-the-3-big-megatrends/

21
General Discussion / a short story about a paralitic guy
« on: April 28, 2014, 02:17:56 am »
Once ago there was a paralytic guy living in hospital.
This guy cannot move any part of his body neither his mouth, but  he was conscious.
This guy didnt like to live in this way so he wanted to die.
He talked with his family and his doctor and explained that he want to die.
The doctor explained that this was not very easy. 
He needed to make a  lot of burocratic tramits and then go to the judge, so he should analyze his case and give an approbation.
After 7 years of making the tramits and waiting for the answer , the judge didn't give him the permission for dying.
After this, the paralytic guy made a plan.
A plan that would allow a large group of people to help him to commit suicide.
The paralytic guy studied the laws and designed the plan in way that none of his helpers could be put in jail or sentenced .
The plan was that a large group of people would help him , each one would make a very little action.
Some of them didn't know what was the purpose of that action.
In this way the coordination a large group of people making each one a micro action helped the guy to kill himself.
At the end nobody get charged or put in jail and the paralitic guy died.
The plan worked perfect.


In which way do new technologies as blockchains or crypto stuff would allow collectivities to achieve new types of collective actions that cannot be tracked or even if they get  tracked that cannot be sentenced by laws ?




22
General Discussion / Re: crypto currency based on energy or computation
« on: April 28, 2014, 01:23:35 am »
toast you are wrong, eMergy and the hierarchy also take in consideration information and computation, thats  why i used the word "computation" in the topic.
Instead of having a "proof of work" that is lost work, is it not possible that the money is itself the work?

So you exchange power of computation ( that is in escence another manifestation of energy) to others, or use it as currency.


what do you think?



You should read this book.


http://www.amazon.es/Environment-Power-Society-Twenty-First-Century/dp/0231128878




23
General Discussion / crypto currency based on energy or computation
« on: April 28, 2014, 12:59:12 am »
HI ,  some time ago i been thinking about the possibility of using energy as currency.
Creating a new currency based on thermodynamic laws and the eMergy concept proposed by Odum.
Odum used to say that money in our system is not a good way of measuring the real wealth of something because our economic system doesnt take in consideration energy and the work done by nature.  So he created a new way of measuring the "real" wealth of things, based on energy laws and in the hierarchy of energy.

Hierarchy of energy means that you cannot compare 2 different types of energies using just calories.
2 calories of sun energy are not the same as 2 calories of fossil energy in their capacity to generate work. So in order to compare different types of energy ( and  everything !, not just energies ) you need this hierarchy of energy that allows to convert the calories  from one type of energy to another.
For example 1 cal of fossil fuel is equal to 2000 cal of sun energy.

With this new type of measurement you can define the real wealth of everything. Because everything in our universe uses energy.
The "real" wealth is very different from the "economic" wealth ( capitalism monetary wealth).

With a new currency that integrates this , it would be possible to integrate the currency to the dynamics of the planet and nature, it would be possible to create a new sustainable world at large scale.



What do you think about this idea?
Is it possible use these technologies like block chain that work not only in the digital domain but are also attached to real world processes  or things in the real world?

24
General Discussion / Re: Achieving consensus through crypto-random leader election
« on: April 28, 2014, 12:31:37 am »
I understand that, but why does bitcoin uses proof of work?
Whats the reason the inventor adopted this architecture?
Whats the objetive of proof of work?



Quote from: Troglodactyl on April 26, 2014, 09:05:15 pm
Quote from: tipon on April 26, 2014, 08:50:48 pm
Hi, why does achieving consensus implies on massive resources waste in bitcoin?

Why is that? whats the idea behind that?

...

Achieving consensus in Bitcoin relies on massive resource waste because it uses Proof of Work.  In order to prove that you've done the work, you actually have to do the work.  Therefore, Bitcoin consensus relies on lots of people doing lots of work.

25
Español (Spanish) / prueba de trabajo en bitcoin
« on: April 28, 2014, 12:24:59 am »
Buenas, soy nuevo en este foro y tambien son nuevo con bitcoin y las nuevas tecnologias basadas en cadenas de bloques.
He estado leyendo ultimamente sobre bitcoin pero hay algo que no entiendo:

Cual es el objetivo de usar la prueba de trabajo para conseguir consenso en bitcoin?
Porque es necesaria la prueba de trabajo para conseguir consenso? O cual es la idea de porque se implemento en bitcoin?









26
General Discussion / Re: Achieving consensus through crypto-random leader election
« on: April 26, 2014, 08:50:48 pm »
Hi, why does achieving consensus implies on massive resources waste in bitcoin?

Why is that? whats the idea behind that?




Quote from: bytemaster on April 26, 2014, 06:24:18 pm
Randomness and nodes is prone to sybil... 

This is effective a variant on the trustee approach.

What source of deterministic randomness are they using that doesn't allow one node to control which node will be the next 'random' node?

27
General Discussion / Re: New Economic Paradigm, Collaborative Commons
« on: April 25, 2014, 02:00:54 pm »
Compulsive neccesity of growth ( result from competition)  tends to centralization of power and control , gigantism and ecological unsustainability  .

Now humans have the possibility (as result of technological developments)  of generating a post capitalist system based on collaboration and descentralization of power and control, that works at small scale and in a sustainable way .




 
Quote from: bytemaster on April 25, 2014, 05:10:14 am
Quote from: tipon on April 25, 2014, 05:02:44 am
Capitalism is not only the private ownership of wealth.  Capitalism is basically the compulsive necessity of growth that emerge as result of competition.
Capitalism is based on competition.
New postcapitalist economy should be based on collaboration.




Quote from: BldSwtTrs on April 24, 2014, 03:22:40 pm
I think to say that capitalism exist since the 19th is completely clueless. The term capitalist was coined by Marx in the 19th and the idea of a transition from feudalism to capitalism with the Industrial Revolution is also a Marx one. Repeating Marx's storytelling and categories is a serious handicap to say something intelligent about economic reality.

What people call capitalism since Marx is actually the private ownership of wealth (included the means of production), that reality exist since the dawn of Humanity and is not about to change.


Edit: After having watch the video, I read the article now. I found it very bad.
Pervasive marxism :
- "the failling rate of profit"
- "value creators are spoil of their value with capitalism, that can't last!"

And poor understanding of existing economics concepts:
"no more division of labor but distribution of tasks", oh yeah completely different!
" bla bla mutual coordination...  bla bla social collaboration", too bad the author don't hear about free market!

Always funny to see how people make appear revolutionnary and progressive the same old song.

What is collaboration but voluntary trade and elimination of initiation of force or fraud.  The society that emerges from that reality will be what is right and is free from all labels you may wish to put on it. 

"distribution of tasks"  by whom... this is called CENTRAL planning.

If you are going to debate over the definition of terms that is one thing... but realize that is all you are doing. 

I think that capitalism is based upon competition to collaborate the most effectively.    The division of labor is the result of collaboration.   Explain collaboration without central authority?

28
General Discussion / Re: New Economic Paradigm, Collaborative Commons
« on: April 25, 2014, 05:02:44 am »
Capitalism is not only the private ownership of wealth.  Capitalism is basically the compulsive necessity of growth that emerge as result of competition.
Capitalism is based on competition.
New postcapitalist economy should be based on collaboration.




Quote from: BldSwtTrs on April 24, 2014, 03:22:40 pm
I think to say that capitalism exist since the 19th is completely clueless. The term capitalist was coined by Marx in the 19th and the idea of a transition from feudalism to capitalism with the Industrial Revolution is also a Marx one. Repeating Marx's storytelling and categories is a serious handicap to say something intelligent about economic reality.

What people call capitalism since Marx is actually the private ownership of wealth (included the means of production), that reality exist since the dawn of Humanity and is not about to change.


Edit: After having watch the video, I read the article now. I found it very bad.
Pervasive marxism :
- "the failling rate of profit"
- "value creators are spoil of their value with capitalism, that can't last!"

And poor understanding of existing economics concepts:
"no more division of labor but distribution of tasks", oh yeah completely different!
" bla bla mutual coordination...  bla bla social collaboration", too bad the author don't hear about free market!

Always funny to see how people make appear revolutionnary and progressive the same old song.

29
Muse/SoundDAC / Re: Is bitshares music about creating artificial scarcity ?
« on: April 25, 2014, 03:37:55 am »
Yes, i was asumming it involves selling songs, but not only selling songs, its more trading and making bussiness with music.
In order to sell or trade something that is digital ( music, art, books ,software,  etc)   you need to be able to limit the number of copies.
You can do this using blockchain technologies and bitshares music , for example you can create a limited run of  a few copies of an album then you can assign each album
 a special key and then you encode that in the blockchain.
In this way you can have these digital albums or songs  that always stay an exact number of copies that can be traded.
This is basically creating artificial scarcity




Quote from: toast on April 23, 2014, 03:08:39 am
Quote from: tipon on April 23, 2014, 03:02:24 am
We need to be carefull with innovation and technological development. They both are not neutral.
We need to analyze if these innovations are good for society. Where do we want to go?
Which kind of consequences are gonna have these developments?


I think bitshares music promote scarcity and as consequence its very bad for the interest of humanity.

You still haven't explained your point and you're assuming bitshares music works by selling copies of songs. Please do a more thorough argument because I still disagree.

30
General Discussion / Re: descentralized forum based on blockchains?
« on: April 23, 2014, 05:48:22 am »
why blockchain technologies cannot help with consensus?  Intelligent consensus you mean?

The blockchain itself is an expression of consensus. Its an expression of the evolution of consensuated ideas.

The thing is: are these consensuated ideas good?  which mechanism should we need to implement in order to guarantee that these structures of ideas being generated in a consensuated way in the block chain are efective ideas?


A lot of ideas come to my mind.
Is consensus about ideas a good way to define the evolution of an idea or creation of an innovation?

Which mechanism do we need in order to make a super intelligent entity from a descentralized collectivity that can create very creative, useful or profitable  innovations?



Other thing:

why do you think its weak incentive?
If a person's idea get etched into the blockchain that person should receive as a prize crypto-equities.
If a person submit a lot of useful ideas that get etched into the blockchain and the resulting company is a sucess then that person is gonna receive more profits based on the amount of crypto-equities ( that in this case would mean more apportation on useful ideas).

So the structure of the system itself reward innovation and reward innovative and creative people, transforming the whole society into a society that promotes innovation and creative thinking and people .

The system will allow also that nobody can cheat you or steal your idea.
People gets rewarded in relation of its creative apportation and everything happens in the block chain that can be seen by everyone so it would mean also a new type of intellectual property system.



Pages: 1 [2] 3

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 22 queries.