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.
Use like so - for block 32000 - don't forget to add 1.
for(int i=0;i<32001;i++){
processNextBlockIntoGrantDatabase();
}
Of course the answers to the rhetorical questions you ask are obvious. Also, the ideas I have presented are naturally outrageous in that they have probably never been tried. But that something has not been tried does not necessarily make it impractical. Nobody may ever know whether it's practical unless they try it.
My expectations about how people would respond to a Public Domain development kit are based on what I think my personal responses would be: I think I would be thunderstruck, and that it would win over my good will even more, and I would want to use the tools in the context which those who release it ask (yet do not demand). But my expected personal response isn't necessarily a predictor for how others would respond.
I do think the general guidelines bytemaster outlined in his OP would work very well, and I'll happily support whatever the community/Invictus decides is best.
Welcome to capitalist decentralization, the first fluid mix of capitalist and collective principles that encourages business but upholds privacy. Here we innovate and develop with global talent unrestricted in our creativity. We encourage those who wish to use our ideas and material to join and work with us for a better more decentralized future.
These are all great points. When thinking about the other side of the argument I have visions of FUD in the form of
"centralized"
"they changed what they originally sold shares for"
"they can't be trusted"
Just for reference what are we talking about here Dan? Like an MVP in Feb as opposed to a full product at the end of march? Where do you guys think our competitors will be along this timeline?
Our competitors haven't even realized the problems they have to overcome. Anything based upon mining will be destroyed in the market because mining is an expense that eats the profitability of the DACs and ultimately centralizes control. This means that everyone will end up having to change their designs to replace mining to stay competitive. Mining also slows block production and is not viable for blockchains with markets built in because the 'miner' has the power to control what transactions get in the block.
Our competitors are all based upon 'one blockchain to rule them all' mentality which is a side effect of the mining mentality. These systems will not scale in the end. They may spring up quickly, but will die once reality hits that a 'market' is different than a 'currency' in terms of transaction volume.
Mastercoin has so many inefficiencies, and baggage from being layered on top of Bitcoin and the original designer isn't even working on the project any more. I wish them well, but they too will end up having to move to their own blockchain and this will set them back in development.
In other words, I am not aware of any competitor that actually understands the nuances of DACs, blockchains, and the like at the level I do today and their lack of understanding is going to set them back dramatically in the long run.
I am sure I have things I do not yet fully appreciate or grasp, but what I do get shows me that the competition is far behind.
The FUD and legal risk arguments are the primary argument against MVP. However, FUD is just a profit opportunity for those who can see through it because in the end FUD has no substance.
I believe that a MVP that is command line / JSON-RPC based where the 'consensus' algorithm as a Unique Node List of 1 will be viable especially once I lay the mental framework that demolishes the false decentralization offered by Bitcoin, Ripple, and other mining based systems. Bitcoin is effectively centralized in GigaHash + 1, Ripple is centralized in the inner circle cartel that makes up the Unique Node List. The only thing that is required to eliminate the need to 'trust' is to eliminate the potential of cheating and getting away with it. The only thing required to be decentralized is market competition and elimination of barriers of entry.
I think our marketing will begin to shape the narrative in a way that our competitors will have a hard time escaping from.
In conclusion I think a MVP may be the best way to go as a stepping stone to realizing the final goal. When can such a MVP be available, I cannot say for certain but probably sooner than may think and later than I would estimate.
Just tried it. The PC says its missing ddl file libgcc_s_dw2-1. But I have downloaded this file.I have PTS client v4.8.5 that I am trying to run on windows7.
I have tried adding every node I can find on the forum without any luck
Any suggestions?
Thanks
you have tried the one i linked in this thread?
edit: I have now got the client to work and added a bunch of nodes, but still nothing. Its fine though, I will just keep using the mac version.
Thanks
Its 0xb8 (184). Figured out comparing Litecoin version numbers.
what you wanna use it for if you dont mind my asking?
A paperwallet generator.
http://q39.qhor.net/pts/ptsaddress.html
https://github.com/donSchoe/ptsaddress
If you could write that in C++ we would then they to integrate it into the client to allow people to just have a hard copy of their wallets, perfect for cold storage and back up.
Just dump private key and send it to your printer. There is not much code to add.
Its 0xb8 (184). Figured out comparing Litecoin version numbers.
what you wanna use it for if you dont mind my asking?
A paperwallet generator.
http://q39.qhor.net/pts/ptsaddress.html
https://github.com/donSchoe/ptsaddress
I should be able to follow your instructions with the script/tool to produce said CSV file for any given block. So yes, a if a tool is required to follow the instructions then that will be required. Notice, that simply saying how to build the tool is not sufficient.
Bottom line, when I can follow your instructions and produce the desired CSV file with less than 10 minutes of time then we will have a good result.
Its 0xb8 (184). Figured out comparing Litecoin version numbers.
I talked with Andy last night and he said he is about 75% done tweaking the work barwizi started with. I suspect he will be posting his edits soon.
I'll be waiting to see. This document is a priority, already it's absence is causing problems.
He has been sending me questions from time to time, so I know he is actively working on it. Just got a question a minute ago.
