Quote from: tvbcof on June 17, 2015, 08:17:49 PM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on June 17, 2015, 08:31:44 AM

...
Btw, in my coin's design the miners can not be paid with transaction fees that originate from prior balances because this is a source of censorship of transactions (even if the inputs are blinded by a mix because one blacklisted input in the mix could cause censorship of the entire mix). My design is 100% censorship free (no heuristic arguments, rather 100% provable).

Shit I am giving away too much of my design. I better STFU.

You will end up buying my coin if I create it, because it will blow your fucking mind or I mean to say the design will make your jaw drop to the floor and you will say, "I must buy this".

If your design is half as good as what I've been working on, I just might do that

Seriously, if I might be so bold as to suggest that you throw your ideas out there, some of them might be picked up and even enhanced in ways you don't initially imagine. That has happened to me over the years. If you don't get credit or money for them, so what? Speaking only for myself these things are quite secondary. If you are consumed with fame and fortune and what-not it cannot help but detract from your ability to focus on other things. I suppose it could be argued that fame and fortune might spur one to work harder, but I'll bet that in most cases working harder is actually counter-productive to doing quality work in certain important ways.

I believe the only way to build an innovative ecosystem for ALL OF US (remember I want to put anonymity and remove the master-servant model on the entire internet, not just cryptocoins) that won't just be subsumed into Bitcoin's venture capital model, is to get a jumpstart in ecosystem momentum. I don't believe that jumpstart can be accomplished by giving your ideas away for free such that either venture capitalists can fund an Inverse Commons of open source to have the ideas implemented in their Bitcoin ecosystem or the capital interested in your design gets squandered on copycoin pumps that waste the capital and don't build out a competitive, innovative ecosystem.

In other words, I think open source Inverse Commons works very well, but it also falls prey at the start to the chicken-or-egg dilemma when trying to compete with an ecosystem that has turned us geeks into dogs who chase our own tail (working for the enemy to enslave us).

Also my design will be enhanced by releasing it as a working system, because my design makes the consensus network orthogonal to the transaction model, so innovation can continue on even though the consensus network design is already perfected and locked into stone on auto-pilot. Avoiding this entire problem we are seeing now with Bitcoin needing ongoing changes in order to scale.

I was lucky to arrive at a design which is quite simple and which is so important that by itself (without all the other complexity that make Bitcoin) it can I estimate drive much capital into a coin (and especially if that capital is being allocated in a way that inspires many people). And I estimate this is simple enough for a very small group to realistically accomplish.

In short, society rewards more capital to those who prove they know how to allocate capital for the greatest good. For me to throw away the opportunity to prove that I am great allocator of capital, is to say that I am just engineer and not an iconoclast, maverick, trailblazing magnate. I should endeavor to discover whether my early signs of being a potential iconoclast, maverick, trailblazing magnate were timing, luck, aliasing error, or ruminations (incubation) of my true potential.

Edit: give away half-baked designs, those which are incomplete in terms of what the market will buy, or those which require more resources than you can bear to bring to market. To give away the golden egg is to assert the golden goose is dead. I am not dead yet.

Edit#2: as in all things one must weigh the probabilities. Thus it is also possible someone like myself might sell such a design, choosing to take the least risky route to compensation. Taking into account the factors that I am 50 and sick with a severe progressive illness (Multiple Sclerosis), and have nearly no assets to retire on. And am entirely unwilling to return to any Western country to work.

Edit#3: implicit in what I wrote above is the assumption that some percent of us are not happy about the future of the internet, Bitcoin, and the world on its current trajectory. Some of us want a decentralized internet, and not one owned by a few large fascist corporations. Some of us don't believe that Bitcoin won't end up with the same fate that the internet has. In short, some percent of us do believe a slide into an NWO is underway and we need a different trajectory. Additionally some of us think a micropayments coin could accumulate network effects exponentially faster Bitcoin and afaik the Lightning Networks (LN) on Bitcoin proposal won't enable the same N^2 network effects because it is not a decentralized model.