Quote from: bargainbin on January 30, 2016, 02:57:29 AM

Quote from: figmentofmyass on January 30, 2016, 02:33:18 AM

Quote from: bargainbin on January 30, 2016, 02:01:27 AM

If you feel that Lauda's alluding to game theory, feel free to cite that. Forgive me if I don't take the word of random_guy_from_the_internet on trust.

i don't need to cite anything. i was expanding on what Lauda said. in any case, i am asserting that this is the relevant issue. alternatively, you could explain how it has fuck all to do with "coding."

Quote from: bargainbin on January 30, 2016, 02:01:27 AM

Worked when, where and how? Also define what *you* mean by "consensus," everyone seems to have teir own opinions.

one example is BIP66. an intentional fork would, for example, not be successful if it results in multiple surviving blockchains, thereby breaking bitcoin. i defined what i meant by consensus:

Quote

the "consensus mechanism" stated in the whitepaper and the definition of "consensus" -- is to establish as close to 100% agreement as possible, and to prevent any changes that do not approach 100% agreement.

Quote from: bargainbin on January 30, 2016, 02:01:27 AM

Can you please cite the relevant passage? Again, it's simply rude of you to make me search for the text you're referencing.

i'd say it's more rude to insult people for "not being a coder" when it's 100% irrelevant. if you haven't read bitcoin's whitepaper, then it's obvious why you haven't contemplated what consensus is, nor why it is necessary for bitcoin to function. refer to "consensus mechanism" in the whitepaper, relate it to the English definition of "consensus" and historically (as relates to bitcoin) how it has been used and subsequently achieved (e.g. BIP66).

Quote from: bargainbin on January 30, 2016, 02:01:27 AM

cite the fucking relevant passage plz.

Quote

Nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone. They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.

Quote from: bargainbin on January 30, 2016, 02:01:27 AM

Huh? "from a game theory perspective"? WTF are you taking about? Am enjoying the a) and b) list bit tho. Very acædemic of U.

you realize the bitcoin system is an economy, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory

Quote from: bargainbin on January 30, 2016, 02:01:27 AM

Bro, unless you can be more specific than "herp, Gaem Theorie!!1!" I'm gonna have to put you on ignore.
Don't waste my time.

look, bro. clearly you're a fucking idiot if this is your grasp of economics. i took several more minutes than i should have answering your retard 101 questions, knowing full well that you know absolutely nothing about bitcoin or how it works.

your comments to Lauda asserted that economic incentives can be determined by code. please explain to me how that works.

an "economy" is "a system especially of interaction and exchange" -- that implies human rationality and incentive. so yes, if you think you can analyze the idea of "economic consensus" with no regard for modelling conflict and cooperation among intelligent rational decision-makers, you'd be dead wrong.

please feel free to ignore me, though. apparently you're just another retard that picks apart others' arguments without the slightest understanding of them, and never once proves a point of your own. you just incessantly ask irrelevant questions rather than address the substance of what is being said. this is a classically dishonest style of argument.

seriously, learn to use Google rather than forcing everyone to explain every little idea for you like a small child.

Whoops, nothing left...
Into ignore void you go then. But don't be a sad, will check on u every now and again

yep, as expected....

Quote from: bargainbin on January 30, 2016, 02:57:29 AM