Quote from: altcoinUK on April 04, 2016, 12:02:35 AM

You sent me a PM a while ago about your debate with gmaxwel, the lead Bitcoin dev. I came and posted something to gmaxwel. gmaxwel has been a real gentleman, he was always a very nice guy and a fucking serious asset to Bitcoin, so of course I was interested in his opinion. On the other hand, I wanted to support you as well. gmaxwel replied me, as usual his post was interesting, intelligent and civil. By the time I was going reply to his post, of course, why not, you head got dizzy and you must needed to lock this thread, so I was unable to reply gmaxwel. No the thread is opened again. A usual mess around you.

The links to the thread that contains the debate between gmaxwell and myself has always been linked from an upthread post immediately after your post upthread.

And gmaxwell got his ass handed to him by myself in that debate on the Ogg container format for which he was the co-inventor of one of the key codecs:

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on February 28, 2016, 09:02:05 AM

Quote from: gmaxwell on February 27, 2016, 07:34:18 PM

Doing so would also increase the overhead for the format by 20% or so. As mentioned, accurate indexes are not small-- and many things compromise by just not providing accurate indexes; which then leaves applications linearly scanning or not permitting sample accurate seeking.

I assume the 20% estimate is only for when the optional index is present. So it is presumed someone would use an index only when that 20% was justified by their use case. Again I argue you should not remove degrees-of-freedom and hinder the optimization of use cases which you did not envision because no group or person is omniscient.

And how is not having the index any worse than not allowing an index. I fail to see the logic. Seems you are arguing that the receiving end will expect indexes and not be prepared for the case where indexes are not present. But that is a bug in the receiving end's software then. And in that case, there is no assurance that software would have done the index-less seeking more efficiently for the status quo of not allowing an index. None of this makes sense to me.

Also I don't understand how you calculate 20% increase in file size for adding an index. For example, lets take an average 180 second song consuming roughly 5MB for VBR encoding. Let's assume my users are satisfied with seeking in 1 second increments, so that means means I need at most 180 of 22-bit indices, so that is only 495 bytes which is only a 0.01% increase! On top of that I could even compress those 22-bit indices into relative offsets if I want to shrink it by roughly 75% to 0.0025%.

The reason I locked the thread is so I wouldn't have to waste my precious time responding to fucks who can't read such as this post from you. I quote myself:

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on February 29, 2016, 02:23:00 AM

I am closing this topic (at least until there is something other than a vaporcoin to talk about).

Quote from: altcoinUK on April 04, 2016, 12:02:35 AM

Please do not involve me anymore in your activities.

Why would I? Do you have programming skill I need? Have I contacted you over the past month or two? Sorry that you could not recruit me to become a developer for GadgetCoin. I did invest the time to talk to them and unfortunately there was no synergy. I have my own project to work on. Sorry if that makes you feel you were spurned or were not asked to invest as an angel investor. You can buy shares in the company like everyone else can when the shares are offered to the public. These are not crypto-currency tokens. The will be shares in the company and regulated as any such crowdfunded equity raise is. They are not transferable to crypto-currency tokens. I have maintained I will not promote a crypto-currency token here on this forum. I continue to maintain that pledge.

Quote from: altcoinUK on April 04, 2016, 12:02:35 AM

Organize your P&D with your "angel investors" - we know your P&D is coming.

There will be no P&D of cyrpto-currency tokens. We are selling shares in a company, not tokens. There is no masternode or centralized governance scheme for any tokens. None of the bullshit and scams.

What happened to you? You seem to be mentally unstable or simply lashing out because of not taking the time to read enough to understand what is going on? Try to get control of your rationality please. I'll forgive this one transgression but if repeats, I will just have to ignore you.

I have no idea why you would pretend to be nice and friendly to me for so many months and then suddenly write such venomous words. I didn't receive any private message from you over the past month asking me to unlock the thread or complaining about anything I had done. I can only assume you are frustrated but I don't know what obligation you feel I had to you that you feel you deserve to talk to me that way.

Quote from: altcoinUK on April 04, 2016, 12:48:21 AM

[Rant start.]

The Chinese influence in Bitcoin, the corrupt proxies of the fucking Chinese communist party officials in Bitcoin, the threat with regards to centralization which is obviously more a concern with the presence of the Chinese are anything but great help.

The Chinese, who never invented anything but the fucking umbrella - but ready to extort any Western ideas - brought nothing to Bitcoin but unethical and immoral greediness. They jumped on the Bitcoin bandwagon to make money. They do not care about decentralization nor they care about what decentralized crypto currencies could bring to society. The Chinese's moral, greedy attitude and respect to their fucking communist leaders is the oxymoron of Satoshi's libertarian project.

[Rant is over]

Oh I see you are just pissed off at the world today and taking it out me. Thanks. Roll Eyes