Have I not explained my stance now?
Yes, you admit you are against Synereo because you do not understand it.
Because they have only provided
hand-waving technobabble and no specification that could be peer reviewed by anyone here.
The rest of your post was a combination of disingenuous drivel and more hype to pump some technobabble. Good luck.
Again you are speaking nonsense. There is ample material for review and comment at
http://blog.synereo.com/ and the basic information at
http://www.synereo.com/learn-more/, in the weekly hangouts and on the slack.
I tried to extract the details from those various resources and was unable to. It is hand-waving technobabble. You can continue to lie to readers. That is your prerogative.
While I agree completely that more formal up do date publications would be nice, there are some pretty awesome innovations weekly
Formal paper won't help us to vet it. We need a layman's explanation of the math. And pretty awesome technobabble hype is hand-waving.
I consider Greg's time better spent on developing Synereo which is why the community is taking on expressing Greg's abstract mathematics in terms you might understand.
Okay you can delay the inevitable wherein it will be shown to be a flawed technology. That will not help you.
There is a huge gulf between abstract theory and practice. Every homebuilder knows this. Greg will be cut down to size by reality later.