Quote from: bytemaster on September 01, 2013, 06:48:50 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on September 01, 2013, 06:42:23 PM

Quote from: bytemaster on September 01, 2013, 06:16:39 PM

Exactly, we need to spend 200 billion on security at that scale, but not via hashing power. It would be like a $200 B lock on your front door while you have windows right next to it.

I argue that security comes from privacy and public support / popularity. You must win the hearts and minds of the public against the propaganda that government will throw at the system to justify their crackdown.

Then the protocol must be robust to high-latency, low-bandwidth situations and not rely entirely on hash power for validating the consensus. So to blindly throw $200 million toward hash power when it could be redirected toward public relations and other forms of security is insane.

The international bankers are taking us into chaos of WW3 with or without the support of the people. You can do all the PR you want and won't stop them from taking us into war and impoverishing the majority.

The majority is weak. They depend on socialism and the international bankers for their daily needs.

Unless you can design a socialistic coin to give all the masses everything they want for free, you are never going to win the PR battle against the international bankers who offer the masses everything via debt and socialize the defaults into wars.

So I completely disagree with your naive idea that you can overthrow human nature. Go ahead and try if you want.

I am interested in a coin design that can continue to function even under attack by the $trillions that the powers-that-be have access to.

It doesn't need to be used by everyone, just by those who want to exist outside the "system". I am not going to try to change the "system". Everyone who has tried since before and after Jesus has failed to stop human nature.

Is it possible to design a system that can withstand attacks both on the PoW and also on the network infrastructure that carries the packets?

I am not so sure it is possible. That is what I am evaluating now.

Everything has a price and the market balances cost vs benefit of every choice you make. Decentralization isn't free and the measures required to defend against WWIII level attacks would require extensive compromises in functionality, speed of transactions, transaction fees, etc. Ultimately all that is needed is:

1) a means to broadcast to the entire world.
2) a means to receive that broadcast.

If you can do those two things cheaply and in a decentralized/timely manner then the system will work.

I am trying to think of a way the system can switch over the to slower way that still works if the SOBs start filtering the packets over the whole network, i.e. we call the blocks in or something or obfuscate the packets in other kinds of network traffic.

The design considerations are different than when one isn't considering such a grave threat.

I am not saying I don't want your BitAssets, but for me that is not the main priority right now in my mind. I feel we are facing a much more dire threat from 2016 to 2020 at least.

And I am really sick and tired of people telling me I am wacko for thinking these things.

People are so naive.

Please everyone go watch the video I linked upthread (page 1) of the four-star general Wesley Clark telling us that the USA government planned for a long time to overthrow 7 countries in the Middle East.

Understand this is about building a pipeline to Europe to remove Russia's monopoly over natural gas to Europe. But there is a larger picture, which about reorganizing the financial system from dollar reserves to SDRs so that the rise of the developed world can be controlled by the same international bankers who have been around since central banking was established in the 16th century. I think you all know the names.

Remember what I taught everyone over in your main BitShares thread, who ever controls the unit-of-account controls the world, because all other currencies and assets float in value relative to the most liquid money.

When the world's energy has to paid in dollars (and soon to be SDRs), then they control the world.

The other of the currencies of the world will float relative to SDRs, so that countries will be slaves to the SDRs.

Why do you think the USA is involving in the Spratlys island dispute near the Philippines that is also claimed by China? It is all about making sure that Asia does not produce their own natural gas, because there is a huge investment now in the USA to build pipelines to Louisiana and Texas and ship liquefied natural gas over to Asia. What do you think the BP oil fiasco in the Gulf of Mexico was about? It is all about them gaining unfettered control over that region to implement these plans.

Quote from: smoothie on September 01, 2013, 05:33:25 PM

No.

Overpaying compared to existing pay networks and banking system? Definitely not.

Exactly. We are paying much more than the 5% debasement to the SOBs.

So we need to pay a lot for security. So that people can build the side-infrastructure to route around the SOBs. Maybe they will use short-wave or HAM radio if necessary?

This is why I am not against pools, as long as we keep them below say 5% of the network difficulty, which I think we can do by making the clients and protocol smarter.

I am thinking of things that aren't even your radar with BitShares. I wish I could find someone willing to work with me?

EXCLUSIVE: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack