197300+ entries in 0.041s
mircea_popescu: mike_c honestly i suspek your intuition is certainly correct. more money to be made teaching this than 90% of the stuff taught online. "be a better you" or w/e.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform and im passing on the next 2, they're nice but more in a "basic guide to being a gentleman scholar in 2015"
mircea_popescu: 2. sybil. the purpose is irrelevant. all mitm is a degenberate case of sybil.
mircea_popescu: 1. locust. i did not say irrelevant, i said locust is not part of agriculture. it isn't.
mircea_popescu: there's been more than one case of people who'd have been much better served through tutoring than trying to drink from the river here.
mircea_popescu: * Adlai assumes the business model would be "pay us to troll you gentlyer" << for srs.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform the reason rawls is in there is because it gives perhaps the best approach for average derp to touch his derpitude. the reasoin no discussion of scamming is in economy is because i do not believe it is in there.
mircea_popescu: how "common" something is in principle does not mean it doesn't have to be on the supply list.
mircea_popescu: (one will note that the arithmetic basic is in pm economy too - the original way to lose your coinz was to not know how to count)
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform the one sad result of this exercise is that in fact it turns out a privileged relationship to randomness is an ingredient.
mircea_popescu: not that it's not interesting. but this is already a major asspoking.
mircea_popescu: lemme see if anything occurs. ima keep it open for a little bit see if i become suddenly unhappy with b overnight, then ima set it in stone an' give out some symbolic prizes for first completors.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: the way this test is designed, not only is lying a theft against oneself, as these things usually are - but moreover it leaves a trail and there's something to bitterly regret later.
mircea_popescu: Adlai the idea being that if they have a decent understanding of fundamentals
mircea_popescu: and if we ARE stuck with some sort of randomness in there, contrary to my original intuition,
mircea_popescu: yeah ok, "all functions" does not work, i give. and it's not sal;vageable.
mircea_popescu: i put it to you bitcoion would still exist and function.
mircea_popescu: this as a rule of the universe, not avoidable. perfectly deterministic anything and everything.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform let's for a second presume, as a thought experiment, that magically any call to a random function returned 5.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform lemme put it this way : their problem has nothing to do with bitcoin, but with their head.
mircea_popescu: this is also not a "how to save" or "how to put out fires" guide.
mircea_popescu: i don't think it was idiotic. they spent their bitcoin.
mircea_popescu: let me put it in these terms asciilifeform : if you actually need the concept of random to have bitcoin, this reduces to a situationb of "whosoever has priviledged access to random owns bitcoin".
mircea_popescu: i do not think you actually have to have the concept of random to have bitcoin
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform "Discuss perfect forward secrecy, in the broader context of mathematical guarantees."
mircea_popescu: in one famous case, because this allows you to pass a null parameter
mircea_popescu: you think we\re discussing F(F(F(x))) whereas we did not say a=b=F