8100+ entries in 0.05s
ThickAsThieves: so the fact that they can be taken back is where it breaks or?
ThickAsThieves: it doesnt just mean it's an economy with special rules?
ThickAsThieves: under the arrangement that you may also take them back
ThickAsThieves: each user may spend them on each other specific user only
ThickAsThieves: for every user, every other user gets 20 neg coins and 20 pos coins
ThickAsThieves: the system doesnt need to track them visibly because the system allocates for each ouser in it
ThickAsThieves: hmm maybe i dont fully understand the conserving over time aspect
ThickAsThieves: however psuedononymous, it may be, identification is required, right?
ThickAsThieves: first, the gazette does not require identification in your definition
ThickAsThieves: also, i'm with jurov, i see some weakness in the gazette/forum definitions and separation
ThickAsThieves: furthermore, <+mircea_popescu> ThickAsThieves but any ounce of gold stays an ounce of gold permanently. where do your rating points go when they go ? /// where is it in your theory that this matters?
ThickAsThieves: in fact, don't people do things at times strictly for the points?
ThickAsThieves: it's not a typical economy, cuz it has allocation idiosyncracies, but i'm not sure if that disqualifies it
ThickAsThieves: my rating points are held by every user that hasnt given them to me yet
ThickAsThieves: <+mircea_popescu> so no, that's what it is : it isn't a wot because it can't be /// well i can accumulate points no? and at any given time, a maximum amount can be had, and every time a user joins anew, the system inflates to accommodate
ThickAsThieves: <+mircea_popescu> <ThickAsThieves> i have a feeling though, this theory will end up distilling into one that already exists << kinda cxurious about this myself. /// one thing it reminds me of is your basic escrow deal
ThickAsThieves: every user has 40 points they can work with, unto any other user
ThickAsThieves: what might be the medium of exchange in the WoT? Rating points, right?
ThickAsThieves: if the WoT is decentralized, and has verification methods, signing, identities, etc, and bitcoin also does, they start to converge in their features
ThickAsThieves: jurov that's also not a requirement of the theory as stated
ThickAsThieves: as in the gazette now wants to be decentalized, like bitcoin
ThickAsThieves: it's interesting to me to see how much the 3 separate elements would/could function as economies themselves, and how their traits might converge
ThickAsThieves: and we do have a source for extra-info, the bitcoin software
ThickAsThieves: [16:26] <+jurov> we need extra-blockchain information to assess them /// do we? each address may function as a user/reputation
ThickAsThieves: and then those would then be interpreted separately by any individual user
ThickAsThieves: "punishment" in its terms are merely individually given
ThickAsThieves: first, the theory doesnt require consensus judgment and punishment (head on pike)
ThickAsThieves: (note i'm taking this position for sake of the debate, i have no conclusion)
ThickAsThieves: i've got this hammer now, and trying to sort out what it can smash and what it can build
ThickAsThieves: i think whether it applies might lead to other interesting things
ThickAsThieves: i'm merely trying to see whether Bitcoin would qualify as another echo to apply it to, not whether it fits a perfect example
ThickAsThieves: could you say that an orhpaned block or unconfirmed tx is a punishment?
ThickAsThieves: i have a feeling though, this theory will end up distilling into one that already exists
ThickAsThieves: if the theory can be applied to the Sun and elements, surely applying it to the Bitcoin system isn't absurd
ThickAsThieves: bitcoins being the medium, blockchain the gazette, mining the forum?
ThickAsThieves: so by Mirceanomics, Bitcoin is an economy itself, right?
ThickAsThieves: <+Oleanie> ;;rate davout 2 /// haha davout only gets a 2 from his better half
ThickAsThieves: Blockchain Strikes Five Year Deal to Exclusively Manage Bitcoin.com
ThickAsThieves: well that raises another point, if it's really decentralized, how is it moderated?
ThickAsThieves: as in, if one person is selling weed in a jurisdiction he is not allowed, and you are host to that, you are now a target
ThickAsThieves: they'd also need to provide same security and privacy to any host of the pieces of the system
ThickAsThieves: it would involve dentralizing the software and content
ThickAsThieves: we hadnt discussed the overall decentralizing of a marketplace as a bad thing
ThickAsThieves: decntralization would be distributing the risk, not necessarily randomizing it
ThickAsThieves: wouldnt you rather have one person that is good at it, than 50 that suck or are ill actors?
ThickAsThieves: depends what your expectation/definition of decentralization is i suppose