Alex B.: "Back before the block size limit debate was even relevant, @gwern hit the nail on the head. Features are secondary, resilience sine qua non." ['Bitcoin’s greatest virtue is not its deflation, nor its microtransactions, but its viral distributed nature; it can wait for its opportunity.']
09-12 16:42 - 'So I should be put on a blacklist because I want to support Gwern's research? / I'm more worried about a general gravitation of procurement being gated by KYC. Did you know if you get caught doing cash trades in NYC you...' by /u/thestringpuller removed from /r/Bitcoin within 12-22min
''' So I should be put on a blacklist because I want to support Gwern's research? I'm more worried about a general gravitation of procurement being gated by KYC. Did you know if you get caught doing cash trades in NYC you can go to jail for violating the Bitlicense? This forces users into KYC channels. This isn't a tinfoil hat issue. It's a real issue that will destroy fungibility of coins. Should I be blacklisted just because I have coins that at one point were part of "prohibited use" even if I don't know it? In 10 years if >90% of Bitcoin procurement occurs through a KYC channel then the Bitcoin economy has failed at being censorship resistant. ''' Context Link Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: thestringpuller
Bitcoin mentioned around Reddit: Essay on Wikipedia by Gwern: "One of the most distasteful aspects of Wikipedia editing these days [...] is that the guidelines, as practiced, encourage editing in bad faith." /r/KotakuInAction
Alex B.: "Back before the block size limit debate was even relevant, @gwern hit the nail on the head. Features are secondary, resilience sine qua non." ['Bitcoins greatest virtue is not its deflation, nor its microtransactions, but its viral distributed nature; it can wait for its opportunity.']
In a recent spillover of internet-based long-form intellectual new media into the mainstream, Eric Weinstein appeared as a guest on Ted Cruz's podcast. Eric was well prepared. Cruz played the role of a charitable and engaged critic while avoiding direct confrontation. The conservation laid bare the intersection of the anti-corporate socialist left and anti-government libertarian right and the potential of these forces as a combined political interest. There was a strong sense of shared acknowledgement of the current crisis and they touched on all the culture war aspects. But I'm more interested in what Eric has pointed to now several times as the root cause of the systemic decline, and what seems to be the original trigger for the slow decay and building of tension that has ultimately led to the rise of darker elements on both the left and right that we see today: a Great Decoupling of productivity (GDP) and wage growth in the early 1970's. The significance of this time period has also been highlighted by Eric's boss, Peter Thiel. We are referred to https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/, where a collection of charts give the impression that a profound change in the foundations of the economy took place, effectively causing a divergence of all kinds of metrics related to equality, wealth creation, the complexity of regulation, and implicitly downstream effects like political polarization, incarceration rates, and age of marriage. The simple, seemingly persuasive answer is that the effective cancellation of the gold standard set us on a path towards borrowing ever larger sums to avert financial crises as they arise, and the return to a currency backed by something provably scarce, i.e. bitcoin, is a solution. I can't say I'm convinced it's that simple. And Eric doesn't mention currency specifically as the problem. So what I want to know is, was 1971 a real inflection point, the real root of inequality and dysfunction we see today? Was the removal of limits on the Fed's ability to print money a mistake? Or was there some other government action or change at that time that was the real cause? Do we need to let stock market crashes happen from time to time? A year ago, u/gwern posted a 1986 Atlantic article that described a lot of the problems in black America that are still around 4 decades later and offered more in the way of nuance and insight than most of the discourse we see today. What struck me on revisiting it was how the timing of the decline of Chicago aligns with the early 1970's trigger hypothesis:
In 1970 thirty-seven percent of the population of the area was below the poverty line; in 1980 the figure was 51 percent. In 1970 the unemployment rate was 9.5 percent; in 1980 it was 24.2 percent. In 1970 forty percent of the residents of the neighborhood lived in families with a female head; in 1980 the number had grown to 72 percent. In 1980 of the 54,000 residents 33,000 were on welfare. Experts agree that all of the numbers are even worse today.
My mental model for social issues is that they are mostly rooted in economics. If you have a society that generates wealth, you can pay teachers, doctors, and police well enough to attract competent candidates and the competition necessary to create real expertise. You can afford to build and maintain good infrastructure and spend time on figuring out how to best help the disadvantaged. You have the resources to advance technology and support the arts. You get all the positive feedback loops that come with this. When wealth generation becomes concentrated and restricted, public institutions start to struggle, people feel they have less opportunity, and social issues start to bubble up like the formation of outgroups of all kinds. A massive oversimplifation, I know, but a useful general framework to approaching issues that avoids (mis)placing blame on cultural degeneracy, "evil" corporations, or other common scapegoats that are largely symptoms of greater problems. Today, this mindset seems to align with the conservative right, but in the 1986 article it's the "liberal answer" to the problem of ghettos that I identify with:
In Chicago the harbinger of the change was the closing in the late fifties of the stockyards, which for half a century were the sine qua non of lower-class grunt work and a heavy employer of blacks. Chicago lost 200,000 jobs in the seventies; small shut-down redbrick factories that used to make products like boxes and ball bearings dot the city, especially the West Side. The lack of jobs, the argument continues, caused young men in the ghetto to adopt a drifting, inconstant life; to turn to crime; to engage in exaggeratedly macho behavior -- acting tough, not studying, bullying women for money -- as a way to get the sense of male strength that their fathers had derived from working and supporting families. As Murray believes that one simple step, ending all welfare programs, would heal the ghettos, the unemployment school believes that another simple step, jobs, would heal them. "When there's a demand for the participation of the black underclass in the labor force, most of the so-called problems people talk about will evaporate in a generation," says John McKnight. an urban-research professor at Northwestern University.
Indeed, Mr. McKnight. And up until this spring, it looked like the Trump presidency's aggressively pro-jobs and pro-American workers policy was showing promise of vindicating this view - the presence of BLM and racial tensions leading up to 2016 had all but subsided by 2018-2019. I wonder just how little backlash the George Floyd incident would have caused if the pandemic hadn't undone the economic progress of the past 3 years. Mind you, that "progress" was but a tiny step in the right direction in terms of improving wages and opportunities for the lowest earners. And for all the times the "audit the fed" meme hit the top of the_donald, it now seems impossible that the current administration has any capability or willingness to take the drastic steps needed to address the real root cause that apparently started 50 years ago. To do that, we may need an actual revolution.
Why did Satoshi Nakamoto use "Upload.ae" to upload the pre completed bitcoin whitepaper?
As clearly seen in his email https://www.gwern.net/docs/bitcoin/2008-nakamoto sent 22nd august 2008, why in the heavens would satoshi upload his doc to this upload.ae website? As a UAE resident, i find it very odd for satoshi to end up uploading his doc in such a non relative domain. See upload.ae activity history https://i.imgur.com/Azyrj9M.jpg It was only active 2007/2008 (It was his active years too. May be needed a ready solution as a dev to share something with others like he did in the email). If it was not his domain or a friends domain (unlikely), how did he find about this website? Is there any other scenario/technical reason how he would end up using this website? It had zero traffic and no google results so even if he tried overseas to find a random website to upload something to he would not get this website as a result. Note: In 2008, .ae domains were only buy-able from very limited options mainly the ISP provider of UAE Etisalat. Why did he not use something more anonymous?
My 2019 curated list of articles, resources and links on programming, math and computer science.
Hi /compsci! Every year I bookmark many websites, tutorials and articles on mostly programming, math, technology and computer science. I go through them all in the end of the year and curate the best, unique and interesting stuff to make a list for myself (and discard the others). I hope some will benefit you, ignite your interests further in computer science or find something interesting to read and learn. Enough talk, let's get to the meat!
Paperdigest, tracks and analyzes all new papers (ai, machine learning, vision, robotics, etc) uploaded to Arxiv and published on selected conferences, and then generates a one sentence summary for each paper to capture the paper highlight.
cogsci reading list, the cognitive science subreddit's reading list is an amazing resources with a lot of books, papers and articles if you're into cognitive science.
Gwern's Blog/Website, about psychology, statistics, and technology; Gwern writes about darknet markets & Bitcoin, blinded self-experiments & Quantified Self analyses, dual n-back & spaced repetition, and modafinil.
Pragmatists, Romantics, Analysts, and Fundamentalists: a fun heuristic for classifying personalities
What are you favourite ways of categorising personality types? Joke: Big 5 Broke: MBTI Woke: Zodiac Sign Bespoke:Which Veggietales Character Are You? In all seriousness, I love finding interesting new ways of categorising personalities. I've taken MBTIs, Big 5s, Personality Disorder tests, and Hogwarts House quizzes more times than I can count. Even if a given schema isn't scientifically robust, it can serve as a useful shorthand among a knowing audience - you can communicate a lot by saying things like "he's a typical fucking Aries" or "he thinks he's an Aragorn but he's actually a Boromir". I'd love to hear what schemata others have come up with, but one useful little framework I've devised and found surprisingly adaptable is to carve up people into Pragmatists, Romantics, Analysts, and Fundamentalists. Pragmatists are relatively unreflective and just want to get on with life. Romantics are driven by emotion and beauty. Analysts are self-conscious optimisers who value truth and knowledge. And fundamentalists operate on the basis of axiomatic principles that structure everything else they do. Pragmatists think the other types are out to lunch. Romantics think the other types are boring and cold. Analysts think the other types are stupid and unreflective. And fundamentalists - insofar as they understand the other types at all - think of them as benighted and deprived of some basic insight. I don't think this framework is particularly useful in classifying people tout court, but it's quite intuitive to apply to particular domains. Consider Christianity, for example. A Pragmatist Christian goes to Church because that's what they've always done and the Minister gives funny sermons and it's a good opportunity to chat about what's happening in the community. A Romantic Christian is a William Blake type - they're moved to tears every time they listen to Allegri's Misere, and love Kierkegaard. They've probably been to Taizé. Analyst Christians are impressed by the Cosmological Argument, have a signed copy of the Summa Theologica, and privately worry a lot about the problem of evil. Finally, a Fundamentalist Christian cleaves to a few basic principles - maybe that's biblical literalism, but it could equally be a single moment of personal revelation they had that they've subsequently built their life around. Science is another nice example. The Pragmatic Scientist would like to finish the paper they're working on, get a publication in Nature, and secure a juicy grant. The Romantic Scientist gazes at the stars at night feeling a mix of terror and wonder. They think about the Fermi paradox ten times a day. They probably love Carl Sagan. The Analyst Scientist likes metanalyses, worries about the replication crisis, and complains about the statistical incompetence of their peers. The Fundamentalist Scientist is in a ten year back-and-forth publication battle with a rival at Stanford who they consider to be a fucking idiot who doesn't grasp the obvious truth of Modified Newtonian Dynamics. They are possibly a fan of Richard Dawkins. I also see a nice mix of these personality types in the Rationalist community. Probably the Pragmatists Rationalists are the least well represented, but they're around. They started reading Less Wrong after they started working for an algorithmic trading fund and it was recommended to them by a coworker. They're always on the lookout for inadequate equilibria they can exploit. They bought BitCoin early and used the money to fund their EVE Online Corp. They frequently makes comments like "Well if you really believe that, you could make a bunch of money on PredictIt right now." They use Modafinil three times a week and can't understand everyone doesn't do the same. Naturally, they're one-boxers. The Romantic Rationalists, by contrast, probably came into the movement after reading Kurzweil and Bostrom. They worry a lot about consciousness and frequently flirt with panpsychism. They love Scott Alexander and CS Lewis and have read Harry Potter and The Methods of Rationality seven times. They sometimes worry that they've given themselves HPPD from microdosing but aren't sure if things always looked that way (or maybe it's just their new polyphasic sleep schedule?). The Analyst Rationalists got into Rationalism via reading u/gwern or maybe listening to Rationally Speaking. They find Newcomb's problem deeply disturbing but find One Boxers to be baffling and annoying. They try not to think about Roko's Basilisk (sorry for mentioning it). They take 2mg of melatonin to sleep at night but worry that they're becoming dependent. They see the obvious appeal of Mealsquares. They use unnecessary formalism at every opportunity. They actually read the fucking article you just posted. Finally, Fundamentalist Rationalists probably came across Less Wrong at a delicate age and were immediately convinced by the obvious and irrefutable truth of Timeless Decision Theory, HBD, antinatalism, or Bayesianism. They are up to 20g of Phenibut a day but have no intention of tapering. They either love or despise Nicholas Nassim Taleb. They once broke up with their girlfriend because she was a Frequentist. They have probably been banned from the Culture War Thread at least once.
All gwern.net pages for the tag: Tag: Bitcoin. Home Site Me Changes: News Reddit support on PATREON. Tag: Bitcoin. Articles. Archiving URLs; Bitcoin Is Worse Is Better; Blackmail fail; Darknet Market Archives (2013-2015) Tor DNM-related arrests, 2011-2015; Darknet Market mortality risks; Epigrams; My Mistakes ; Prediction Markets; Time-lock encryption; Silk Road 1: Theory & Practice; Bitcoin ... Bitcoin is a distributed, worldwide, decentralized digital money. Bitcoins are issued and managed without any central authority whatsoever: there is no government, company, or bank in charge of Bitcoin. You might be interested in Bitcoin if you like cryptography, distributed peer-to-peer systems, or economics. A large percentage of Bitcoin enthusiasts are libertarians, though people of all ... 2011 essay on how Bitcoin’s long gestation and early opposition indicates it is an example of the ‘Worse is Better’ paradigm in which an ugly complex design with few attractive theoretical properties compared to purer competitors nevertheless successfully takes over a niche, survives, and becomes gradually refined. Anleitung: einfach in Bitcoin Investieren in drei Schritten Schritt 1: Konto bei Trading Plattform eröffnen. Bevor man in Bitcoin investieren kann, muss man sich als erstes ein Konto bei einer Trading Plattform erstellen, die die Währung unterstützt.. Dabei fällt unsere Wahl auf eToro.Hier ist die Kontoeröffnung besonders einfach und benötigt noch nicht einmal eine Verifizierung bei ... Is Bitcoin the perfect money, or is it the worst money that solves the most essential problem, as simply and reliably as possible? In true "New Jersey” style, Bitcoin doesn’t attempt to be everything, it attempts to do ONE thing as beautifully, & as unambiguously as possible. Today we read a fascinating piece from Bitcoin’s rich history, originally published in 2011, and edited, added to ...
Wir gehen also auf das Bitcoin minen ein und auf die Übertragung von Bitcoins. Anschließend diskutieren wir die wichtigsten Argumente, die für und gegen Bitcoins und ein Investment in Bitcoins ... 5.To buy something in any DarkNet Market you need Bitcoins, so go to any shop in your region and exchange money into Bitcoins,for example here: ... SternTV hat sicherlich eine gute Reichweite und berichtete über den Bitcoin. Wie objektiv und sachlich dieser Bericht ausfiel, darauf geh ich kurz ein. Weiters möchte ich hier noch einen ... Bitcoin Brandon 147 views. New; 44:49. Class 12 Income And Expenditure Method NITIN YADAV 167 watching. Live now; The Mark of the Beast - Duration: 50:07. Pastor Greg Laurie Recommended for you ... Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.