U0723KV7E says -=*[1469656771.000276]-=*::: Hey guys.. This article was provided by <@U1BBCH5K4>
U0723KV7E says -=*[1469656772.000277]-=*::: <http://qz.com/742676/blockchain-could-be-the-revolution-that-hillary-clinton-brings-to-washington-and-it-is-sorely-needed/>
U0A9NH17X says -=*[1469716139.000280]-=*::: <https://medium.com/@dominic_w/ethereum-ethereum-classic-and-useful-lessons-from-the-fall-of-ancient-rome-5a67d36a5e67#.63fysbmuh>
U0A9NH17X says -=*[1469716154.000282]-=*::: What do you think of this?
U07HTRSQN says -=*[1469717577.000283]-=*::: "Blockchain could be the sorely needed revolution that Hillary Clinton brings to Washington" - oh I hope she does, a virus is always able to take down its host faster if it is injected deep in reservoir tissue. Hillary, without knowing it (naturally) could help introduce a technology for government reliance that could end up eating government. I approve 1000%
U076LGFE0 says -=*[1469719355.000284]-=*::: <@U0A9NH17X>: sounds a bit too conspiracy theory for me
U0A9NH17X says -=*[1469719426.000285]-=*::: <@U076LGFE0> yeah, had a similar impression. However, he seems pretty convinced that Ethereum is able to scale
U07HTRSQN says -=*[1469719537.000286]-=*::: <@U076LGFE0>: me, or the article?
U07HTRSQN says -=*[1469719606.000287]-=*::: I am just stating that having the technology that will enable gov-marginalizing decentralized applications accepted by the very entity it is marginalizing is wonderful, and equated it to a virus as analogy
U076LGFE0 says -=*[1469719653.000288]-=*::: <@U07HTRSQN>: not you. The article <@U0A9NH17X> shared
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469727328.000289]-=*::: <https://twitter.com/cdixon/status/758715044636954625>
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469729209.000291]-=*::: I can understand some of the antagonism Americans seem to have against their government.  I'd have that too, if I was in America, or Russia or some other place where there's simply too much power distributed in a bad way.  Also the European Union, way too big.  Though for smaller countries like Norway this doesn't really right very true.  Our government is very effective, and if it could be made even more effective and smaller it would be very happy to do so.  It has continuously been doing so in fact.  Not in the form of "more privatization" because that's worse, just putting power in the hands of the few super capitalists companies and people that already exist.  That's the real enemy in my mind.  Government tries to do well, they have people's best interest at heart.  Big multinational private corporations on the other hand...  They also hold the most power, and they are rallying most against government intervention.
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469729268.000292]-=*::: I dont think its a fair comparison because its really small
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469729275.000293]-=*::: Norway is more like the state of New York
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469729303.000294]-=*::: When what's actually needed is much more distributed power, and so much /more/ intervention.  Less laissez-faire economy.  Actually having some form of control to the raging private oligarchs :slightly_smiling_face:
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469729327.000295]-=*::: ryan_blockstack: Yeah, smaller is often better though.  Too much power in too few hands =&gt; problematic.
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469729333.000296]-=*::: oh for sure I agree
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469729347.000297]-=*::: very much believe in decentralizing power as you can probably tell :slightly_smiling_face:
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469729358.000298]-=*::: Indeed ^_^
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730316.000299]-=*::: As someone who lives in New York City, I 100% support NYC breaking off and forming its own country.
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730423.000300]-=*::: as in, Trump got the wall part right, but the location wrong?
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730426.000301]-=*::: haha
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730432.000302]-=*::: its called the hudson
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730439.000303]-=*::: ah, the moat
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730446.000304]-=*::: <@U1JGE616C>: manhattan should be its own countr
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730451.000306]-=*::: step one: disable the L train
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469730463.000307]-=*::: Moats are so cool.
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730472.000308]-=*::: Don't worry, <@U0722SJ4A> -- The MTA plans to disable the L.
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730478.000310]-=*::: yeah thats what I meant
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730481.000311]-=*::: Then all those hipsters in Brooklyn will be stranded. :joy:
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730487.000312]-=*::: haha like <@U071X9XPC>
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730501.000313]-=*::: hey, the hipsters *deserve* their own country :wink:
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730532.000314]-=*::: Sadly, I was forced out of Manhattan because, as my good friend Jimmy McMillan would say...
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730532.000315]-=*::: <https://i.ytimg.com/vi/mBF_JR0VLBk/hqdefault.jpg>
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730542.000317]-=*::: I think I saw that guy's car once
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730554.000318]-=*::: haha
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730560.000319]-=*::: I ran into him once in the east village. I yelled that the rent was too high and he told me he loved me.
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730560.000320]-=*::: I saw him at a crepe place once
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469730560.000321]-=*::: A country of people prepared to pay huge monies for tiny places plus the tourists.
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730616.000322]-=*::: yeah, the moat doesn't stop the tourists unfortunately
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730627.000323]-=*::: haha we need a wall on 14th st
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730633.000324]-=*::: lol
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730636.000325]-=*::: literally put it on Wall S
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730640.000327]-=*::: Can we just wall off Time Square?
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730648.000328]-=*::: And keep tourists inside it?
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730656.000329]-=*::: well they need to get to central park
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730658.000330]-=*::: they do that once a year at least
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469730672.000331]-=*::: I lived a block away from him
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469730676.000332]-=*::: think I even have a picture with him
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730683.000333]-=*::: Im his roommate, so there
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730691.000334]-=*::: pics or it didn't happen :wink:
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730701.000335]-=*::: lol
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730704.000336]-=*::: and in case youre wondering, our rent is high
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730712.000337]-=*::: this is why I live in New Jersey
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730713.000338]-=*::: High or too damn high?
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730717.000339]-=*::: too damn high!
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730719.000340]-=*::: *gag* Jersey is sad ...
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730729.000341]-=*::: central NJ is pretty nice IMHO :slightly_smiling_face:
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730735.000342]-=*::: Jersey is indeed, thats why they made a new one!
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730741.000343]-=*::: in the US no less :wink:
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730750.000344]-=*::: no comment on Old Jersey
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730764.000345]-=*::: I lived in hackettstown for a summer. That is a different breed of person out there.
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730794.000346]-=*::: I love how there are two st. patricks days in Hoboken
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730813.000347]-=*::: this once showed up in the Princeton newspaper: <http://media.nj.com/ledgerupdates_impact/photo/2011/12/-73d3c8bf7dd38bb7.jpg>
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469730833.000349]-=*::: sooo good
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469730878.000350]-=*::: <@U071X9XPC|muneeb_blockstack> uploaded a file: <https://blockstack.slack.com/files/muneeb_blockstack/F1W3R6SRH/slack_for_ios_upload.jpg|Slack for iOS Upload>
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469730883.000351]-=*::: nice!
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469730905.000352]-=*::: Legit
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469730945.000353]-=*::: lol, nice.
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469730997.000354]-=*::: I would never get that far. :slightly_smiling_face:
U1JGE616C says -=*[1469731059.000355]-=*::: In New Jersey, where I lived, it was right on the border of the hill people.
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469731094.000356]-=*::: I've only been in Bayonne and Hoboken in NJ.  Pretty much only spent a most time biking Manhattan, Queens and Brooklyn.
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469731111.000357]-=*::: I see I need to get around more when I'm visiting New York. :]
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469731135.000358]-=*::: I'm in the area called "Drunk Rutgers Students"
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469731186.000359]-=*::: <@U1Q7T9Q0G>: you should stop by our office if you're ever in NYC :slightly_smiling_face:
U1Q7T9Q0G says -=*[1469731277.000360]-=*::: Yeah, that'd be cool.  I've been meaning to visit the Opera offices also when I've been there, but just never did.  Now we'll be separated into different companies though.  I also never had much to do with the ads-part of Opera. :]
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734388.000361]-=*::: <@U071X9XPC> <@U074Q9Q3D> was kind of confused by naval's lightning+sidechain comment
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469734417.000362]-=*::: oh?
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469734421.000363]-=*::: link?
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734423.000364]-=*::: does he mean lightning ON a sidechain
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734428.000365]-=*::: lightning cross-chain swaps
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734434.000366]-=*::: something else? :wink:
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469734459.000367]-=*::: I mean, do you have a link to his comment?  :wink:
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734466.000368]-=*::: <https://twitter.com/naval/status/758728548525809664>
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734470.000370]-=*::: haha was looking for it
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734489.000371]-=*::: not sure what a lightning token means :slightly_smiling_face:
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469734533.000372]-=*::: maybe he means doing the token transfers off-chain and using LN to settle them?
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734551.000373]-=*::: with a sidechain?
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734554.000374]-=*::: hah! anyway...
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469734565.000375]-=*::: yeah, the sidechain part is weird
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469734579.000376]-=*::: sidechains have their own tokens
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469734583.000377]-=*::: theyre just pegged
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469734585.000378]-=*::: distinct currencies
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469734588.000379]-=*::: maybe he meant sidechain OR lightning
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469734589.000380]-=*::: illusion that they are the same
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469734595.000381]-=*::: yes I think he meant OR
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734653.000382]-=*::: oh <@U074Q9Q3D> i thought you were on that thread but apparently not
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734665.000383]-=*::: <@U0722SJ4A>: or would make more sense kinda
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734696.000384]-=*::: maybe he means a token that has LN capability
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1469734753.000385]-=*::: <@U0722SJ4A>: yup, exactly re: sidechains
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469736321.000386]-=*::: Im not as sophisticated as this group :slightly_smiling_face: Im just trying to figure out why proprietary tokens would exist when you can fork the software early and then reimplement on top of Bitcoin. The answer seems to be the value of the network effect established before the fork &gt; the value lost to the premine."
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469736344.000387]-=*::: The Sidechain / LN discussion came up as a retort to the claim that Bitcoin cant handle it."
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469736413.000388]-=*::: I meant that one could use Bitcoin + Lightning to solve scalability issues, and Bitcoin + Sidechain to implement code that might be too dangerous to be part of Bitcoin.
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469736436.000389]-=*::: But I confess that my understanding of this stuff is not at a code / protocol level so I still mix up terms.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469736505.000390]-=*::: I think in many cases you can fork and implement using Bitcoin.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469736523.000391]-=*::: Two top cases that come to mind are:
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469736575.000392]-=*::: a) When youre using the token simply as a payment e.g., tipping. Why would I not tip in Bitcoin instead of a new token?
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469736591.000393]-=*::: b) When you dont have any network effects e.g., stand along OSS software like Linux.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469736642.000394]-=*::: If the token youre creating is around some *scarce* resource that is actually *used* for the operation of your protocol then there is a case for a token.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469736682.000395]-=*::: Filecoin proposes a token around proof of storage. Storage is a scarce resource and is not free.
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469736798.000397]-=*::: And I love Filecoin. Big believer. But why not fork the protocol instantly and have payments in Bitcoin?
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469736812.000398]-=*::: And use LN to settle?
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469736846.000399]-=*::: The only answer that I can come up with is keep the Filecoin premine small and roll it out slowly so that it has a chance to build up network effect before someone can come along and fork it."
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469736860.000400]-=*::: Filecoin is a slightly odd example because of "proof of storage.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469736884.000401]-=*::: but I hear what you mean
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469736898.000402]-=*::: (this is of course assuming Filecoin can work at all--as in, they stop people from leeching value by only serving proofs-of-storage in exchange for the reward, but never actually serving the data)
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469736918.000403]-=*::: yep any potential problems with proof of storage / filecoin aside
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737007.000404]-=*::: Filecoin is distributing the currency using proof of storage
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737018.000405]-=*::: just like Bitcoin distributes currency using proof of work
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737101.000406]-=*::: so miners become data storage nodes
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469737160.000407]-=*::: So sidechains would have to be launched and working before filecoin could be replaced by a sidechain. And any token designed to replace filecoin on a sidechain would still have value and basically just be another filecoin. Is that what you mean?
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469737224.000409]-=*::: Filecoin is only valuable as long as its "miners" also serve the data they host.  Sadly, it doesn't look like there's an incentive to do this, since it costs much more bandwidth to serve data than proof-of-storage.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737228.000410]-=*::: Filecoin is messing around with mining. I think we should discuss some example where the token is not linked to mining and is simpler.
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469737252.000411]-=*::: So youre saying that a coin linked to mining is more defensible?
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469737275.000412]-=*::: (And Im assuming that its some fundamentally required link, not one that the developer imposes to create a new coin)
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737336.000413]-=*::: I feel its a double edged sword. Yes, a separate blockchain and different mining process can make your token more defensible but then you have to deal with the over head of running the blockchain and keeping the network secure.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737353.000414]-=*::: Namecoins security vulnerabilities that we discovered, comes to mind.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737370.000415]-=*::: (Namecoin was merged mined but still)
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469737392.000416]-=*::: Well, if you could implement the same protocol without a new mining process, then the token is just artificially inserted and a fork would remove it.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737419.000418]-=*::: It can if there are no network effects.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737428.000419]-=*::: Or some other valid reason.
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469737449.000420]-=*::: The only valid reasons I can find so far are network effects and sidechains arent ready yet."
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737468.000421]-=*::: I view sidechains as just a different way to implement altcoins.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737480.000422]-=*::: Theyre better than separate blockchains because theyre pegged
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737482.000423]-=*::: but thats about it
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737493.000424]-=*::: theyre alts in every other way
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469737537.000425]-=*::: But the pegging distinction is critical. If their value is fixed, they cant trade / gain value. So you cant build a business around it.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737546.000426]-=*::: Lets think about scalability. Bitcoin core devs already dont like data embedding transactions.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737558.000427]-=*::: What if data embedding transactions go to 70-80%
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737564.000428]-=*::: of total volume on Bitcoin
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737589.000429]-=*::: scalability requirements of a financial system are different from all these apps people are envisioning
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737612.000430]-=*::: and at some point putting data on the Bitcoin blockchain is not going to be feasible
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737882.000432]-=*::: Re pegging, I have to read up more on sidechains but my understanding is that its a fail safe mechanism to get your coins back to the main chain if all hell breaks lose on the sidechain (you cant do that with separate blockchains).
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469737911.000433]-=*::: The market value of the coins on the sidechain can be independent of (and not a subset of) the main chain.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469738008.000434]-=*::: Let me rephrase. You can always get your coins back from a sidechain and redeem their value on the main chain. But you might not want to do that if they are more valuable on the sidechain. So there is a floor to how bad things can get for you.
U07C37F8R says -=*[1469740304.000437]-=*::: Ok, so my conclusion is that if you are going to launch a new protocol and try to keep some premine, then youd better make sure to: - Roll out the code slowly and let network effects build OR - Develop a network with some fundamental scarcity that ties the token into the mining in some non-extractable way  Otherwise, your project is vulnerable to getting forked. The fork can use straight up Bitcoin as its token. Or if the scalability requirements mean you cant use Bitcoin, then the fork might create a non-premined altcoin. That altcoin can be sidechained to Bitcoin for security / pegging.  This means that only certain kinds of protocols can use proprietary tokens as a business model for the developers. And theres some upper bound to how much of the tokens the developer can keep. That upper bound is a function of the tokens intrinsic inseparability from the protocol / mining and network effect.  Did I get anything wrong?
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469740397.000438]-=*::: I think thats a really good summary :slightly_smiling_face:
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469740447.000439]-=*::: I do think that not all protocols/projects are suitable for tokens and well see that playing out as forks appear and things get consolidated with Bitcoin. In fact, weve witnessed the first wave of this already (Namecoin -&gt; Blockstack on Bitcoin).
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469740470.000440]-=*::: But the first wave mightve missed the subset of protocols/projects that are in fact suitable for a separate token.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1469740617.000441]-=*::: And definitely upper bound on how much of the tokens developers can keep. This is important for two reasons (a) avoiding the scam behavior that you see in projects today. If you have too many tokens you can manipulate the market and show a high market cap while sitting on 90% of the tokens, and (b) the sense of fairness also works against forks. If you are keeping too much, you are more vulnerable to a fork.
U07HTRSQN says -=*[1469756959.000446]-=*::: <@U071X9XPC>:  that's such a good point about market cap - I would love to have data on the amount of a coin's market cap that is being actively transacted among non-originating parties.
U099X8H27 says -=*[1469764143.000448]-=*::: Guys awesome discussion above. Reading your paper I was curious - could we write a proof of stake protocol that uses BTC rather than the chains own token like Ethereum wants to do? The value of the chains token would be roughly equal to the amount put at stake plus any added value of the abstract token (which would probably get priced in). If the value of the extra chain drops to zero (or below the value of the BTC put at stake), virtual miners would drop of the network, the chain would die and the BTC would return to the ecosystem.
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469764595.000449]-=*::: <@U099X8H27>: whether or not PoS can exist in an incentive-aligned manner without wasting the same amount of energy as PoW is still an open question, though.  In order for PoS to work and be superior to PoW, not only does PoS have to make the same kinds of incentives as PoW, but also it cannot be the case that a staker can gain an advantage by spending energy.
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469764614.000450]-=*::: otherwise, PoS is just PoW through obscurity
U099X8H27 says -=*[1469764914.000451]-=*::: That's what I mean though. By staking btc you are basically just directly applying BTC hash power to the virtual chain
U099X8H27 says -=*[1469764964.000452]-=*::: Obviously there's arguments against alt coins. But that's like saying why have equity when there are dollars
U075BH6M7 says -=*[1469766682.000453]-=*::: Clarifying The "Free ETC" Coinbase Confusion <https://gist.github.com/taoeffect/c910ebb16d9f6d248e9f1f3c6e10b1b8>
U099X8H27 says -=*[1469768403.000454]-=*::: <@U074Q9Q3D>: I think its important to think about PoS based on a native token differently from PoS done with a PoW token. Its too simplistic to see it as PoW vs. PoS when Bitcoin exists and its not going to disappear. So if you care about getting rid of mining energy then simply making a secondary chain PoS isnt the way to do that since the majority of energy wasted in cryptocurrencies is from Bitcoin miners. If you take that as a given, that Bitcoin mining wont disappear, then its hard to argue for PoS mining that doesnt use Bitcoin as its token. Ethereum Im skeptical about since they want to move away from PoW for whatever reason (even though their mining algorithm differentiates themselves well from Bitcoin). \_()_/
U075BH6M7 says -=*[1469773790.000456]-=*::: nice, forbes linked to my post: <http://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2016/07/28/ethereum-the-battle-of-the-chains/>
U0723KV7E says -=*[1469802921.000459]-=*::: That was a well-written summarization of the ethereum debacle
U0723KV7E says -=*[1469802941.000461]-=*::: <@U075BH6M7>: That was a well-written summarization of the ethereum debacle
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1469802943.000462]-=*::: awesome <@U075BH6M7>!
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469804506.000463]-=*::: <@U099X8H27>: Sorry, to clarify--I was talking about PoS in a general sense, not in the special case where we implement PoS on top of a PoW blockchain :slightly_smiling_face:  I pointed out the energy-use argument as an open problem because that seems to be the main reason people cite switching to PoS.  That said, I guess I'm not seeing the reason for doing PoS on top of a PoW blockchain?  Specifically, I'm not seeing how PoS adds any additional incentive for using the token (other than to make the early adopters rich off the payments from latecomers) that can't be gotten through PoW alone?
U074Q9Q3D says -=*[1469804725.000464]-=*::: <@U075BH6M7> read that this morning!  congrats on the Forbes link :slightly_smiling_face:
U0A9NH17X says -=*[1469806587.000465]-=*::: <@U074Q9Q3D>:  I guess <@U099X8H27> means using PoW-tokens as PoS-tokens on a sidechain
U075BH6M7 says -=*[1469820558.000466]-=*::: thanks! (whole thing has been insane!)
U099X8H27 says -=*[1469828780.000467]-=*::: <@U0A9NH17X>: yep
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470249965.000493]-=*::: <http://coincenter.org/entry/neither-the-cftc-nor-multi-sig-are-to-blame-for-the-bitfinex-hack>
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470249991.000494]-=*::: &gt; Neither the CFTC nor multi-sig are to blame for the Bitfinex hack There are several complex issues, both in regulation and the technology, at play.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470250005.000496]-=*::: Hat tip: <@U0BAP21N3>
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470260149.000497]-=*::: do we know exactly what the technical issues are yet <@U071X9XPC>? :slightly_smiling_face:
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470260169.000498]-=*::: I dont know yet.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470260190.000499]-=*::: There was a call of DCG family companies re this, but I had some other work to take care of
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470260203.000500]-=*::: I think more details will emerge in a few days
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470260667.000502]-=*::: Ill tell Meltem to send out a summary of best practices to all companies.
U079L559C says -=*[1470342278.000505]-=*::: <https://blog.mediachain.io/please-share-with-gratitude-b489e60a3e13#.8nxxdac6o> thought folks might be interested in this article on how blockchain might impact on Creative Commons media publishing. it was written by a guest author on the Mediachain blogan attorney who actually forked a CC-license to imagine the implications of the technology on the exsisting model. also posted in #creativeworks
U0723KV7E says -=*[1470342826.000509]-=*::: Great article <@U079L559C> <@U07D44N65> <@U0ACPJ917>!
U0ACPJ917 says -=*[1470343100.000510]-=*::: thanks :smile:
U0ACPJ917 says -=*[1470343115.000511]-=*::: happy to be so mission aligned with CC
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470505899.000516]-=*::: Great article by Peter Todd: v
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470505923.000518]-=*::: Turns out Blockstack already implements a replay protection system similar to what he describes
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470665047.000523]-=*::: <https://www.usv.com/blog/fat-protocols>
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470665058.000525]-=*::: Great post by <@U07KF7KKJ>
U076LGFE0 says -=*[1470674088.000526]-=*::: <http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-08-08/bitcoin-bail-ins-and-yuan-bets>
U076LGFE0 says -=*[1470674142.000528]-=*::: `"It is all a mess, and yet it is a charming, hopeful mess. It is easy to make fun -- and I do make fun -- of bitcoin/blockchain enthusiasts for naively re-creating everything that has existed for decades or centuries in the traditional financial system.`
U0A9NH17X says -=*[1470675154.000530]-=*::: Is there a red line in this article? I couldnt find it
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684520.000531]-=*::: <@U071X9XPC>: am mulling over that blog post
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684524.000532]-=*::: i'm not sure i buy it
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684547.000533]-=*::: I think its fascinating!
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684552.000534]-=*::: i think we haven't yet seen the gains from building on top of a few major token-protocols
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684584.000535]-=*::: there may indeed be a world in which there are many, but i'm less confident of that. protocols tend to have more of a winner-take-all (or most) characteristic
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684591.000536]-=*::: will be interesting to see where something like steem is in a few yearse
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684640.000538]-=*::: <https://twitter.com/starkness/status/762731870689824768>
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684652.000540]-=*::: i tend to side with the first case here :slightly_smiling_face:
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684663.000541]-=*::: (protocols meaning token-protocols)
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684686.000542]-=*::: So email is a great example.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684695.000543]-=*::: There is a *clear* spam protection problem here
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684704.000544]-=*::: and you couldve started email by linking it to a token.
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684735.000545]-=*::: sure but the CS hadn't really progressed far enough yet, but okay
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684757.000546]-=*::: yep
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684767.000547]-=*::: email still surprisingly stayed fairly decentralized
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684778.000548]-=*::: i'm worried USV is too caught up in things like steem
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684789.000549]-=*::: and i don't really see long-term staying power in that
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684797.000550]-=*::: Steem is a bad example (apologies to any Steem fans in our community)
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684804.000551]-=*::: yeah, sorry guys
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684813.000552]-=*::: well, we could have made "lightning sparks"
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684830.000554]-=*::: you guys could have made "blockstack stacks"
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684832.000555]-=*::: hehe
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684852.000556]-=*::: /giphy stacks
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684875.000558]-=*::: my point is i think we will see a lot of new applications emerge from layer 2 protocols that could mean huge opportunities for monetization
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470684882.000559]-=*::: i think they're too focused on the "failure" of layer 1
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684883.000560]-=*::: LOL @ stacks
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684891.000561]-=*::: <@U071X9XPC|muneeb_blockstack> uploaded a file: <https://blockstack.slack.com/files/muneeb_blockstack/F1ZBKSZHU/pasted_image_at_2016_08_08_03_34_pm.png|Pasted image at 2016-08-08, 3:34 PM>
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684930.000562]-=*::: they absolutely can
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684944.000563]-=*::: apps can be huge
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684959.000564]-=*::: I think this is USVs way of thinking through data unbundling
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684977.000565]-=*::: if you cannot create a monopoly around user data (the entire goal of decentralization()
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470684993.000567]-=*::: then how/where will value be captured
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685005.000568]-=*::: I think their hypothesis is fairly plausible
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470685024.000569]-=*::: well, my point is apps on top of layer 2 may create a huge amount of value
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685028.000570]-=*::: definitely a bit out there and hard to envision a world like that
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685035.000571]-=*::: but it can happen
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470685041.000572]-=*::: potentially way more than the underlying value of the blockchain
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685047.000573]-=*::: yep potentially
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470685158.000574]-=*::: my thesis is that we'll more see equities, real world assets, etc.
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470685169.000575]-=*::: than even more from nowhere crypto assets
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470685274.000576]-=*::: <@U071X9XPC>: what are good examples? he mentioned sia and storj
U07C0TB6H says -=*[1470685288.000577]-=*::: getting back to the steem point
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685340.000578]-=*::: from the top of my mind, imagine a token for IP addresses for a parallel, secure Internet
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685348.000579]-=*::: you can only connect to it if you have the token
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685401.000580]-=*::: Urbit did something similar (although with artificial scarcity since they have a IPv6 space under the scarce IPv4 space)
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685419.000581]-=*::: but you can imagine that scarcity for joining a network is a good thing given spam/sybil problems
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685453.000582]-=*::: in fact, there was an after market for IP addresses for the Internet
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685465.000583]-=*::: MIT famously never gave up their 18.* addresses
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685689.000584]-=*::: domain squatters bought up domain names (scarce resource) early and then sold it for much higher later .. they made money because they saw value in the Internet before others  bad example because I hate domain squatters but its a real example and happened
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685715.000585]-=*::: in fact, even true for wireless spectrum
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685756.000586]-=*::: I know people who bought a spectrum range because they saw future value in it given mobile devices etc
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685761.000587]-=*::: again a scarce resource
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685789.000588]-=*::: I doubt were anywhere close to being done exploring interaction of scarce resources and how communities come together to make new systems/networks
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685815.000589]-=*::: the tokens just provide a mechanism for early adopters to participate and provide incentives for initial developers etc
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685974.000590]-=*::: heck, even land allocation is token based .. back in my home country there is a billionaire (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahria_Town>) who buys large pieces of land, hands out tokens as a right to buy land in his new development and then later actually builds the area using the initial money he collected
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470685999.000591]-=*::: people invest based on his part record and potential for future gain in value when the work gets done on the land area
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470686020.000592]-=*::: so I think its a fairly well understood model and were only beginning to think about it in terms of digital property and the Internet
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470686102.000594]-=*::: <@U071X9XPC>: The domain example is actually interesting because the squatters provided early funding to ICANN and the domain name registrars.
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470686126.000595]-=*::: So as much as one may not like squatters, they actually had some very nice positive effects on the web.
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470686142.000596]-=*::: It would have been better of course if the success of the web was more driven by those who collected the fees.
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470686149.000597]-=*::: There wasnt as much overlap in this as there could have been.
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470686271.000598]-=*::: In other news, the new ZCash Alpha is out
U0722SJ4A says -=*[1470686271.000599]-=*::: <https://z.cash/blog/new-alpha-release-optimization-and-nonmalleability.html>
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470686277.000600]-=*::: good point about early investment from squatters
U08BDV693 says -=*[1470691225.000601]-=*::: Layer 2 protocols can use direct payment of Bitcoin in exchange for the contribution of compute, storage, and bandwidth.  You dont need a token.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470691274.000602]-=*::: Bitcoin is the token in that case.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470691283.000603]-=*::: So you dont need a token other than Bitcoin.
U08BDV693 says -=*[1470691294.000604]-=*::: yes another token is just an accounting mechanism that allows for speculation
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470691333.000605]-=*::: there are good reasons for thinking that way, so many use cases can be covered by the original token :slightly_smiling_face:
U08BDV693 says -=*[1470691337.000606]-=*::: Ive had an inside view on several token sales.  Its not pretty.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470691349.000607]-=*::: Id discard previous token sales completely though.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470691362.000608]-=*::: Professionals have not moved into this area.
U071X9XPC says -=*[1470691372.000609]-=*::: super super super early
U08BDV693 says -=*[1470691373.000610]-=*::: Agreed
U08BDV693 says -=*[1470691402.000611]-=*::: I posted a brief response to Joels article
