In a recent thread on W3C public web payments, it brought to light an issue that is overly present today: People who glaze over incredible information, only to let their emotions get the best of them 1.
To make this simple, I’ll copy and paste the conversation. Start from the bottom and read up, like an email 2:
No offense, but you see things completely backwards. The fact that he pointed out the deficiencies as early as 2013 and people are only realizing then now, should be alarming to you. "Newness" of the post does not reflect its quality. I can point out several pieces of literature to prove that, which need not be mentioned, as this point is blatantly obvious. When it comes to payments, it's merely 1's and 0's. Emotions are irrelevant. Furthermore, Mircea being one of, if not the largest holder of bitcoin, makes his comments incredibly relevant, whether you like them or not. Best, Mitchell On Saturday, April 25, 2015, Torrie Fischer <email@example.com> wrote: > An article from 2013, and it is currently the year 2015. Not to mention a > comparison to birth defects and abortions. Great. > > I have to say I don't really appreciate reading something like that and > would > prefer a much more constructive discussion about web payments. > > On Thursday, April 23, 2015 11:45:11 AM Mitchell Callahan wrote: > > My advice is to quit while you're ahead. As pointed out in 2013 by > Mircea > > Popescu, RIPple has serious congenital defects: > > http://trilema.com/2013/ripple-the-definitive-discussion/ > > > > Best, > > Mitchell > > ᐧ > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Melvin Carvalho < > firstname.lastname@example.org> > > wrote: > > > On 7 December 2014 at 00:04, Manu Sporny <email@example.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > >> On 12/06/2014 05:20 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote: > > >> > Interesting article here > > >> > > >> > http://www.coinsetter.com/bitcoin-news/2014/12/06/ripplestellar-consensus > > >> -system-may-serious-issues-stellar-forks-1969 > > >> > > >> This has some interesting info: > > >> > > >> > > >> > https://www.stellar.org/blog/safety_liveness_and_fault_tolerance_consensu > > >> s_choice/ > > >> > > >> """ > > >> This week, we discovered the first instance of a consensus failure. On > > >> Tuesday night, the nodes on the network began to disagree and caused a > > >> fork of the ledger. The majority of the network was on ledger chain A. > > >> At some point, the network decided to switch to ledger chain B. This > > >> caused the roll back of a few hours of transactions that had only been > > >> recorded on chain A. We were able to replay most of these rolled back > > >> transactions on chain B to minimize the impact. However, in cases > where > > >> an account had already sent a transaction on chain B the replay wasn’t > > >> possible. > > >> """ > > > > > > Some more issues reported between the founders of ripple and stellar > > > > > > > > > > http://insidebitcoins.com/news/not-so-decentralized-ripple-freezes-1m-in-u > > > ser-funds/31862 > > > > > > Without knowing all the details, it would appear that in decentralized > > > systems, centralized artifacts can creep in. > > > > > > It's also been particularly difficult to keep the web centralized. I > > > wonder if decentralization through incentives (ie payments or block > chain > > > technology) could be used to make the web more decentralized. > > > > > >> I can't seem to find any documentation on the actual set of parameters > > >> that would cause a ledger fork to happen. Anyone have a link to a > > >> mathematical formula where it was proven/theorized that the event > would > > >> happen? > > >> > > >> -- manu > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) > > >> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. > > >> blog: The Marathonic Dawn of Web Payments > > >> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/dawn-of-web-payments/ >
This took a bit for the stupidity to really sink in. Like, sink sink in. Her comment “I have to say I don’t really appreciate reading something like that and would prefer a much more constructive discussion about web payments” is the absolute peak of the stupidity. What is more constructive than the only article that actually fucking matters on the subject ?
Then, she goes onto say that it’s from 2013, like it’s a bad thing ? WTF. It’s like saying a warning is best served when it’s too late. Mircea threw the world a bone in 2013. I threw it back in 2015. Yet her, among many others, will still dwell on this stupid idea3 for years to come. Years of which could be spent on getting a real education.
The worst part, is Torrie Fischer is competent with PGP 4. My advice to her, is if you want to be a part of “payments”, get into the WoT, and then, maybe then, will you be able to contribute to bitcoin policy.
- This is a classic example. While you’re at it, read that article 4-5 times, you’ll be much better off. ↩
- My apologies, I didn’t wanna C&P all over this thing. ↩
- There Is No “Bitcoin 2.0” ↩
- She’s apparently a “hacker for hire” as well. ↩
Posting for reference: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=26-04-2015#1111938