It is curious the link that binds us to our cybercompañeros travel. Although no more reference them an alias and a number of comments, we often inspire a kind of familiarity that does not seem entirely justified. It's like imagination hasten to fill the gaps left as bare frame.
That experiment when I read Palamedes, character known in these parts for his habit of engalanar with impeccable prose chaotic space for comments . I can not help representármelo as a patriarchal figure, a mature man, cultured, and with a deep knowledge of the human soul. A man, therefore, devoid of vain hopes, but not so distanced himself from the things of this world; perhaps you tempted to shut themselves between stacks of books, but compelled to intervene in the debates of these times more for how the ideas of today will affect the future for their children, and their children's children, who by how they affect himself.
After removing the object of his reflection whirlwind spin it, Palamedes has a habit of examining calmly from different and unexpected angles. When you begin to read some of your comments, you do not know why paths-philosophy, history, personal-prints will come insight, that flash produced by contact between disciplines who refuse to be entirely subsumed; but almost always it comes and surprising way. In any case, his writings are endowed with a beauty that never tarnishes the truth, precisely because it is at the service of truth.
As expected, before granting us permission to publish here one of his texts as a guest, Palamedes was quick to apologize for not being a specialist, without realizing that what we value in it is not his talent to detail the microscopic but quite the opposite: his gaze hawk . Mere technicians abound in Bitcoinlandia; not abundant, however, the ability to appreciate the full landscape -the ability to appreciate the multidisciplinary nature of Bitcoin-, and this deficiency leaves us at the mercy of technocrats, of phonies, and fakers technocrats .
Put the fate of Bitcoin exclusively in the hands of specialists in cryptography would be as misguided as putting in the hands of specialists in metal casting monetary policy in an economic system based on the gold standard. If this comparison seems exaggerated you, it is because you've lost sight of multiple aspects of Bitcoin, and because it is likely to lose a lot of money. So consider reading these paragraphs of -pepitas Palamedes rescued from the barrage of comments that triggered the ( "last post Fork Bitcoin: If you do not understand, you lose ") - both a contribution to your cultural heritage as a contribution to your economic wellness.
If the solution focuses only on the best technical options, without clarifying first what is intended by the bitcoin we not get to reach any site profitable or at least novel.
After all, I see two spirits with which it is meant to Bitcoin. They hate one dominant (especially financial) oligarchies in cryptography and see a way to turn them into new pariahs; others want to get rid of these oligarchs not (we include politicians), but what they do: inflate the currency and have exclusive control over it .
The distinction is very important, because one approach or another require different means, expect different purposes and are not irritated by the same things.
The first came to the Bitcoin imagining a happy world free competition, surpassed by consensus among the good, a collaboration among men without a profit and prices, and a neoasamblearias practices through new technologies.
Others see in the bitcoin the optimal way that individual merit is expressed in figures that the market operates fairly without the distortions of monetary manipulation, which, finally, the monetary institution is not anyone, but the money each is only for you .
The first group is satisfied that some oligarchs new style, 3.0., Dressed in shirt and trousers Chinese experts in computer engineering, made with coin what others like they did with operating systems when the private software of the previous century will He faced one of open source, whose engineers shared everything (needed here blinders not to see that many are now millionaires). The problem are the bankers, not what bankers do and, therefore, to replace them with people more "committed" enough.
Others, however, do not hate those who do something harmful, but the damage they cause . We do not understand why it proposes scoring off the chain transactions and then be poured into it, to undo the jam and allow scalability. When rolling over, is there not jam?
I do not understand decentralization as prosumption of antiquity, where each house was a factory of all. Decentralization is inviolability and exclusivity of the chain as a universal record. If you can get that, I do not worry that they are many or few, Chinese and Chileans who undermine the currency and fill the blocks. I'm not afraid to capital, I do not fear them rich. I fear those who, under the guise of doing good, have the power to inflate the coins that are not in view of all for the time being, because banish inflation is for me the ultimate end bitcoin not give bankers with the door in my face, so neither me nor I will come.
If engineering can not get there currency with the public, inviolable and exclusive chain, for me there is no currency.
That experiment when I read Palamedes, character known in these parts for his habit of engalanar with impeccable prose chaotic space for comments . I can not help representármelo as a patriarchal figure, a mature man, cultured, and with a deep knowledge of the human soul. A man, therefore, devoid of vain hopes, but not so distanced himself from the things of this world; perhaps you tempted to shut themselves between stacks of books, but compelled to intervene in the debates of these times more for how the ideas of today will affect the future for their children, and their children's children, who by how they affect himself.
After removing the object of his reflection whirlwind spin it, Palamedes has a habit of examining calmly from different and unexpected angles. When you begin to read some of your comments, you do not know why paths-philosophy, history, personal-prints will come insight, that flash produced by contact between disciplines who refuse to be entirely subsumed; but almost always it comes and surprising way. In any case, his writings are endowed with a beauty that never tarnishes the truth, precisely because it is at the service of truth.
As expected, before granting us permission to publish here one of his texts as a guest, Palamedes was quick to apologize for not being a specialist, without realizing that what we value in it is not his talent to detail the microscopic but quite the opposite: his gaze hawk . Mere technicians abound in Bitcoinlandia; not abundant, however, the ability to appreciate the full landscape -the ability to appreciate the multidisciplinary nature of Bitcoin-, and this deficiency leaves us at the mercy of technocrats, of phonies, and fakers technocrats .
Put the fate of Bitcoin exclusively in the hands of specialists in cryptography would be as misguided as putting in the hands of specialists in metal casting monetary policy in an economic system based on the gold standard. If this comparison seems exaggerated you, it is because you've lost sight of multiple aspects of Bitcoin, and because it is likely to lose a lot of money. So consider reading these paragraphs of -pepitas Palamedes rescued from the barrage of comments that triggered the ( "last post Fork Bitcoin: If you do not understand, you lose ") - both a contribution to your cultural heritage as a contribution to your economic wellness.
If the solution focuses only on the best technical options, without clarifying first what is intended by the bitcoin we not get to reach any site profitable or at least novel.
After all, I see two spirits with which it is meant to Bitcoin. They hate one dominant (especially financial) oligarchies in cryptography and see a way to turn them into new pariahs; others want to get rid of these oligarchs not (we include politicians), but what they do: inflate the currency and have exclusive control over it .
The distinction is very important, because one approach or another require different means, expect different purposes and are not irritated by the same things.
The first came to the Bitcoin imagining a happy world free competition, surpassed by consensus among the good, a collaboration among men without a profit and prices, and a neoasamblearias practices through new technologies.
Others see in the bitcoin the optimal way that individual merit is expressed in figures that the market operates fairly without the distortions of monetary manipulation, which, finally, the monetary institution is not anyone, but the money each is only for you .
The first group is satisfied that some oligarchs new style, 3.0., Dressed in shirt and trousers Chinese experts in computer engineering, made with coin what others like they did with operating systems when the private software of the previous century will He faced one of open source, whose engineers shared everything (needed here blinders not to see that many are now millionaires). The problem are the bankers, not what bankers do and, therefore, to replace them with people more "committed" enough.
Others, however, do not hate those who do something harmful, but the damage they cause . We do not understand why it proposes scoring off the chain transactions and then be poured into it, to undo the jam and allow scalability. When rolling over, is there not jam?
I do not understand decentralization as prosumption of antiquity, where each house was a factory of all. Decentralization is inviolability and exclusivity of the chain as a universal record. If you can get that, I do not worry that they are many or few, Chinese and Chileans who undermine the currency and fill the blocks. I'm not afraid to capital, I do not fear them rich. I fear those who, under the guise of doing good, have the power to inflate the coins that are not in view of all for the time being, because banish inflation is for me the ultimate end bitcoin not give bankers with the door in my face, so neither me nor I will come.
If engineering can not get there currency with the public, inviolable and exclusive chain, for me there is no currency.