New around here? Register your SA Forums Account here!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Obdicut
May 15, 2012

"What election?"

RealityApologist posted:

FWIW, the same basic criticisms being raised in this thread were raised in the HN thread (albeit with much less hostility). The overall consensus seemed to be that the idea was incomplete, confusing, probably straightforward to implement, and novel. People seemed to think that the apparent problems with the proposal could be resolved.

My goal was just to take the conversation in a new direction, and I feel like I succeeded beyond my expectations.

All of your ideas are wildly terrible, your presentation of them is awful, you don't ever actually try to learn from the criticisms and improve the old idea, but instead just drop it (like your horrifically stupid attention economy poo poo) and come up with a new random word salad. You will never improve unless you actually start being self-critical rather than so desperately, pathetically, painfully self-congratulatory.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

PrBacterio
Jul 19, 2000
I guess I just don't understand what problem you're trying to fix. The solutions to our basic economic problems seem to me to be rather well understood, it's just that opposition from powerful, wealthy interests stands in the way of their implementation.

Uranium 235
Oct 12, 2004

RealityApologist posted:

FWIW, the same basic criticisms being raised in this thread were raised in the HN thread (albeit with much less hostility). The overall consensus seemed to be that the idea was incomplete, confusing, probably straightforward to implement, and novel. People seemed to think that the apparent problems with the proposal could be resolved.

My goal was just to take the conversation in a new direction, and I feel like I succeeded beyond my expectations.
Congratulations, you steered the conversation toward being about how much of an idiot you are.

RealityApologist
Mar 29, 2011

ASK me how NETWORKS algorithms NETWORKS will save humanity. WHY ARE YOU NOT THINKING MY THESIS THROUGH FOR ME HEATHENS did I mention I just unified all sciences because NETWORKS :fuckoff:

T-1000 posted:

Multiple accounts.

Alright, I'll say some things about multiple accounts.

First of all, if I'm managing multiple accounts I'm effectively distributing my income among those accounts, so they'll each be less influential in the network than I'd be on my own. So there's at least some incentive to maintain a unified account. And as I said, I don't have any principled reason to think people shouldn't be able to sustain multiple accounts if they want, even against the incentive. So I don't think the potential for multiple accounts is a problem.

The problem with multiple accounts is that it looks like a free way to get infinite modifiers on my money. That's not really the case, but you have to think about the network and its parameters to see why.

Let's say my income is n, and the basic income from TUA is m, and that m << n.

The most basic kind of multiple account I might get is an account that only gets basic income from TUA, and pays that entirely forward in support to me. But that support can only be in proportion to the basic income, which is insignificant. So there's no real incentive to have this kind of multiple account.

So instead, let's say I set up a lot of empty accounts, all paying forward to me. Enough of these accounts will eventually start draining TUA, which drives down the basic income for all accounts. The relationship between TUA balance and basic income can be tuned in a way so that adding more accounts has diminishing returns on overall income. Perhaps this means there's a limit to the number of accounts I can profitably maintain, and perhaps this number is greater than 1.

Notice also that support is really the only useful transaction with an empty account; if the clone accounts were all coupled, it would still only be coupled at the low rate of the basic income, and all excess income/expenses are taken from and deposited to TUA, so they aren't really helping the person maintaining them. So another way to constrain the use of multiple accounts is to put limits on the proportion of income that can be offered as support. If accounts can't pay everything forward but can only offer a small fraction of their overall income as support (which seems like a reasonable constraint), then farms of blank accounts receiving only basic income would have a negligible impact on anyone else's account, and there'd be no reason to go through the effort.

There's other ways of managing this too. One might institute some policy in the protocol where certain ring structures in the network result in an overall inhibition instead of an expected amplification, where these policies are designed specifically to prevent this kind of abuse. HN also talked about the possibility of persistent pseudonymous identities as ways of enforcing discrete accounts, but I like this method less. I think the parameters of the network can be tuned so that there's no intrinsic incentive for maintaining multiple accounts so that it's just not a problem.

This is a bit of a crazy analogy, but this is the image running through my head as I answer the question: Imagine a big circular room of mirrors, with two little circular rooms that come off the main room arranged like Mickey Mouse's head and ears. The walls are mirrors, and so will reflect and bounce light around the room. Some of that light might find its way into the ear rooms and bounce around there. But these reflections don't make the light grow brighter, they just reflect whatever light comes in, and in the real world those reflections decay over time. If you want the light to grow brighter, you need a light source and not just a bunch of reflective surfaces.

If I'm setting up a subnet of multiple accounts, those accounts can only reflect the income I'm bringing into it. It can pass that income around itself for a while and give the illusion of a lot of economic activity, but that's something much different than the generation of new income streams. Setting up multiple accounts of Strangecoin in the hopes of getting rich would be something like setting up multiple cameras in my bedroom in the hopes of becoming a celebrity; It's completely misunderstand the process by which that value is created.

RealityApologist
Mar 29, 2011

ASK me how NETWORKS algorithms NETWORKS will save humanity. WHY ARE YOU NOT THINKING MY THESIS THROUGH FOR ME HEATHENS did I mention I just unified all sciences because NETWORKS :fuckoff:

Obdicut posted:

All of your ideas are wildly terrible, your presentation of them is awful, you don't ever actually try to learn from the criticisms and improve the old idea, but instead just drop it (like your horrifically stupid attention economy poo poo) and come up with a new random word salad. You will never improve unless you actually start being self-critical rather than so desperately, pathetically, painfully self-congratulatory.

I didn't drop the attention economy poo poo. I've pretty clearly described how this is the latest iteration and refinement of the idea, and that these refinements were made in light of the criticisms I've been receiving from this thread in particular.

Two posts after yours someone shits on me for being self-critical. There's seriously nothing I can do to please these threads.

Obdicut
May 15, 2012

"What election?"

RealityApologist posted:

It's I completely misunderstand the process by which that value is created.

Fixed that for you.

quote:


Two posts after yours someone shits on me for being self-critical. There's seriously nothing I can do to please these threads.

No, he was mocking you, not actually saying you were being self-critical in some meaningful way. You also have a really hard time understanding things other people say to you.

And this isn't a 'refinement' of your horrible, unworkable attention economy idea. It's just another related pile of pseudointellectual crap in a random area. Go back and read the accountant dude's post, he really took the time to engage with your idea and show you were you're off the walls. Really, really read it, especially the bit about how you transform what could easily be expressed in a single sentence into a baffling wall of text. Even if there are any shreds of iotas of specks of good ideas in your howling vortexes of garbage that you spew out, they're being suffocated and buried under the greasy lard of your hyperpretentious writing.

Obdicut fucked around with this message at 11:44 on Mar 31, 2014

Enjoy
Apr 18, 2009

RealityApologist posted:

Nothing I've said commits me to thinking that they are. I respond to a similar question in the Hacker News thread as follows:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7496699

You say that it's a thought experiment that might lead us to learn things about currency in general. But why don't you just tell us what you've learned rather than present the thought experiment without the conclusions?

You also say that strangecoin demonstrates someone's importance to the economy. But you also say that it's possible for two people to have an exchange where both leave with more strangecoin than they started with, meaning holding large quantities of the currency is only contingent on holding smaller quantities of the currency earlier, rather than being integral to the economy.

RealityApologist
Mar 29, 2011

ASK me how NETWORKS algorithms NETWORKS will save humanity. WHY ARE YOU NOT THINKING MY THESIS THROUGH FOR ME HEATHENS did I mention I just unified all sciences because NETWORKS :fuckoff:

PrBacterio posted:

I guess I just don't understand what problem you're trying to fix. The solutions to our basic economic problems seem to me to be rather well understood, it's just that opposition from powerful, wealthy interests stands in the way of their implementation.

"Oh I know perfectly well how to change the tire. I have a new tire in the trunk. I just lack a tire iron, so I have no way of removing the old tire and securing the new one."

Well, then, I don't really know how to change the tire, do I.

I'm of the opinion that there are no solutions for implementation using the existing economic and political tools that are on the table. I believe that there are better circumstances we might easily enjoy with existing technologies, but the tools we have give us no way of getting there from here.

This is a common scenario in dealing with complex systems, often discussed in terms of path-dependence. The point of discussing new technological frameworks is precisely that they might open up new paths to system equilibrium that weren't available before. If it helps, imagine we lived on land divided by a huge mountain range. It might be possible to travel across the land on foot, although parts of the journey might become so treacherous as to limit passage to only the most hearty travelers. But then someone invents a helicopter capable of reaching all points in the land. No new places were introduced by the new technology; in principle everything in the land was accessible the whole time. But the introduction of the technology might nevertheless have a dramatic impact on how and which people can move across the land. The technology has introduced a new path through the same space, and the new path changes the way they conceive of that space.

Strangecoin allows for transactions that are available on in traditional economic frameworks, but it approaches those transactions in a fundamentally different way. I'm suggesting that these differences allow us to move through economic space in different ways, and that these differences may allow us to overcome the implementation issues that currently stymie our progress.

Robhol
Oct 9, 2012

RealityApologist posted:

"Oh I know perfectly well how to change the tire. I have a new tire in the trunk. I just lack a tire iron, so I have no way of removing the old tire and securing the new one."

Well, then, I don't really know how to change the tire, do I.

Are you suggesting that switching to an entirely new and alien form of currency would be any politically easier to achieve?

PrBacterio
Jul 19, 2000

RealityApologist posted:

"Oh I know perfectly well how to change the tire. I have a new tire in the trunk. I just lack a tire iron, so I have no way of removing the old tire and securing the new one."

Well, then, I don't really know how to change the tire, do I.
No, what I'm saying is that all you have is a solution in search of a problem. Unless you're claiming your convoluted solution of abolishing traditional currency in favour of some convoluted crypto thingy that supposedly has a more equitable distribution of economic resources built in would face less opposition from wealthy elites than more traditional types of market correction.

Rutibex
Sep 9, 2001

by Fluffdaddy
This thread is why I have a hearty belly laugh whenever some full-of-himself math/comp sci major tells me that sociology isn't real science :eng101:

CheesyDog
Jul 4, 2007

by FactsAreUseless
I'm serious OP, have you ever had a job or made a budget?

You could have the most brilliantly complex whatever this is in the world (you don't), and to your average minimum wage worker all they will understand is that each transaction will cost them a perceived random amount of money. Meanwhile you'll have some Important Men in Suits who have min-maxed how long they spend wiping their collective rear end who will realize that selling a poor person a lemon-flavored tampon for a "buck" will actually cost the poor person nine bucks and give them 200, so the Marketing Campaign rolls out tomorrow hope you like your ladies with a refreshing hint of citrus.

archangelwar
Oct 28, 2004

Teaching Moments
Hey OP why do you think HackerNews is a good source of critique rather than academic review by actual experts in the fields of study that you wish to revolutionize? Actually, I know the answer to that, I was just wondering if you were self aware.

Fried Chicken
Jan 9, 2011

Don't fry me, I'm no chicken!

SedanChair posted:

But what if you could do it better, adaptively, dynamically? What if intellectuals could collaborate in real time? At the speed of thought?

Bro what if instead of sending gold coins with you, I wrote on a piece of paper that I'd pay gold coins to the bearer of the note? DYNAMICALLY

Wait, wait, hear me out. You want gold coins because it gets you good and services. What if we cut out the middleman and wrote on a piece of paper that the paper was worth a volume of goods or services to the bearer of Tue note? DYNAMICALLY

Orange Devil
Sep 30, 2010

Good Citizen posted:

Do you want to talk to people about money? Then say "Accounts have a max balance and any money put in over that balance is lost". If I tried to hand what you just typed up here to a manager he would throw it in my god drat face, and rightly so.

Oh so wait, between this and the sentence about income gradually being diminished as the account gets closer to the cap, Eripsa is basically saying we should adopt the Warcraft 3 economic system?

PrBacterio
Jul 19, 2000

Orange Devil posted:

Oh so wait, between this and the sentence about income gradually being diminished as the account gets closer to the cap, Eripsa is basically saying we should adopt the Warcraft 3 economic system?
Oh how I actually wouldn't be surprised if that's where he got the idea from ... :eng99:

CheesyDog
Jul 4, 2007

by FactsAreUseless

Fried Chicken posted:

Wait, wait, hear me out. You want gold coins because it gets you good and services. What if we cut out the middleman and wrote on a piece of paper that the paper was worth a volume of goods or services to the bearer of Tue note? [I]DYNAMICALLY[/[I]

This is an excellent suggestion, but will need to use my new non-linear numbering system. Allow me to demonstrate:

1, 2, hat, -17, 4 pound bag of sunflower seeds, 4, "the number 4", appl3, trukk, and so on in this fashion

PrBacterio
Jul 19, 2000

CheesyDog posted:

This is an excellent suggestion, but will need to use my new non-linear numbering system. Allow me to demonstrate:

1, 2, hat, -17, 4 pound bag of sunflower seeds, 4, "the number 4", appl3, trukk, and so on in this fashion

So you're saying we should all switch to speaking moundsbarian? (Props to anyone who gets the reference).

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug
Pillbug
I look forward to another endless discussion of why Von Mises is awesome and every other economist is wrong.

Who What Now
Sep 10, 2006

by Azathoth

RealityApologist posted:

Strangecoin mining is modeled on bitcoin mining. There are a finite amount of bitcoins, and once they are mined there are no more bitcoins. There's also a finite amount of Strangecoin, and when they are minded they are deposited into TUA, and once they are all mined there aren't any more.

I've certainly not proposed anything where the number of coins in circulation is fluctuating by orders of magnitude on a regular basis.

If the balance of coins doesn't matter then there is no reason to mine them. Simply have [X] amount from the start, rather than starting with [X/y] amount and "mining" from there.

-EDIT-

Not that it matters. You still don't have a solution to implementing such a system, or even simpler problems to questions like "why is a new currency necessary" or "how is it less complicated than the current system". Instead you rely of 'conversational charity' to solve all of these things for you, and get pissy when people won't do your thinking on your behalf.

Who What Now fucked around with this message at 13:08 on Mar 31, 2014

DeepQantas
Jan 13, 2008

Ah, to be a Hero... Keeping such company...
Don't have any money?

"IOU $5
- DQ"


Problem solved.

R. Mute
Jul 27, 2011

I still haven't gotten an answer why this system should be implemented, so I'm just going to assume it's because normal currency and the normal economic system are triggering to autists.

Who What Now
Sep 10, 2006

by Azathoth

R. Mute posted:

I still haven't gotten an answer why this system should be implemented, so I'm just going to assume it's because normal currency and the normal economic system are triggering to autists.

The USD is just so... problematic.

Captain_Maclaine
Sep 30, 2001

Every moment that I'm alive, I pray for death!

RealityApologist posted:

Traditional economics is like alchemy, and I'm like one of the early chemists before the periodic table or anything else was developed but who has a pretty good sense that alchemy is just bad methodology and that there's an alternative science just around the corner. And you all are like "but why should I believe in the atom" as if I'm heretical for suggesting alchemy needs some updating, and there's honestly nothing I can say to satisfy the lot of you. The only thing I can do is be earnest and try my best. It's never good enough, but I can't reasonably expect anything more.

Allow me to repeat my sage advice from when you went off bemoaning the horrible discrimination you envisioned cyborgs (like yourself) experiencing at some point in the future, which you expected to be as bad, if not worse, than that of racial minorities and homosexuals: get the gently caress over yourself, Eripsa.

brakeless
Apr 11, 2011

Sorry op you're too late, the new medium of exchange is going to be pics of my dick.

Now just give me a few minutes and I'll set y'all up for life.

Paper Mac
Mar 2, 2007

lives in a paper shack

DeepQantas posted:

Don't have any money?

"IOU $5
- DQ"


Problem solved.

Get chartered as a bank and you're good!!

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug
Pillbug

brakeless posted:

Sorry op you're too late, the new medium of exchange is going to be pics of my dick.

Now just give me a few minutes and I'll set y'all up for life.

Its worthless without a way to exchange it for USD.

So, your dick is worthless.

brakeless
Apr 11, 2011

CommieGIR posted:

Its worthless without a way to exchange it for USD.

So, your dick is worthless.

Wow wasn't expecting this level of hostility in an open discussion forum.

Mods???

DeepQantas
Jan 13, 2008

Ah, to be a Hero... Keeping such company...
Grandma, why did you send me $1000?! I told you my balance was capped! Now the money is gone and I can't eat next month. No, I owe that money to Joe, I can't pay him yet cos his balance is capped, too. Why did you send me $1000 bucks, grandma? What? No... don't send it again, my balance is capped! No!

Good Citizen
Aug 12, 2008

trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump
In this post I'm going to assume you can get over the technical problems of a *coin such as 51% forks and transaction volume limits and actually create something instead of wanking about it on your blog.

Obvious 2 seconds of thought problems from someone who knows a little something about accounting and finance:

Corporations. Corporations are legally distinct entities and would need a seperate accounts. Many would need balances far exceeding an individual account to operate but the entities themselves are trivial to create. Any rich person would be able to exploit your dumb system and any safeguards against it would collapse the finance system in on itself. I could literally go on all day just on this one point and I'm not even touching partnerships and sole proprietorships.

Physical stores of value. People would be able to store value in systems besides your dumb coins. If people were restricted in cash then they would just store value in some other item that could be easily converted between coins and that item.

Governments. Literally every single country in the world would need to adopt your dumb coin to avoid people socking money away in other countries. You can see the problem with this right? Industries like mine would spend obscene amounts of money crushing your idea. Even assuming you got past us (you wouldn't) then the black market would take over on day one and crush your dumb coins for us.

The switchover. My god, the transition. Can you even begin to imagine how the transition from pure cash to pure coins would work? It would be god drat financial Armageddon. I can't even begin to describe the problems here while phone posting on my way to the office.

Your whole idea is so easily torn apart that it's silly. We have solutions to the problems you think exist within the confines of the existing monetary system. They're more feasible than your idea but still outside the realm of reality currently because of established interests. You're just more interested in sounding smart on the Internet than actually advocating for real solutions. You're a joke and the only person who isn't in on it is you

karthun
Nov 16, 2006

I forgot to post my food for USPOL Thanksgiving but that's okay too!

Rutibex posted:

This thread is why I have a hearty belly laugh whenever some full-of-himself math/comp sci major tells me that sociology isn't real science :eng101:

RealityApologist/Estrada is a philosophy grad student.

DrSunshine
Mar 23, 2009

Did I just say that out loud~~?!!!
So, uh, speaking as someone who majored in Earth Sciences and tried reallllllly hard to read the OP and the subsequent posts... if I understand it correctly, the OP describes basically a system where the money is on fire? And whenever you buy something with it, some of the pieces fall off and you get more flaming money? So the faster you play the game of hot-potato, the more flaming money you can make?

Zombywuf
Mar 29, 2008

DrSunshine posted:

So, uh, speaking as someone who majored in Earth Sciences and tried reallllllly hard to read the OP and the subsequent posts... if I understand it correctly, the OP describes basically a system where the money is on fire? And whenever you buy something with it, some of the pieces fall off and you get more flaming money? So the faster you play the game of hot-potato, the more flaming money you can make?

To be fair, this is basically how the finance industry works.

icantfindaname
Jul 1, 2008

R. Mute posted:

I still haven't gotten an answer why this system should be implemented, so I'm just going to assume it's because normal currency and the normal economic system are triggering to autists.

ding ding ding ding ding

fragglet
Sep 14, 2005
I've got a christmas tree inside my head

RealityApologist posted:

If I give you a dollar for a burger,

What's the cuil factor of a Strangecoin?

Escolopendra
Nov 4, 2013

Captain_Maclaine posted:

Allow me to repeat my sage advice from when you went off bemoaning the horrible discrimination you envisioned cyborgs (like yourself) experiencing at some point in the future, which you expected to be as bad, if not worse, than that of racial minorities and homosexuals: get the gently caress over yourself, Eripsa.

Wait a moment, what is the basis exactly for fearing future cyborg discrimination? There are people right now with mechanical prostheses, and they donīt seem to be objects of hate and discrimination.

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug
Pillbug

R. Mute posted:

I still haven't gotten an answer why this system should be implemented, so I'm just going to assume it's because normal currency and the normal economic system are triggering to autists.

Its because a bunch of armchair economists want their little digital collection to make them rich. Its basically the same as Beanie Babies, its a gimmick that will fade into time when people lost interest, but it will always be there in the background.

Precambrian Video Games
Aug 19, 2002



Ok I re-read part of the OP for some unfathomable reason and it seems like the stupid rules of this system could be implemented entirely with electronic currency and by banning physical currency like coins. Then presumably the government could closely track all StrangeCoin transactions for the purposes of turning the world into a carefully engineered socialist paradise dystopian hellhole. Is that roughly correct?

quote:

Support is a one-sided transaction over some duration t. If X supports Y over t, then X contributes additional S to Y's income from X's balance, expressed as a proportion s of Y's income over t. X's support effectively amplifies Y's income. To initiate this transaction, X specifies Y, t, and the proportion s of Y's income that X will contribute as support. Since support is a one-sided transaction, Y does not need to approve of the support to receive the additional income.

How is this different from giving someone money or paying them for nothing? Is it supposed to be? Why?

quote:

Inhibition is a two-sided transaction over some duration t. If X inhibits Y over t, then X reduces the income or expenses of Y over t by some proportion i. By inhibiting Y, X effectively reduces the impact that Y has on the Strangecoin network by i over t by forfeiting that proportion of income and expense. To initiate the transaction, X specifies Y, t, and i, which must be approved by Y.

Why would I ever want someone to have the ability to reduce my income? What the gently caress?

quote:

Endorsement is a one-sided transaction over some duration t. If X endorses Y over t, then X contributes additional S to Y's outgoing expenses, expressed as a proportion e of Y's expenses over t. X's endorsement effectively amplifies the payouts of Y's expenses. To initiate the transaction, X specifies Y, t, and the proportion e of Y's expenses that X will contribute as endorsements. Since support is a one-sided transaction, Y does not need to approve of the endorsement or the additional expense, which is drawn entirely from X's account.

Coupling is a two-sided transaction over some duration t. If X and Y couple over t, then changes in the income and expenses of X over t (apart from this coupling) result in proportional changes to the income and expenses of Y, and vice versa. Coupling "binds the fate" of X and Y over t, so that any change in one results in change for both. To initiate the transaction, both X and Y must agree on a duration t, and may specify distinct proportions cx and cy for coupling which must be approved by the other. With approval, coupling can involve both positive and negative correlations between income and expenses of two users. If X and Y are positively coupled, then increases in X's income and expenses results in some proportional increase in Y's income and expenses. This additional income or expense are drawn from or deposited to The Universal Account, as described below.

Could you give some examples of transactions of this sort that could not possibly be represented by just giving someone money and how an average person would learn to utilize these transactions? Also why, that point is important.

Precambrian Video Games fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Mar 31, 2014

Who What Now
Sep 10, 2006

by Azathoth

Escolopendra posted:

Wait a moment, what is the basis exactly for fearing future cyborg discrimination? There are people right now with mechanical prostheses, and they donīt seem to be objects of hate and discrimination.

Mechanical prostheses don't count. Those aren't part of your "identity" like your tools (read: Google Glass and Smartphone) are.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ozmunkeh
Feb 28, 2008

hey guys what is happening in this thread

RealityApologist posted:

"Oh I know perfectly well how to change the tire. I have a new tire in the trunk. I just lack a tire iron, so I have no way of removing the old tire and securing the new one."

Well, then, I don't really know how to change the tire, do I.

Wait, wait, wait. What if...
massive bong rip
skateboards attached to little goats.
cough
No, no, no listen, right, we'll plant grass all over the city and

  • Locked thread