other.arkitech other.arkitech at
Fri Jun 5 13:02:14 PDT 2020

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Sunday, May 24, 2020 10:02 AM, Karl <gmkarl at> wrote:

> I have reason to believe that the various Corp/Gov influences are disrupting the developers of the blockchains that will really address the current patterns of power.
> The new ideas grow from quiet people who develop in obscurity and then release (like bitcoin itself).
> For example, a cryptocurrency that backends a social network would put communication control in the hands of the people instead of marketing money and government filters: All the successful cryptocurrency-backended social networks are either closed source (akasha), transformed to something else (also akasha), centrally hosted (steem), or died from a surprise and lost their support base (qora).
> Doing projects in a way that has all the attributes is obvious: but the projects that do this and stay alive have evolved to not be found by process of natural selection.
> We could support a public one by being aware of the danger, discussing it, and taking action to waylay it.  I had some success with BSV by warning the devs about the situation a little before posting new materials to their chain.  This meant what I said would be taken more seriously if the problems I described arose.  The chinese gateway I was using to access the files no longer serves the protocol they use, but it is simply a small maintenance issue that anyone could fix by simply talking about it persistently while demonstrating ability to fix it.
> Maybe what punk-stasi is raising is, is there a good blockchain or development community to provide support for that might grow to be better?  I am using BSV only because it lets me store undeletable data easily, which I need.  I do not really use money myself, but appreciate how more free economies can reduce global harm by sharing power.
> I believe bitcoin core to be the most secure.
> It sounds like the answer is crosschain technology.  A community for such technology would probably have a lot of links to "third-gen" obscure altcoins struggling to resolve all the "obvious" problems.
> On Sun, May 24, 2020, 1:39 AM Punk-Stasi 2.0 <punks at> wrote:
>> On Sat, 23 May 2020 23:28:12 -0400
>> grarpamp <grarpamp at> wrote:
>>> >> so where are the 'second generation coins'...?
>>> Instead of being special asshole you can go search
>>> and post some,
>>         no, you're the official google-jewtube spammer, posting 10s of useless links per day. So where are these systems that don't need a 'bloated blockchain'?
>>         I mean, are you drunk? You think people use bitcoin because they like to suffer? If 'bloated blockchains' are not needed, then WHERE THE FUCK are the 'coins' that don't use them?
>>         Are you aware that the only other half decent coin out there, monero, is at least 10 times as bloated as bitcoin (or would be, if it were used as much)
>>> Immutability of value held in UTXO does not
>>> necessarily depend on having any sort of rollable
>>> tx log from genesis. That is indoctrinated ridgid
>>> thinking imparted by old school first gen BTC.
>>         Show the functional description and implementations of those '2nd generation' coins, or shut the fuck up.

>>> 1) That final entry, that UTXO, is all one needs.
>>         and how do you compute the UTXO genius? Oh, wait...


utxo + tx = new utxo
(then forget prev utxo)

>>> 2) And note very clearly that cash/etc even goes
>>> further by its final UTXO not having any "inputs" record
>>> at all...

Possible if the blockchain is designed as a state block (yet not a chain)

>>         yeah, I think I extensively pointed out to you that metals and even govt paper are  better than  'cryptocurrencies'. I guess I should be happy that you finally got the point...
>>> cash is a private ideal state of self existance
>>> without reference to or dependence on anything else.
>>> Any "cryptocurrency" project that does not implement
>>> one of those two forms of UTXO, the second being
>>> the highest form, is not absolutely not worthy of calling
>>> itself a cryptocurrency version of cash/metal/chickens.
>>         go figure. So what's theoretical foundation for 'cryptocurrencies' that actually work? Oops, there's none.

I feel a bit sad, bcs nobody cares about USPS, even though it looks like matching all the stuff you say about desirable coins (with the exception of the opening of the source code, which I stated will come after finding angel investor and create dev-community)
I believe this is the only mind-blocking anti-feature.

Correct me if there is any other major complain about USPS
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 7316 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list