Cryptocurrency: -- The New Social Contract
gmkarl at gmail.com
Tue May 26 16:47:55 PDT 2020
It's not free software if the source is not available without having to ask.
It sounds like you know a lot about navigating the business world and have
a lot to offer to us free software people?
Like business, we believe our way is the only way, not really seeing or
talking about ways we can work together and support each other to succeed.
Free software is likely very interested in supporting businesses that help
the free software people spread and accurately preserve the free software
It is really very profitable to give all of your rights to your works
away. People respond by giving back to you, and getting involved in the
work to strengthen and grow it widely.
On Tue, May 26, 2020, 6:28 PM other.arkitech <other.arkitech at protonmail.com>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 9:28 PM, Punk-Stasi 2.0 <punks at tfwno.gf> wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 May 2020 20:01:31 +0000
> > "other.arkitech" other.arkitech at protonmail.com wrote:
> > > 1.- I am making a living with this project.
> > > 2.- Whoever is paying me he does it to get it conducted to businesses,
> which is fine to me, is not happy with free software, and I respect it.
> > Ok, so now we just learned that you are developing a commercial product.
> like, e.g. Qt, MySQL or RedHat GNU/Linux. I promote the free software side
> of it. And also the Business side of it, because I am entrepreneur.
> For those who like to play a different game in the private sector, a
> product fit to them will be supplied.
> If you only tolerate Free software is fine, your choice. For me being open
> to what exist is essential for survival and rise.
> > > 3.- In the business, privative world, it is normal to exchange NDA's.
> That's a given.
> > So called NDAs are based on the flawed concept of 'intellectual
> property' and so they are invalid and unenforceable. I pointed this out in
> the past. You of course ignored it.
> Yes, I agree with this. This doesn't mean we cannot cooperate in a flawed
> world. In bz you have to sign NDA with cooperating parties, knowing that is
> a weak contract that mostly serve as a memorandum of intentions. I am
> against patents and all this shit as well.
> I refered to NDA that for the first time here in the context of what is
> the procedure to share the sources of non-free software or, in my case,
> software that is not yet released. That's something that can be
> questionable philosophically, but it does exist. I have signed a lot of
> them of them and they're like most like a ritual to move on to practical
> things between 2 parties in private agreement..
> > > 4.- As soon as I get funding to create the "open-source" branch I
> will, as a free software enthusiast, start the community. But not before,
> do I don't upset the man who is making it possible to develop the system.
> Who is aware since the beginning of the intention, but kindly asked me to
> wait to release the sources until the product is more mature, giving him
> time to sell it as a privative platform based on licences.
> > ...so this 'thing' can be used for 'public governments' or whatever
> half-backed political idea you promote, and it can be also used by the
> (fascist) private sector...
> Yes because literally this is anonymous system where anyone is alloed to
> participate without asking for permission, by design (aside from
> implementation complications like Tor defects).
> This cannot be a reason to criticize the tech.
> > > That's contextual to help understand.
> > > So to me is fine both worlds and they will co-exist.
> > > Now, if you don't like, I would kindly ask you to just manifest that
> you don't like it. But don't cross the line of being a gentleman because it
> does not help neither me nor to you.
> > I can't cross that line because I've never been a gentleman...
> > > I suggest you to change your prejudices you invented about my product,
> and start either just ignoring with respect or looking at it as an
> opportunity to learn about new approaches to cryptocurrencies.
> > So, you kindly give me two options. Either I agree with you, or I shut
> up. You don't happen to see any problem with such a 'deal'?
> > Anyway, I'll say it one more time. If you're developing some 'new
> system', the very first thing you have to do is explain how it works. If
> you want to keep the workings secret, then I don't think people here will
> take you too seriously.
> I have zero intention to hide anything.
> I cannot focus on particular topics with wide questions, so,.. in general
> what is it? a decentraliced P2P system that can run using inexpensive
> hardware where nodes form a flat organization (no different roles), the
> connect each other as a mesh forming a graph of connections where the
> number of edges is configurable on every node. Permissionless, anonymous,
> the algorithm only cares about the current state of the database and is not
> linked backwards to previous states. The system is Sybil protected using
> IPv4 addreses and depends on the internet be turned on (formerly Arpanet).
> The algorithm enforces homogeneous distribution of nodes over the IPv4
> geographical allocations and its security increases with the number of
> nodesm with no known shrinking forces (like other competitive consensus
> algorithms). The consensus is based on BFT. It preserves no history and a
> 51% attack is possible during the time the network is small. That's the
> public system, a multi-coin account where the definition of a coin is not a
> chain of signatures but a utxo set, where an utxo is a Bitcoin word, I call
> it boxes because files or typed information can be also stored in every
> account. Nodes also run a wallet with P2P protocols to trade among them in
> what I call the pricate system. Both system (the public, the private) form
> a closed ecosystem designed to maximize transactions, thus a system that
> can be used to run an aggregation of microeconomies, eventually the
> world-wide economy.
> That's an overview and a final note on the vision.
> If you are interested in having a feel of new systems like this you're
> invited, anyone, is permissionless, so I dont even have to know. Accept my
> disclaimer as the creator this is what the system needs to mature until the
> public release.
> There is no evil software running in it. Accept for now the same
> disclaimer you accept from https://cock.li/, the mailing system you use.
> "How can I trust you?
> You can't. Cock.li doesn't parse your E-mail to provide you with targeted
> ads, nor does cock.li read E-mail contents unless it's for a legal court
> order. However, it is 100% possible for me to read E-mail, and IMAP/SMTP
> doesn't provide user-side/client-side encryption, so you're just going to
> have to take my word for it."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 8092 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the cypherpunks