[Cryptography] Proof of Work is the worst way to do a BlockChain

[Ersin Taskin]

 On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:23 PM, Ismail Kizir <ikizir at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Ersin Taskin <hersintaskin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >We need a system that can be implemented TODAY and evolve in the course
> of time. We have to admit that state/government is a reality TODAY. Some
> part of is bad but some part of it is good (at least as of today). >
> https://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/911307/Bitcoin-price
> -live-gunpoint-heist-rising-falling-ripple-ethereum-blockchain . We have
> to acknowledge the legitimate parts of the state and design a fair system
> that collaborates >with that part of the state. No body would be able to
> succesfully object to a crypto-system that shakes hands with the legitimate
> and fair part of the state.
>
> Ersin,
>
> You tell that you trust in State and Banks. And you tell that there
> are good parts of it.
> Of course, there are good parts of State. And we need it.
> But, let me emphasize some facts about State:
>
> Modern Democracies are based on Montesqieue's "Separation of powers" ideas:
> https://www.catallaxia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Montesquieu:De_l%
> 27esprit_des_lois
>
> The base of modern state is, simply "lack of trust".
> That's why, we have separation of powers.
> That's why, for example, in Turkey, actually, we are converting our
> parlementary system, which is more based on trust(soft separation of
> powers) to  a Presidential system, as in United States, which have a
> more rigid separation of powers(Legislation, Execution, Jurisdiction).
>
> Consequently, even actual modern state concept is based on "untrust".
> The State doesn't trust itself. How can we trust it?
> Even though it was a lie, last 30 years Western World Slogan is
> minimizing the State! (But they did the same mistake i am trying to
> elaborate and made peoples slaves of global finance capital and
> empowered States physically, more police and security officers, more
> cameras, larger armies, more weapons and wars! But this is another
> discussion)



>
>
But here, the biggest danger is to be trapped by global
> finance-captial instead of States.
>

Dear Ismail,

Today I visited with my ms thesis advisor after so many years. I asked her
help with the paper which takes more time than I expected. When I briefly
sketched her the isolation of crypto-functionality to three basic
independent components, she said "Ersin, you know what this is. It is the
Separation of Powers principle." and I replied, "I admit that the recent
political  debate on the separation of powers in Turkey probably inspired
me." So I find your "Separation of Powers" remark fascinating taking into
account that you are Turkish, too. You see how influential our environment
is in our creation.

To avoid misunderstanding; I do not propose handing over any bit of power
to the state (nor the banks). POP can only be implemented with zero
government/capitalist stake. Its core strength is that it resolves the
double spend problem with an anchorage that cannot be convertible to money.
State and banks (an all other powerhouses of capitalism) are made of money
and thus cannot influence/attack the POP system. Remember the
anchor-to-iceberg problem.

However, we must acknowledge the existence of the state, banks; and the
fact that a great deal of the people trusts these banks in basic
banking/cash services. Many people to whom I presented and advocated
Bitcoin told me that they trusted banks more than the entities in the
cryptocurrency ecosystem. Some of them said they didn't like the idea of
irreversibility to my surprise and anger. These are observations I have to
admit. I try hard to fight against fanaticism and cherish scepticism in me.
It is not easy. Evolution hasn't wired our brains that way. We cannot help
getting aggressive when we hear statements against our strongest beliefs.
Then the heist, ransomware incidents caused me to re-think irreversibility.
A system architect with an evolutionary vision/approach cannot deny the
environment. This is our environment. A cryptocurrency system should not be
arrogant to deny these people, banks, states. We have to admit that we are
soo the minority in our countries, trying to join forces with the unbanked
in the underdeveloped world. We are the very minority in terms of capital
as well. Besides, any good platform would provide the options, its users
demand. The broader the platform the broader the options demanded. A
cryptocurrency cash platform must provide its users and suppliers with the
option for jurisdiction based reversibility, the trust scheme, and the
privacy-control, etc. Any cash system who addresses the demands of the
majority of the people will be dominant anyway. And all these are possible
in POP without any state stake in the system. The state is a
peripheral device in POP. If users want to use it the POP protocol allows
that. Just like the printer. Same for the banks.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20180213/23451ed6/attachment.html>