Forum Replies Created
“jvanname’s unwaivering, un-nuanced scientific idealism”-You are such a pig. You are in a cult. Your mind is so deluded that you cannot see anything wrong with people who say things like “Who gives a shit about advancing science? I certainly don’t.”
“Honestly jvanname, you just seem like a kid who is mad at the world.. mad at Bitcoin and what you believe to be an undeserved and irrational price rise”-Um. You seem to be the entity who is mad here. Mohammed is also mad since he angrily says things like “Who gives a shit about advancing science? I certainly don’t.”
“You cannot view Gold, Silver, Bitcoin, or any other crypto in terms of moneyness without doing so in the context of the bleak outlook for debt-based fiat currencies around the world, and without considering the authoritarian tendencies of those who run the fiat systems.”-Oh. So are you saying that the way to combat authoritarianism is to waste energy in order to prompt the authoritarians to restrict Bitcoin?
Since you want to talk about quantum computing, why don’t you answer this basic quantum computing question to demonstrate your intelligence before we continue this discussion?
Suppose that your two qubits are in state (0.7+0.3*i)*|00>+(0.1-0.4*i)*|01>-0.3*i*|10>-0.4*|11> and after measuring the first qubit, you obtain a measurement outcome |0>. What will be the posterior state after your measurement?
VTGothic-If you want me to consider you as an intelligent specimen, you should say intelligent things. Yes. I agree that there is a downward progression in the quality of the typical Bitcoiner. Bitcoin started off with Satoshi. Then the next people interested in Bitcoin were the experts in cryptography, distributed systems, and computer science. And then after that, you get people who are willing to invest early into Bitcoin around 2013. And after that you get the people who invest into Bitcoin at the peak of the January 2018 bubble. And now the typical Bitcoiner says things like “Who gives a shit about advancing science? I certainly don’t. . . . I give a shit about a democratic form of money(which gold is not) BTC was not invented to advance science.”. Unfortunately this entity realizes that a democracy where everyone hates science is an idiocracy. Mohammed wants an idiocratic form of money.
I regret to inform you that there is actually a way to improve the quality of the average user of a given cryptocurrency, and Bitcoin has completely failed in employing this strategy.
You are right. Back in the good old days, the Bitcoiners actually knew and cared about cryptography. Now Bitcoin has gone from being a democracy to being an idiocracy. Now, only unintelligent people use Bitcoin. Today, you can hardly find a Bitcoiner who knows the difference between an encryption function and a cryptographic hash function.
dreinmund-Your communication is really unclear. Don’t make me report you to the Modern Language Association. My response is proper against an entity who claims that ‘I feel that “science” is bullshit’.
‘A few sentences later, you launch a personal attack (“because you lack intelligence”)’-Um. That is not an insult. It is a demonstrable fact backed up by plenty of evidence such as the statement ‘I feel that “science” is bullshit’. Or do you also think that when a professor gives a student an F in math class, that is an insult too?
mememonkey-You really need to try to communicate clearly. Who are you talking to? Who are you calling a troll? Please work on your communication skills so that all your communication is clear, or I will report you to the Modern Language Association.
davefairtex-Your anti-scientific rhetoric is troubling.
“I can’t figure out if this is a comedy routine or not.”-Please do not insult me. You are the ignorant one here.
‘I feel that “science” is bullshit’-What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
“And I’m not buying it.”-This is because you lack intelligence.
“Make an argument. See if it hangs together.”-By your anti-scientific attitude, you clearly cannot be the judge of whether an argument is valid or not. Sorry.
“No. Advancing science means nothing. It is about reason. Reason is the key.”-And you sound very reasonable. NOT!!!
thatchmo-You are way off. Try again. You did not advance any science since you got the wrong answer.
VTGothic-What you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
EddieLarry-I hope you know that you are discrediting yourself by referring to Mohammed Mast since he said on Tue, Dec 08, 2020 – 05:58pm “Who gives a shit about advancing science? I certainly don’t.” And no, it is not a coincidence that the same person here promoting Bitcoin is a science hater. Bitcoin now attracts science haters for reasons I have explained elsewhere previously.
JimboJim-You do not seem very curious since you were previously more interested in being as demeaning as possible. Please read these resources first in order to appreciate a possible answer to your question.
I only give straight answers to people who are NOT full of ravenous hatred. Of course, if you solve this math problem (related to cryptography) in order to prove your intellectual curiosity, I will give you a detailed answer (the problem is easy if you are able to do it):
Suppose that one were to generate a string of 0’s,1’s, and 2’s of length 10,000,000 where the symbol at each position has a 25% chance of being a 0, a 30% chance of being a 1, and a 45% chance of being a 2, and where the values at each of the positions are independent. About how many bits long will this string be when it is fully compressed by an optimal compression algorithm?
SagerXX-Actually, ignoring someone who talks about science will not advance science. That will instead delay the progress of science. An ignore button will only advance science if you use it to ignore someone who says something like “Who gives a shit about advancing science? I certainly don’t.” (yes, Mohammed Mast really said this; yes, it is pathetic; Mohammed Mast really is that stupid).