[Arm-netbook] ZeroPhone

Mon Apr 17 04:55:16 BST 2017

I apologize in advance for any duplicate messages, but I feel the need
to touch up that post a bit, as people already have had the chance to
begin reading it.

On 4/16/17, John Luke Gibson <eaterjolly at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, in this context artificial is often meant to describe scarcity
> which is the result of a decision. I would probably adapt that
> definition for my purposes, to say a decision made by an identifiable
> mint (a whole decision by a group or a decision partially weighted in
> favor of any group) on behalf of people with this credit (in this
> case, credit for having that address)... the key aspect being
> artificial meaning (for me atleast) the scarcity was decided for
> someone else.
>
> Better defining addresses in this case, bitcoin addresses are more
> like identities (I like the term Sybil used as a noun, in this case)
> rather than addresses, because we don't go to them so much as we
> simply talk (or send messages) to them.
>
> _
>
> Addresses are only intrinsically as scarce as physical locations they
> can point to physical location (which I would prefer to use the term
> Sybil [or at least "identity"] to describe anything which would
> Normally be described as an address which Doesn't point to physical
> location). Additionally they can be considered scarce in that it is
> unsustainable to deliver messages to individual possessors of
> addresses, whom don't help the delivery of messages (atleast, as an
> abstract concept). So, ultimately, (at the very least) the degree of
> viability of addresses needs to be limited for practical reasons. Some
> might associate the suggestion of limiting this viability to
> possessors of addresses who facilitate the delivery delivery of
> messages to a higher degree than they strain the delivery of messages
> {(especially [or particularly, if you will] with the volume of
> messages-to-be-delivered-added), with "capitalism". I would like to
> emphasize that this is not a concept of either "capitalism" or
> "socialism" (or any their like currently being formed outside of the
> occident) , (both of which rely on the fairly novel social construct
> of a "stock" and/or banking/"monetary fund"-management)} but-rather
> simple self-sustainability. Of course, if at a given point the
> collective infrastructure {(or atleast relevant parts thereof) ,
> (with-which many people have agreed is acceptable for delivering
> messages according to a system of determining which messages are given
> the most priority that they have agreed is acceptable)} is
> under-strained (or under-utilized, if you will) according to it's
> maximum potential for helping people communicate, it should probably
> begin to deliver messages "gratis" or simply out of the goodness of
> doing so........ which is something a noob can plainly see the bitcoin
> protocol tried to do by rewarding it's bitcoin miners, but failed to
> realize: only sentient beings can effectively measure the potential
> meaning to be had in helping another sentient being or the so-termed
> "goodness" in doing so; that No protocol can account for what it's
> like to help someone specific or every being one can; that It should
> be up to every individual exactly who they help or what kind of Sybils
> they help or to what degree and for what purpose. We are fundamentally
> human, and we must remember our value is in our decision.
>
> On 4/16/17, Adam Van Ymeren <adam.vany at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why do you want artificial scarcity of addresses?  Either via bitcoin
>> type
>> system or some authority I don't see any benefit to artificial address
>> scarcity.
>>
>>
>>   Original Message
>> From: eaterjolly at gmail.com
>> Sent: April 16, 2017 8:45 PM
>> To: arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
>> Reply-to: arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
>> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] ZeroPhone
>>
>> Ultimately, isolation of the sim card or otherwise modem, should
>> probably be the biggest concern. There are ethical concerns around
>> artificial scarcity from telephone numbers and, to be fair, ipv4
>> addresses, (metaphorical mints thereof having absolute decision-making
>> authority giving infinite leverage as "benevolent dictators" who can
>> simply crash everything if something doesn't go their way) that should
>> be considered before dedicating too much priority to this task.
>>
>> A more perfect solution (longterm) would be a network with
>> self-modulating scarcity of addresses, in a fashion reminiscent of
>>
>>
>> bitcoin. However it would be prudent to construct a language the
>> anti-thesis of esoteric (top-down, expressing this anti-thesis on all
>> levels of design) to describe the underlining software in and make the
>> networking protocol more accepting of contrarian behavior.
>>
>> If this sounds like a lot, consider that for a person with no
>> experience computer design, it should be easier to learn as they go
>> when designing this, than to pick up all the computer design wisdom
>> necessary to retrofit or "reverse-engineer" literally self-described
>> as esoteric systems. Is there not a fundament to computers, computer
>> design, and network engineering, that is intuitive to beings not
>> fortunate enough to be included in the circles of any so-called
>> esotericism of any kind?
>>
>> I apologize if my reliance on certain obscure terms, without
>> interchanging any alternative phrasings made this email seem
>> convoluted and difficult to understand.
>>
>> On 4/16/17, GaCuest <gacuest at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> El 16 de abril de 2017 a las 12:42:43, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
>>> (lkcl at lkcl.net) escribió:
>>>> ---
>>>> crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 11:05 AM, GaCuest wrote:
>>>> > El 14 de abril de 2017 a las 7:37:24, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
>>>> > (lkcl at lkcl.net) escribió:
>>>> >> the idea there is to use an LCD that has *dual* control interfaces:
>>>> >> SPI *AND* RGB/TTL.
>>>> >
>>>> > Something like this?:
>>>> > http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/shenzen/frida/FRD3504503.pdf
>>>>
>>>> ... exactly like that :) except i'm not a huge fan of resistive
>>>> panels... they are quite a lot cheaper though.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, it was an example, I prefer CTP :)
>>>
>>> I think the idea that a cell phone can work without EOMA68
>>>  (for basic functions) is a very good idea, but is it difficult to do?
>>> I want to say because you have to do many things 2 times to
>>> be able to work with EOMA68 and without EOMA68.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, is the STM32F072 capable of handling
>>> the audio with good quality?
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
>>> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
>>> Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
>> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
>> Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk
>> _______________________________________________
>> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk
>> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
>> Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk
>