MIT Media Lab Director: ICOs Are 'Attracting the Wrong ...
The Economic Limits of Bitcoin and the Blockchain
Technical Roadblock Might Shatter Bitcoin Dreams MIT ...
Joi Ito's Web
[OWL WATCH] Waiting for "IOTA TIME" 14;
Disclaimer: This is my editing, so there could be some errors, misunderstandings or exaggerations. Waiting for "IOTA TIME " (an era where IOTA defines nearly everything in terms of the block-chain world) niels12어제 오후 4:51 IOTA funds are public:https://thetangle.org/address/IDNAFP9FWWKYGNDMKGJWZD9GATGRPTJYTYHLKFNDEQSISPSETLZQOSPGOHC99LMPXDEHSH9XYHNVOLUBBQPCEGHYK9But they have probably other sources of income, like funding by government etc. And maybe also other IOTA funds on other addresses. I don't know. Balance: 59.68 Ti David Sønstebø어제 오후 9:41 I wonder how many times an out of context 2 year old private DM has to be addressed. At the time IOTA was approaching stagnation due to the actions of primarily CFB**, thus since we both started Jinn together which lead to IOTA,** I tried repeatedly to talk sense into him.I.E. "If you are going to torpedo all progress, let's just sell it all and start from scratch, fuck it"It's a figure of speech, while trying to talk sense into someone who insists that 1 + 1 = 3.59 My tax records show when I last sold iotas. February of 2018. Now stop reading into private DMs, especially ones taken out of context and especially those leaked by someone who's proclaimed he is going to ruin IOTAand my life. You need to go back to school if you think there is anything to 'speculate' on there. dom어제 오후 4:15 u/unsywe will release the condensed version of them once we want to.Just because you so desperately desire them for whatever reason doesn't make us do it faster. Being in this space for so fucking long,last thing I want is to attempt to act in good faith again and then be screwed over by those trying to misconstrue reality and spread lies.We've been at that for too long.Once they are fully ready, and we have them in a format we like, we will publish them. dom어제 오후 4:16 Our objective of the finance / legal department is to become one of the most trustworthy / transparent organizations in this space. Which is why we're setting up new and stricter policies in general dom어제 오후 4:18 quite frankly, with everything that has happened up until now, I would certainly say thatwe are one of the most transparent organization(if we wanted it or not)u/unsy dom어제 오후 4:21 u/unsyI am not worried about it.If we have problems, we always solve them - I think we've proven that by now. And as it stands right now with our current funding + our strategy, we are in good hands David Sønstebø오늘 오전 6:41 Don't worry, a shitty FUD piece in a cryptoblog is nada [오전 6:41] We were once numero uno target by Jeffrey Epstein funded Joi Ito's MIT DCI [오전 6:41] This is nothing ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Antonio Nardella [IF]어제 오후 11:13 IMO the community has matured a lot, we have community and certified developers working with the IF in the X-Teams, there are new people coming in with direct interest in the tech (yeah, also spec is still popular) and from the chats that I've had, there are devs waiting for the breaking changes of Chrysalis P2, before starting to develop again..But that's my assessment.. Jelle Millenaar [IF]어제 오후 9:15 Well, I can say the DID developments are going smooth. Starting publishing the first DIDs to the Tangle ;D Jelle Millenaar [IF]어제 오후 9:15 And since I am totally not biased towards Identity, but its gonna be revolutionary ;D Jelle Millenaar [IF]어제 오후 10:06 This is the perfect time to loose faith in the IOTA Foundations capability to deliver, especially after the network just received a major update with many improvements. Its just crypto being crypto, dom오늘 오전 2:12 Yeh we'll go through it. This is the usual game... Dominik Schiener There is more tech maturity, more adoption and more progress than ever. We are one of the only projects which gets funding from government grants and corporations.Stop the attention grabbing headlines and get your sources right. Long field You can track their iota address, and I can tell they didn't sell any iota tokens in last two months HusQy IOTA is like a large decentralized network cable that connects any number of nodes with each other and that enables data and values to be exchanged with one another, whereby the data is protected against manipulation and the value transactions against double spends. Thereon ... ... you can run any decentralized application (we call this layer) - e.g. a blockchainthat stores certain data for as long as you want and limits the amount of data to be saved via fees like Bitcoin.Each of these uses inherit ... ... your security from the basic protocol and can specifically only save the data that is relevant for you (also decentralized).To say that IOTA is not a DLT is in principle not that wrong -it is a platform for DLTs and therefore much more powerful than all ... ... existing DLTs because it is much more flexible. For example, you can run Hashgraph in IOTA, or Bitcoin or whatever. And IOTA is the token that connects the entire ecosystem. This is of course "not yet" the case, but Chrysalis Part 2 is the first step. HusQy @blocktrainerperhaps this explanation will enable you to understand where the journey is going.If a decentralized data storage is required, then you can build it with IOTA and it then has exactly the same properties in terms of permanent storage as Bitcoin. Block trainer We can also get a little more technical.The way you describe it, it sounds like an interoperability layer ... something like that here, which then equates to a polkadot etc. 📷 HusQy In principle yes, only that it doesn't connect Bitcoin and ETH but "IOTA Smart Contracts" with "IOTA Storage" etc. It is not there to connect other projects but to offer the same as other projects, only faster and cheaper. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bitcoin Coach And in 5 years there will be a completely new project, which then claims to be better than IOTA. And then should all the infrastructure be thrown overboard and the partners simply change the DLT? HusQy This is how technology works.It makes no sense to run the Internet on the basis of 64k modems just because many people have one at home.The change does not take place overnight but creeping and if you look at the BTC Dominance you can see that too. Ultimately, everything will switch to the best technology and we'll see which that is :) Block trainer The "best" must also be defined. What are the classes to master? HusQy All classes. If there is a technology that can represent even one aspect better, then it is not yet good enough. Blockchain, for example, is a "degenerate" DAG with only one reference. The goal is that IOTA can also use blockchains if the use case requires it. HusQy The future is not "either DAG or blockchain" but both seamlessly linked within the same ecosystem. IOTA smart contracts use a blockchain, for example, but a separate chain for each smart contract and the blockchain is within the tangle. Block trainer According to the new definition, they are no longer saved ... A doublespent could change the reference retrospectively. HusQy That's not quite true.The tangle itself contains all information for all eternity and you cannot remove any information. Once the data has reached a certain age, it is no longer stored by every node in the network. But you can still ... ... still prove what happened in the part of the tangle that was "forgotten" by the nodes after a certain time. Now there are two ways to keep this evidence: 1. You save the evidence personally and can present it at any time. 2. Man ... ... writes a plug-in for the node, which monitors the Tangle for information of a certain type and keeps a copy of all car purchase-related data forever (or for at least 30 years, for example). All dealerships could then install this plugin and ... ... jointly store this data decentrally in order to query the information if necessary. However, you would only selectively save the data that interests you. The evidence they produce can still be verified by any node on the network. If the server of a car dealership fails, it can download the data again from one of the other dealerships. Quasi like an application-related private blockchain which is secured by the Tangle. It is also conceivable that there are service providers for this ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HusQy Data is only kept immutable. How do you intend to execute a token transaction over pure data? I'm simply sending the following two data transactions at the same time: 1. I'm sending $ 100 from address A to address B. 2. I'm sending $ 100 from address A to address C. HusQy In order to determine which transaction is successful / came first, you need consensus. Data transactions do not allow token transfer. Block trainer Why doesn't that allow token transfer? I can simply use it to sign my values. The question is about the meaning of the token. I can also sign that I have transferred € 10 for the petrol station. Or I transmit the proof via curled BTC ... HusQy Did I just describe you can publish two conflicting data transactions and no one knows which is the correct one: P Block trainer Unless you agree on a consensus. Time stamp + BTC (locked) in hash = value transmitted ... What else is the IOTA token for? HusQy Whether information is correct can only be seen in the context. Take a look at the difference between "data" and "information". For example, you can claim that you locked Bitcoin even though it didn't. Block trainer I may need a proof of this. See how, for example, BTC is unlocked in liquid or in the LN. The IOTA data layer is extremely similar to the principle of Lightning. Accordingly, the sending of tokens would be possible here, which means that I see the use case of the IOTA coin at risk HusQy Such a proof is impossible. The reason why this works with LN nodes is because LN nodes are Bitcoin nodes that know what is happening in the Bitcoin network and have "information" and not just "data": P What you are describing is technically impossible. Block trainer Data = information What can the LN not, what IOTA can sometimes? HusQy That's not rubbish.There is a huge difference between data and information, and inter-chain transactions are not possible because of that very difference. LN won't work - there are too many game theory problems: P -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dominik Schiener There is more tech maturity, more adoption and more progress than ever. We are one of the only projects which gets funding from government grants and corporations.Stop the attention grabbing headlines and get your sources right. Dominik Schiener As an innovation leader in Europe, I certainly say we deserve to get grants.There is a below 7% success chance usually. And yes,everything is fully audited (by externals ofc), showing clearly how and that the money was used in achieving the milestones of the grant. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which type of curren(t) do you want to see(cy)? A analysis of the intention behind bitcoin(s). [Part 2]
Part 1 It's been a bit of time since the first post during which I believe things have crystallised further as to the intentions of the three primary bitcoin variants. I was going to go on a long winded journey to try to weave together the various bits and pieces to let the reader discern from themselves but there's simply too much material that needs to be covered and the effort that it would require is not something that I can invest right now. Firstly we must define what bitcoin actually is. Many people think of bitcoin as a unit of a digital currency like a dollar in your bank but without a physical substrate. That's kind of correct as a way to explain its likeness to something many people are familiar with but instead it's a bit more nuanced than that. If we look at a wallet from 2011 that has never moved any coins, we can find that there are now multiple "bitcoins" on multiple different blockchains. This post will discuss the main three variants which are Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV. In this respect many people are still hotly debating which is the REAL bitcoin variant and which bitcoins you want to be "investing" in. The genius of bitcoin was not in defining a class of non physical objects to send around. Why bitcoin was so revolutionary is that it combined cryptography, economics, law, computer science, networking, mathematics, etc. and created a protocol which was basically a rule set to be followed which creates a game of incentives that provides security to a p2p network to prevent double spends. The game theory is extremely important to understand. When a transaction is made on the bitcoin network your wallet essentially generates a string of characters which includes your public cryptographic key, a signature which is derived from the private key:pub key pair, the hash of the previous block and an address derived from a public key of the person you want to send the coins to. Because each transaction includes the hash of the previous block (a hash is something that will always generate the same 64 character string result from EXACTLY the same data inputs) the blocks are literally chained together. Bitcoin and the blockchain are thus defined in the technical white paper which accompanied the release client as a chain of digital signatures. The miners validate transactions on the network and compete with one another to detect double spends on the network. If a miner finds the correct solution to the current block (and in doing so is the one who writes all the transactions that have elapsed since the last block was found, in to the next block) says that a transaction is confirmed but then the rest of the network disagree that the transactions occurred in the order that this miner says (for double spends), then the network will reject the version of the blockchain that that miner is working on. In that respect the miners are incentivised to check each other's work and ensure the majority are working on the correct version of the chain. The miners are thus bound by the game theoretical design of NAKAMOTO CONSENSUS and the ENFORCES of the rule set. It is important to note the term ENFORCER rather than RULE CREATOR as this is defined in the white paper which is a document copyrighted by Satoshi Nakamoto in 2009. Now if we look at the three primary variants of bitcoin understanding these important defining characteristics of what the bitcoin protocol actually is we can make an argument that the variants that changed some of these defining attributes as no longer being bitcoin rather than trying to argue based off market appraisal which is essentially defining bitcoin as a social media consensus rather than a set in stone rule set. BITCOIN CORE: On first examination Bitcoin Core appears to be the incumbent bitcoin that many are being lead to believe is the "true" bitcoin and the others are knock off scams. The outward stated rationale behind the bitcoin core variant is that computational resources, bandwidth, storage are scarce and that before increasing the size of each block to allow for more transactions we should be increasing the efficiency with which the data being fed in to a block is stored. In order to achieve this one of the first suggested implementations was a process known as SegWit (segregating the witness data). This means that when you construct a bitcoin transaction, in the header of the tx, instead of the inputs being public key and a signature + Hash + address(to), the signature data is moved outside of header as this can save space within the header and allow more transactions to fill the block. More of the history of the proposal can be read about here (bearing in mind that article is published by the bitcoinmagazine which is founded by ethereum devs Vitalik and Mihai and can't necessarily be trusted to give an unbiased record of events). The idea of a segwit like solution was proposed as early as 2012 by the likes of Greg Maxwell and Luke Dash Jnr and Peter Todd in an apparent effort to "FIX" transaction malleability and enable side chains. Those familiar with the motto "problem reaction solution" may understand here that the problem being presented may not always be an authentic problem and it may actually just be necessary preparation for implementing a desired solution. The real technical arguments as to whether moving signature data outside of the transaction in the header actually invalidates the definition of bitcoin as being a chain of digital signatures is outside my realm of expertise but instead we can examine the character of the individuals and groups involved in endorsing such a solution. Greg Maxwell is a hard to know individual that has been involved with bitcoin since its very early days but in some articles he portrays himself as portrays himself as one of bitcoins harshest earliest critics. Before that he worked with Mozilla and Wikipedia and a few mentions of him can be found on some old linux sites or such. He has no entry on wikipedia other than a non hyperlinked listing as the CTO of Blockstream. Blockstream was a company founded by Greg Maxwell and Adam Back, but in business registration documents only Adam Back is listed as the business contact but registered by James Murdock as the agent. They received funding from a number of VC firms but also Joi Ito and Reid Hoffman and there are suggestions that MIT media labs and the Digital Currency Initiative. For those paying attention Joi Ito and Reid Hoffman have links to Jeffrey Epstein and his offsider Ghislaine Maxwell. Ghislaine is the daughter of publishing tycoon and fraudster Robert Maxwell (Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch, a yiddish orthodox czech). It is emerging that the Maxwells are implicated with Mossad and involved in many different psyops throughout the last decades. Greg Maxwell is verified as nullc but a few months ago was outed using sock puppets as another reddit user contrarian__ who also admits to being Jewish in one of his comments as the former. Greg has had a colourful history with his roll as a bitcoin core developer successfully ousting two of the developers put there by Satoshi (Gavin Andreson and Mike Hearn) and being referred to by Andreson as a toxic troll with counterpart Samon Mow. At this point rather than crafting the narrative around Greg, I will provide a few links for the reader to assess on their own time:
Now I could just go on dumping more and more articles but that doesn't really weave it all together. Essentially it is very well possible that the 'FIX' of bitcoin proposed with SegWit was done by those who are moral reprobates who have been rubbing shoulders money launderers and human traffickers. Gregory Maxwell was removed from wikipedia, worked with Mozilla who donated a quarter of a million to MIT media labs and had relationship with Joi Ito, the company he founded received funding from people associated with Epstein who have demonstrated their poor character and dishonesty and attempted to wage toxic wars against those early bitcoin developers who wished to scale bitcoin as per the white paper and without changing consensus rules or signature structures. The argument that BTC is bitcoin because the exchanges and the market have chosen is not necessarily a logical supposition when the vast majority of the money that has flown in to inflate the price of BTC comes from a cryptographic USD token that was created by Brock Pierce (Might Ducks child stahollywood pedo scandal Digital Entertainment Network) who attended Jeffrey Epstein's Island for conferences. The group Tether who issues the USDT has been getting nailed by the New York Attorney General office with claims of $1.4 trillion in damages from their dodgey practices. Brock Pierce has since distanced himself from Tether but Blockstream still works closely with them and they are now exploring issuing tether on the ethereum network. Tether lost it's US banking partner in early 2017 before the monstrous run up for bitcoin prices. Afterwards they alleged they had full reserves of USD however, they were never audited and were printing hundreds of millions of dollars of tether each week during peak mania which was used to buy bitcoin (which was then used as collateral to issue more tether against the bitcoin they bought at a value they inflated). Around $30m in USDT is crossing between China to Russia daily and when some of the groups also related to USDT/Tether were raided they found them in possession of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of counterfeit physical US bills. Because of all this it then becomes important to reassess the arguments that were made for the implementation of pegged sidechains, segregated witnesses and other second layer solutions. If preventing the bitcoin blockchain from bloating was the main argument for second layer solutions, what was the plan for scaling the data related to the records of transactions that occur on the second layer. You will then need to rely on less robust ways of securing the second layer than Proof Of Work but still have the same amount of data to contend with, unless there was plans all along for second layer solutions to enable records to be deleted /pruned to facilitate money laundering and violation of laws put in place to prevent banking secrecy etc. There's much more to it as well and I encourage anyone interested to go digging on their own in to this murky cesspit. Although I know very well what sort of stuff Epstein has been up to I have been out of the loop and haven't familiarised myself with everyone involved in his network that is coming to light. Stay tuned for part 3 which will be an analysis of the shit show that is the Bitcoin Cash variant...
When the Media Lab was founded 30 years ago, Nicholas Negroponte said that the Media Lab was about "demo or die" as opposed to "publish or perish" which represented a departure from the paper writing of academic to a more prototype and demo model. This fit well with the roots in architecture which also focuses on the atelier model of building things. This actually allows rigor at an interdisciplinary level that couldn't occur if participants across disciplines had to write an academic paper together. This worked very well for 30 years especially when a large percentage of the impact of the Media Lab was through influencing other organizations such as the sponsors of the Media Lab to create products such as guitar hero, the Kindle or LEGO Mindstorms.
However, with the diminishing cost of deploying things like websites or even hardware, researchers at the Media Lab are increasingly able to deploy directly. Last year, we change "demo or die" to deploy or die to signal a shift from just building prototypes (Nicholas actually said, "the demo only has to work once") to thinking about and actually deploying our work directly into the world.
And Joost Bonsen and Sandy Pentland teach a course called Development Ventures which is focused on creating venture businesses in developing countries and has been very successful: Link to d-lab.mit.edu
And there is a lot of stuff going on that I don't know.
So the strategy is to encourage global interaction and get out of the way and let people do it as well as support and nudge where it helps.
I think that there are probably a few people - mostly white men - for whom dropping out of college turned out to be exactly the right thing. I think that for the most part, a college degree will increase options for just about anyone, so I always try to convince my students - not just because it's now my job to - to complete their degrees. The people who should drop out, will drop out anyway and so anyone who can be convinced to not drop out, probably shouldn't.
In my case, it's hard to say. There is a total survivorship bias since it could just be luck that I turned out OK and you're not talking to the 99% of the people for whom it sucked because they couldn't get the job because they didn't have the degree.
My career choices would probably have been different, but I really don't think that you take my choices as any guide for how to live your own life since we're all pretty different... sorry about the non-answer here.
This is one big thing that that I have been pushing since I got to the Media Lab - to post more stuff to the Internet and share as much as possible. We're posting all of our videos and other things.
The reason is that the Internet allows people to see what we're doing and allows us to see what they're doing. This enables us to collaborate with people thinking about similar things or to avoid doing things that others are already doing or have done. One of the key things that we focus on is to NOT do things that others are already doing. This doesn't always work, but I think that as more and more work from across the world is available and searchable online, the less likely we see redundancy.
So for individuals who have similar ideas, I would suggest contacting the research group at the Media Lab that is working on the idea to see if there is a way to collaborate.
No. Interdisciplinary is when the chemist and the biologist talk to each other. Antidisciplinary is when you are between or beyond the disciplines.
When I think about the "space" that we've created, I like to think about a huge piece of paper that represents "all science." The disciplines are little black dots on this paper. The massive amounts of white space between the dots represent antidisciplinary space. Many people would like to play in this white space, but there is very little funding for this, and it's even harder to get a tenured positions without some sort of disciplinary anchor in one of the black dots.
And this is important because the lines between hardware, software, biology - they're blurring and almost everything interesting is actually antidisciplinary.
Yes, you're right. I would still say that we are more "antidisciplinary" than "interdisciplinary" in that although we do connect branches of knowledge, I think my premise is that there is knowledge that is missing from the traditional "branches" of the disciplines and we are actually trying to find the "gaps" or the areas not traditionally covered by disciplines well. Also, while we have many teams that involve more than one person, we try to have at least 2 orthogonal domains in each single person. The "inter" in "interdisciplinary" seems to focus too much on connecting between things rather than being the between itself.
If Bitcoin should use an increase in block size to increase the number of transactions per second is an important debate. More importantly, how this decision is made will be a good example of how the community of developers, entrepreneurs, miners, and users will continue to collaborate on major changes to bitcoin core. Over the last few months there has been a rich discussion through blog posts and open email chains. The MIT Media Lab Digital Currency Initiative is happy to host an open forum where a discussion can take place in person and online with the goal of coming to a satisfactory conclusion by the participants. While it might take some trial and error to figure out exactly how this could work, we're happy to support the community in this way if they think it would be helpful to come to a conclusion on this topic and use this model as an example for future discussions.
1) On privacy: Bitcoin isn’t private. Financial privacy is really important. In the US, many think of privacy as a means for terrorists to hide, but in countries with governments that do not have an open society it is a powerful tool for the citizens to be able to protect their ability to dissent and have freedoms that we take for granted. I’m excited about the potential for technology like ZeroCash to revolutionize this space. The tricky part of any global protocol or network is that anything we do in one country ripples across the world and has unintended consequences. The key is balancing the needs of people in a huge variety of environments.
2) On Lightning: It’s a great idea. I’ve been thinking of Bitcoin as a layer on the internet stack, like TCP/IP. Protocols like lightning are like HTTP, making it easier and more accessible for the world.
I think that every major setback that I've had has made me stronger so in many ways - like a healthy immune system - without the challenges, I wouldn't have growth would be who I am. So first off, I don't see setbacks or stumbling blocks (as long ask they don't kill you) as negative things.
Probably the thing that set me back the most was when my mother died of cancer and it turned out that we had spent all of our money + a couple of hundreds of thousands of dollars on medical bills. I ended up spending the next few years living in a pretty shitty place working for a pretty shitty guy digging myself out of the hole. At some level that built character, but I think it also provided me with the energy to get off my ass and do real work and start a real business so I didn't have to work for people I didn't like.
My biggest failure was probably the incubator that I built in 2000 in Japan called Neoteny. We were backed by some VCs who thought that a big full service incubator would be more successful than a fund so we built a big facility, hired a bunch of people (40+), raised a bunch of money and started investing in and incubating companies. A lot of this was driven by the VC and the market at the time where many incubators were going public at valuations that were many times the value of their portfolios. Soon this model fell out of favor of the market, the model didn't actually work that well, the VCs pushed us to shut down and I had to fire everyone and wind the company down, pay the remaining cash back to our investors and set up a skeleton team to manage the portfolio of investments.
We did some good things like invest in Six Apart that developed Movable Type which didn't end up being a great investment financially, but did help bring blogging to the world.
Although I view it as a massive failure on my part, almost all of my investors are still friends and many of them have continued to invest in my companies and my funds, in part because I think we were always honest and tried to make the right decisions for the employees as well as the shareholders.
Last updated: 2015-06-03 01:52 UTC This post was generated by a robot! Send all complaints to epsy.
Joi Ito . 3 posts . Part One took a heroic stab at explaining the technology that underpins Bitcoin – the blockchain. But although the mysterious inventor (or inventors) of the blockchain concept, ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, wrote specifically about using it to implement a ‘crypto-currency’, the concept is not dependent on this: in principle the blocks could… Foresight. The Nakamoto Legacy ... Impact Investment Metrics and Their Limitations. By Joi Ito and Louis Kang. As the pile of philanthropic money aimed at solving the world's problems grows, the desire for assessment and rigor has pushed experts to develop metrics to measure impact and success.. But our world's biggest problems -- climate change, poverty, global health, social instability -- don't easily lend themselves to ... The value of all Bitcoin held currently is about $22B. That’s less than Google’s Q1 revenue. So, we are still very very early in the evelopment. That’s less than Google’s Q1 revenue. Gans, Austan Goolsbee, Zhiguo He, Joi Ito, Steve Kaplan, Anil Kashyap, Judd Kessler, Randall Kroszner, Robin Lee, Jacob Leshno, Neale Mahoney, Sendhil Mullainathan, David Parkes, John Shim, Scott Stornetta, Aviv Zohar, and seminar participants at Chicago Booth and the MIT Digital Currency Initiative. Natalia Drozdoff and Matthew O'Keefe have provided excellent research assistance. Disclosure ... MIT Media Lab director Joi Ito is joining the ranks of outspoken critics who believe the market for blockchain-based tokens is overheated.
Bitcoin Math & Value with Plan B - Duration: 41:08. Preston Pysh 12,799 views. 41:08. Beginner’s Guide #6: How Bitcoin Works with Shinobi - Duration: 2:01:00. Peter McCormack 2,811 views. 2:01 ... Joi Ito, the Director of the MIT Media Lab (among many things). We chat about the central question of his PhD thesis, "How can we understand and effectively ... Joichi Ito - MIT Media Lab and epstein 22920 The MIT Media Lab — an interdisciplinary research center affiliated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technolo... "Everyone who is issuing an ICO needs to sit down and meditate and say 'Why am I doing this?'. If it's really for making society better, then you should try ... Bitcoin Security and Ethics with Neha Narula ... 47:01. Davos 2017 - An Insight, An Idea with Joichi Ito - Duration: 31:58. World Economic Forum 14,759 views. 31:58. Conversation with Jamila Raqib ...