|
Bitcoin 315: "he that has bitcoins shall have eternal blockchain."
|
|
|
|
Sfinder was found and voted out successfully. It is almost impossible for full pay delegates to be the same person. Unless they are superhuman and able to complete multiple jobs at the same time. You can view the work delegates are doing. They have to be transparent and productive or they are voted out. It's simply not possible to all be the same person because 1 person cannot do 101 jobs. And there are huge incentives to not do this. Delegates are one of the great features of BitShares. It's creating a thriving community and a whole new type of decentralised organisation. Not to mention the unique identity v
erifying features being developed. DPOS is an amazing, fascinating and powerful invention which is going to re-structure society itself. Constructive criticism is always welcomed, but please keep it real. That's the most ridiculous thing to say in the internet age. Of course one person can do millions of procedural tasks at once. If you can't write software to do it you hire cheap tech support in Mexico or India and script them. Break them up into teams for each delegate pseudonym and offer compensation based on productivity. Point taken there can be subcontracting. Mathematically proving delegates are different people isn't necessary. Incentives work strongly against any attacker. They would have to spend months developing (via subcontracting or doing it themselves) a bunch of features for BitShares to win voter approval to take multiple positions or they would have to buy a massive amount of BTS to be able to vote themselves in, only to then attack themselves by attacking the network. The cost of attack is already very high. There is nothing necessarily wrong with having a social construct be part of the mix. Lets compare it to massive warehouses filled with asics run by a handful of mining pools. Both methods are worthy experiments and no one knows what POW or DPOS will lead to in the future. only to then attack themselves by attacking the network. The cost of attack is already very high. But isn't the attack a double spend? It can more than make up for lost revenue. If you run enough double spend scams for awhile you can always sell your position down and quietly exit. |
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't be surprised to see an almost mirror image to 2014.
|
|
|
|
re: Justus, Adam Back The reason Monetas contracted Justus to help us build the voting pools is because he is a Bitcoin purist. Justus keeps us honest. And I think that is the same role he is playing here in this thread. Bitcoin is his highest value. And I think what Justus is saying is, that a framework needs to be developed for any changes to Bitcoin. I think he's right that it's not good enough for changes merely to be "open source, open IP." There is a potential conflict of interest, and there is an easy way to put any concerns to rest. Justus said it best: I think this concern could be minimised if the soft fork needed to support sidechains was part of a larger clarification of the Bitcoin protocol development process.
If there was a clear process that explained what kinds of changes to the protocol are acceptable, and what kinds are not, combined with a development roadmap and a transparent sequence of steps for adding things to it, I think there would be less reason for Bitcoin users to worry about Blockstream and sidechains. I really don't think that's much to ask. Do you, Adam? I think Adam is a good guy with good intentions. Certainly he deserves respect -- he has earned it. All around. He's a brilliant guy and he's been working for good for a long time. We all owe him our thanks at the very least for his invention of hashcash, his work at Zero Knowledge, etc. And I know Justus can be blunt; Adam has been very graceful in this thread. Yet it is true that Monetas is not asking for any forks in the Bitcoin protocol. Blockstream is. That's why these questions are being raised. There is an easy way to put them to rest. With respect to Bitcoin's development road map versus the world's vast array of financial relationships, in order to receive universal acceptance it usually best to keep language and protocol as simple as possible with enough functionality to serve the majority. Overly complex or superfluous language makes some people suspicious. Projects that offer Turing-complete complexity are empowering, but not always welcome. Having said that, there is nothing stopping meta applications from improving Bitcoin's footprint. In defense of Justus' pit bull defensiveness, sometimes strength of conviction is enough to clear the smoke from a conversation mired in nuance. While I often disagree with him on many things, I admire his brevity and focus. |
|
|
|
That qualifies him for political office. |
|
|
|
I think this was the best poster of 2014: https://i.imgur.com/T00bQi7.jpgJokes apart, I don't think we can agree on who was best, but I can assure you the most entertaining was dank. Man, his theories really amused me, especially that alien one. I miss BenRayfield's theories, but Danks always been a trip down the rabbit hole. |
|
|
|
Early holders creating artificial scarcity, price jumps due to limited supply, illiquid markets and exchanges painting the tape, slow price dumps with many bulltraps on the way down...
We all have our shared delusions whether they're love, freedom, or security. Until Bitcoin came along, there was no way to guarantee your long term financial security. That's why people hold bitcoins long term. Delusions like bull traps exist because folks are cynical, insecure, and lonely. Maybe nobody will ever be free, but maybe someone will invent a drug for the loneliness and cynicism. |
|
|
|
|
The next 12 months are critical.
|
|
|
|
bitcoin is a miners scam
Only people making money in this:
-scammers
-early adopters
-miners
-exchange operators
-only the best traders
and nobody else.
Same reasons I quit stock trading and became a pimp.  |
|
|
|
|
Being a native Madisonian myself and only a little older than Nick, I've always been amazed at the superficial similarity in idioms and thought structure that goes into Satoshi Nakamotos writing as my own, especially his politics. I know this is anecdotal and I'm not interested in exposing anyone, but it was an amazing place and time to grow up for free thinkers and many came from there, "That 70s Show" notwithstanding.
|
|
|
|
Sfinder was found and voted out successfully.
It is almost impossible for full pay delegates to be the same person. Unless they are superhuman and able to complete multiple jobs at the same time. You can view the work delegates are doing. They have to be transparent and productive or they are voted out. It's simply not possible to all be the same person because 1 person cannot do 101 jobs. And there are huge incentives to not do this.
Delegates are one of the great features of BitShares. It's creating a thriving community and a whole new type of decentralised organisation. Not to mention the unique identity verifying features being developed. DPOS is an amazing, fascinating and powerful invention which is going to re-structure society itself. Constructive criticism is always welcomed, but please keep it real.
That's the most ridiculous thing to say in the internet age. Of course one person can do millions of procedural tasks at once. If you can't write software to do it you hire cheap tech support in Mexico or India and script them. Break them up into teams for each delegate pseudonym and offer compensation based on productivity. |
|
|
|
A lot of grid is wasted during off peak times. Energy is stored or sold in inefficient manners. Instead, they should use any excess energy in mining bitcoins to sell. Rather than raising electric rates, they can increase their customer base. Their price discovery will be the electricity/btc pair. They can choose which will be most profitable. Storage can then be bought by customers for their needs based on rates. This just seems more efficient than being forced to sell to only one market.
Well in a lot of countries like Sweden Smart grids are coming up. So during off peak hours, most of the energy is now stored and not wasted . So it would actually be hard to use that to mine bitcoins .However in some developing countries, the waste still happens , and those might be perfect places to do this. Not sure how welcoming some of the companies would be to the idea, and would be willing to spend money into the mining gear for this. That's great. How do they store it? Customers can also bear the cost of storage. If the power companies focused on generating revenue, maybe they can offer cheaper power. I realize Sweden treats power as a commons and that's fine. This idea doesn't oppose socialism, it shifts the energy storage from centralized to decentralized. Individuals and municipalities can compete for bitcoin or energy, depending what they need. |
|
|
|
well they are right about bitcoin performing bad, but using peak vlaue is not fair, that just a peak it doesn't count, they should focus on the price that the majority said it was going to be unbreakable, like 600-800 range
Day traders think that way. Hodlers think 5 figures or more. |
|
|
|
Apparently Bloomberg is okay with N. Korea, Cuba, Iran, and ISIS money.
Can you elaborate on this more? I don't follow. Just responding to the topic heading. There are many currencies worse that bitcoin. In fact on average bitcoin did far better in 2014 than 2013 so the article is trash and not worth reading, which i didn't. |
|
|
|
i was wandering in the future can bitcoin switch to proof of stake?
This is an obvious troll thread that belongs in alt coins. Bitcoin has never considered any other design. Please move this thread. SlipperySlope started a project to implement PoS in Bitcoin. Looks like he gave up and tries to make his own new coin now: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=584719.0Edit: Actually he didn't give up but is just going another way to make Bitcoin a PoS coin. Super! I wish his project well. |
|
|
|
Managing block size with speed and storage ability of the internet. Transaction costs will average out. I don't think it's unreasonable for the world to be fiber optic in the next decade. We already have it installed in much of the Philippines.
I've not seen any demonstration of 1:1 pegging in any cryptocurrency. They are asking bitcoin core developers to make hooks for other assets, but those hooks can be exploited and add burdens to Bitcoin. If they can do it with multisig, then I say give it a try. The multisig pegged coins can be swapped for hooked coins later if necessary.
Ah, so you're in the camp of "let's solve the scalability issue with increased block size". I respect this opinion and don't really have one on this, but I think it's very crucial to research and test alternatives. Now in the context of Factom: imho, and to my understanding, it should not be used for "critical" information, say for example financial transactions, but it could turn out to be a very nice candidate to extend the system with arbitrary data, in particular, and in the context of meta-coins like Mastercoin, I'm thinking about moving meta-data, such as asset descriptions, which are "nice to have", but not mandatory, off-chain. It's partly that but I have a philosophical problem with Proof of Existence because it's too derivative to be a universal currency. Though that doesn't stop people from making them. |
|
|
|
Battery storage suck. We don't even have decent electric cars. Why should power companies buy expensive wasteful batteries?
batteries lol....you know what a transformer is right? Yes, it converts (transforms) alternating current to either higher voltage with lower current or lower voltage with higher current. It does this through electrical induction between two coils with differing numbers of windings. What does that have to do with the discussion at hand? I think he's right. They use transformer stations to change amperage for long distance transmission on the grid. Still it's not very efficient compared to batteries and bitcoin would be more efficient still. |
|
|
|
What could happen is another consensus layer that gave the right features and supplemented PoW was added to Bitcoin. This may happen in the future.
What if you had a TaPoS layer that had 1-10 second confirmations which worked with the miners where peoples wallets reflected both the ~10 min confirmation and the 1-10 second ones for added security and to allow for on the sidechain transactions to occur while not giving up on PoW security.
I am agnostic on side chains. There's a lot of ways to skin a cat. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is purely logical.
Kool Aid on sale again? Can you disprove the math? Clonecoin and scamcoin: Can you disprove the math? I have nothing against them if you've read my posts. They all have their place. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
