MPOE claimed astronomical odds of superiority, thus the way to prove his confidence is to bet with those odds, not a 50-50% outcome. He isn't claiming 50-50% odds. He is claiming I am just one in a line of "Derps" who have no chance.

"Derp" implies I guess I am 1 of the 1000s on this forum or millions of masses. I would love to take a bet with him where he puts up 1000X more capital than I do. But I know he won't put his money where his mouth is.

I caught him talking shit and called him out mathematically. This is the way to shut up talkers.

I will not accept a bet that gives me his tainted BTC funds when I win the bet, because I am a US citizen and these funds would not only be subject to confiscation, this could also get me in serious trouble.

Also for him to prove funds are not tainted is going to reveal a lot about the solvency of his operation. He surely won't dare go there.

I guess you are the only reader here, who is slow-minded enough that I had to spell that out for you. It was clearly implied already from what I wrote before.

The coinbase transaction sends you coins from the network, so this must be reported as income.

When you dispose the coins, you must report capital gains (or loss).

The masses use sites such as Coinbase and Mt.Gox. That is not decentralized.

In order to get instant transactions, chargebacks, consumer protection, etc. they will choose to pay from something like coinbase and Bitcoin the block chain will eventually be irrelevant.

Also the block chain is not decentralized. It is controlled by a few pools, and a very tiny % of the world's population who own most of the ASICs.

How much more absolute BS can you 'tards spew?

And when you are proven wrong cocky mofo, then what say will you?

You talk but you have no clue about the details. I do.

You will soon be cast off my lawn.

Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and not particularly interesting to look at a man's ahole. Rather a very few of us have the technical ability to understand what is really going on. All of you think you have have some technical ability, but you are deluded.


It isn't just inflation. Rather it is giving the masses all the features they want such as instant transactions, centralized exchanges (i.e. fractional reserves just like Mt.Gox where you trade "Bitcoin" but nothing trades on the block chain thus it isn't limited to 21 million coines), chargebacks, consumer protection (so people can always get their money back when stolen, etc).

Bitcoin has no defense against the masses and what the masses want.

Your silly idealism won't stand.

There is a possible solution, but you wouldn't want to hear it, so go on.

Nothing worth talking to here. Just more of the same idiots that make the system work the way it does.

Example of philosophy of whom I admire and the genre of generative essence insight we share. You should recognize him as the co-author of the selfish mining attack which shows mathematically that Satoshi's proof-of-work is vulnerable to attack by a pool possessing only 25% of the hash rate.

I see we come from nearly the same generation as I started on the TRS-80 in 1978 at age 13 and obtained a Commodore 64 at age 18. Other than the difference in age of obtaining a C-64 I could have written the following word-for-word about myself.


Probably add Linus Torvalds, although I'm paled as an ant compared to him as a do-er although I reckon this load prevents him from making some genre of generative essence insights. You can add the higher IQ Eric S. Raymond as my elder, although we appear to have somewhat conflicting generational outlook of the introspective kind.

Control 50+% of miners, you can blacklist coins. True or false and why?

If the majority agree with that blacklisting (of illegal activity and theft of their coins), then the argument that it would cause the ecosystem to die is incorrect. Rather it would facilitate adoption by the masses.


The masses use sites such as Coinbase and Mt.Gox. That is not decentralized.

In order to get instant transactions, chargebacks, consumer protection, etc. they will choose to pay from something like coinbase and Bitcoin the block chain will eventually be irrelevant.

Also the block chain is not decentralized. It is controlled by a few pools, and a very tiny % of the world's population who own most of the ASICs.

Control 50+% of miners, you can blacklist coins. True or false and why?

If the majority agree with that blacklisting (of illegal activity and theft of their coins), then the argument that it would cause the ecosystem to die is incorrect. Rather it would facilitate adoption by the masses.

There is so much dick in the Bitcoin space, I can almost taste it am afraid to swallow.  

How much would like to wager big mouth? What odds do you offer for this wager?

Certainly you understand that in very unlikely odds, I put up much less than the person who bets on the very likely odds.

Come on, don't shut up now.

P.S. I will require fiat bet and proven to not originate from your tainted funds.

Add:

Hopefully you deduced the implied point that if you can't make a falsifiable statement, then a wager is not possible and thus your statement is untestable.

Those who confuse superstition with exquisitely researched facts have lost rationality.

Deleting words from what I wrote is a sign of desperation.

MP is masturbating because Bitcoin doesn't have anonymity. Yet I repeat myself from upthread.

And MP if you think you are the most significant innovator in this space, get prepared to unexpectedly kneel.

You will soon be reminded that this space is fundamentally driven by technologists/technology, not Romanian Wallstreet wannabees.

Citation please?

And how do you know it isn't me?

No. The real risk is the government can regulate those 5 miners and force them to blacklist tainted coins, i.e. coins not associated with paying taxes and other criminal activity.

Now for a dose of reality on those illogical $million price projections for Bitcoin...


Logistic S-curve adoption.

But the breadth of adoption depends on the utility of the technology.

Smart phones and toilet paper are technologies just about everyone needs (note I don't use the latter).

Unless Bitcoin will be morphed via offchain reserves to correct glaring weaknesses in its technological design, then it can not and will not appeal to most of the population.

If you are not factoring that into your FA analysis, then your FA is flawed.

First of all Bitcoin (as it currently stands unless morphed as I say above) will be limited to reasonably affluent, white males mostly under age 50. Thus figure the upper limit of adoption is several hundred million. Note NE Asians are white.

So we may already be at that adoption "chasm" you mentioned, or it will come on the next run up and peak in price.


Assuming the stock is rigid and hasn't morphed into an offchain reserves coin.


And so Bitcoin's value will not approach fiat for general commerce without being so morphed.

Given the above argument, you can see why a dip below $300 is psychologically important. We ain't going to da moon, so a lower entry price builds enthusiasm and bullish resolve.


P.S. White is a factor because browner people are too busy enjoying the outdoor and natural life. The white males are stuck inside with winter and find indoor male hobbies. Females in general aren't going to adopt anything that is not super easy, not threatening, available in pink, and lovingly accepted by their peers.

Add:

Andreas M. Antonopoulos claims in the developing world Bitcoin is approached by a different class. However if as it appears be he is referring to his experiences in South America, there is a huge influx of former European immigrants there.

creekbore, you expected Larry Page and Sergey Brin to be hanging around in Yahoo back in the late 1990s too.

I don't need to win any political contest. We share information here. What you do with it, is your own.