The only thing that could stop bitcoin from world invasion 100 years from now is that some other mind blowing technology is invented that deprecates bitcoin, but i just don't see it happening. Bitcoin is something that only happens every 100's of years, it could take more than a century for a protocol that makes bitcoin absolutely deprecated at every level. All the alternatives will most likely need to do some sort of compromise, if they want to be faster, they will be less secure and so on.
That's what I think is funny about all the large companies using blockchain technology. None of them have realized that in 20-30 years quantum computing will come along and destroy their security. Bitcoin may survive that time but not in its current form. The NSA (people that invented the Secure Hash Algorithm used by Bitcoin) are already claiming that SHA-1 is obsolete and attack vectors (by well funded entities) for every digest of SHA-2 is known for digital signatures. They are now suggesting a move to SHA-3. In 20 years Bitcoin will change drastically or be unsecured. |
|
|
|
I am pleasantly surprised to see folks not biting at rawdog's top form trolling. Nice work all!
That's incredibly hard to do, isn't it? There should be some sort of award or gold star for surviving his threads. LOL |
|
|
|
It's really not that hard to start a panic. A well placed story with a small sell off can start a run especially in Bitcoin. See, that's where you're understanding fails. There's nothing respectable or to be respected in being an early adopter. I know a few of them and have met them in person, face to face. Some of them are clowns and dumbasses. One of them is nothing more than a drug addict. But all of them share one thing in common. They acquired Bitcoin early on. That has everything to do with luck of the draw and nothing to do with respect but you don't understand that. Very few people mined them with a CPU. You should call them founders not early adopters. Your talking about people with an in-depth understanding of cryptography, mathematics, economics and coding that allowed them to see the value of something that was worth nothing at the time.
Well, I sort of agree with you that there may be nothing in being an early adopter to be respected for, but people still tend to respect people with money, even if the money they have got was no more than luck alone or was obtained illegally. Of course, not all people are like this, but in general people would certainly prefer to be friends of those dudes than their enemies. Do the people you described still possess the bitcoins which they acquired early on? Ok, you get it. I agree average individuals respect people with money. For some reason they believe the acquisition of wealth equals intelligence and understanding on a level beyond their abilities. You're right, they absolutely do want to be friends with wealthy people which is inexplicable to me. Every wealthy person I've ever known has been a raging asshole that believes the world owes them something. Maybe they feel some of that understanding will pass to them or maybe they are simply looking for a handout, I don't know. It's impossible to know exactly how many early miners are still holding their bitcoins. I suspect that more than a million btc mined by Satoshi are lost because they have never moved. There has been plenty of bubble spikes that would be awfully tempting to someone with that many btc. At any point he could have cashed out some and bought himself a nice island to retire on. He needed to mine to keep the currency going but perhaps he chose to destroy those early coins believing his invention (his baby) could be killed by a saboteur if they fell into the wrong hands. We could live the rest of our lives only to see those coins never move and not know why. I have spoken to people like Ray Dillinger (original tester of Bitcoin with Hal Finney), BitcoinFX (still active on this forum) and many others that say they spent and didn't keep large quantities of the early mined Bitcoin believing it would never be valued as high as it is now. To many of them it was "magic internet money" that they spent buying a 20,000 btc pizza and donating to faucets to bring new users on board. I still have 20 or so btc that I got from faucets. Can you believe they used to just give whole bitcoins away at faucets? Crazy right? Are the founders of Bitcoin lying and sitting on masses of btc? I don't think so. If you parse the blockchain you will see lots of movement of early coins after the Satoshi coins were mined. That means whoever mined those coins sent them somewhere but was it to another wallet under their control? The truth is we will never really know for sure how much they are holding. I just thought of one other example of how little Bitcoin meant to people back then. Did you know that to become a VIP member of this forum you had to donate 50 btc? At the ATH of Bitcoin that amounts to a $60,000 donation to be a VIP member of an obscure little forum. If that doesn't tell you how stupid rich people are nothing will. ROFL |
|
|
|
I don't know why everyone doesn't just stop worrying about what governments are going to do about Bitcoin and start spending them on everything. More spenders and less hodlers would make Bitcoin so commonplace governments couldn't do anything without ruining part of their economy.
We should worry about these things, and prepare for contingencies when these governments react negatively toward bitcoin. We should create untraceble black markets to provide for alternative commerce in the event where Bitcoin is banned. That is what happened with Prohibition in the USA during 1920 to 1933. The governments will soon realize that they are going to lose a significant amount of tax revenue, when Bitcoin goes underground, and that it would be more beneficial for them just to leave it to prosper and grow. So they can chose between having Bitcoin bootlegging like the old days, or having legitimate busineses that create job opportunities and generate tax income. ^smile^ My point is, we have to stop being the mouse worrying about the lion and become the lion. Only when we become a formidable opponent will the lion think twice about attacking. Increasing the velocity of Bitcoin through spending is the only way to become the lion. |
|
|
|
He's a smart kid.
He is not a smart kid, he is a thief. If he had a decent father, his father would take some time to explain to him why this activity is still theft. "But everyone is doing it" - is the dumbest fucking excuse ever. I guess if MLB wasn't ripping everyone off I'd feel worse. Besides, I'd rather have a rich thief that can pay for his own degree as a son than an unemployed lazy fat punk hanging around my house at 30 yo telling me how superior he is because of his honesty and political stance (I have one of those too). Jeeezus - if ever there was a doubt why the world is so fucked up, there isn't any longer. Teaching your kid to get ahead by fucking his neighbor is just what we need to make this planet a great place. If others adopt you and your son's attitude, then we will all go around cutting in line and cheating and screwing each other. How much fun will that be? Funny how you only see two possibilities: 1) the thief kid, and the 'unemployed lazy fat punk'. What about a decent kid who made a decent living honestly. Have you given up on that possibility? If you have, then it is time for you to stop breeding. You're not an American are you? LOL That possibility hasn't existed in my country in half a century, if not longer. BTW, the MLB doesn't live next door to me. They aren't my neighbor and there are no $30 million dollar a year baseball players living nearby either. All with whom we share the Earth are our neighbors. We should be neighborly to everyone. I mean this in the most loving and neighborly way: You're so full of shit your eyes are brown. ROFL |
|
|
|
Right now, no matter how many mine, the block reward is the same.
Your formula would be difficult to implement and it's not future proof. After the last halving the miners will earn only from tx fees. How will you formula apply then? It won't. Sorry, IMHO it's not a good idea.
No more halving. The reward of bitcoins would be dynamic and thus the cap of 21 million would be lifted. Many people argue that what gives Bitcoin its value is scarcity. If you make bitcoins cap we're removed it would lose that benefit. You're system would also need a cap at some point to eliminate the infinite supply concept. Even governments use manipulation of the supply of money to control inflation and deflation. Your system would be continuously inflationary. If the adoption of bitcoin is not rapid enough, there won't be enough transaction fees to pay for the miner's electricity. But if it's too rapid, there won't be enough bitcoins for everyone (with the current system). With my system, miners continue to earn bitcoins in perpetuity and more mining is encouraged and a growth that is too rapid is not a problem since the introduction of new bitcoins will be proportional to the growth. Inflation is bad, but generally if it's less than 2% it's not a problem. The formula could be tweaked to achieve less than 2% inflation. Which even in an infinite time frame would be OK. Bitcoin at it's inception had a 100% inflation ratio! The current inflation rate of bitcoin is about 4%/year, which is a bit high. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt believing your understanding of how Bitcoin works is limited. Yes, there could be a scenario where Bitcoin will not have enough continuous transactions to provide the overwhelming profit miners saw in the beginning. I'm not sure overwhelming profit is necessary to keep some people mining. Businesses, for example, that are making their living selling unique products for Bitcoin or are otherwise tied to Bitcoin may choose to mine for free or at a loss. Bitcoin is divisible enough for everyone in the world to use it. There are 2.1 quadrillion units in Bitcoin. While that's not an infinite supply it should be enough to spread around 7 billion people. In roughly seven years Bitcoin will be down to a 3btc block reward and mostly all mined into existence. There will be almost no inflation as no new money will be added to the money supply. The only benefit you see from an increased mining reward is your ability to collect coins at a faster rate than you can now. The problem with that theory is that all of the extra coins you collect will be worth less than the few you can collect now because of the increase in the money supply. Essentially, you will end up right back where you started. |
|
|
|
Yes, you hit it right where it hurts. In my view, we can count as whales, or super-whales, the first thousand or hundred top Bitcoin holders. We can do basically the same with regard to whales among early adopters. Because their number will be much lower than the number of simple whales for obvious reasons, we should count only the first hundred of them.
Satoshi is gone and not spending any of his. So you can rule him out. Many of the early miners wasted their coins buying shit like 20,000 coin pizzas, Allinvane had his stolen, tons of the early miners lost them at MtGox and so on. I think there's way, way less than 100 early adopters that still have 20,000 coins or more. Your using "early adopter" interchangeably with "whale" and those aren't the same. The Winklevoss twins have mountains of Bitcoin but you wouldn't consider them early adopters. They could sell half of their stash and crash the price to a penny. I've been mining and buying for six years and even I could probably move the price $100 alone when I sell all.Therefore you come to think that you are a big whale still even if you don't quite count as an early adopter? Of course, I can't ask you how much you have just because you wont't tell anyway, but if you don't mind, how high do you place yourself among top Bitcoin holders today, in the first thousand or in the first hundred? Is it like a pissing contest to you? Of course it's a pissing contest to me. I worked hard mining both Bitcoin and altcoins, trading and buying to accrue as much btc as I have. You consider the first thousand users early adopters but what you possibly don't know is the first users were cycling a few Bitcoin through dark markets as drug tokens. They were doing what people today don't do and spending their Bitcoin because it wasn't about holding back then. You could consider the first 20-50 thousand users early adopters. A large group of those lost almost all their btc to scammers like Patrick Harnett, Trendon Shavers, Zhou Tong, Mark Karpeles and others. You could consider the first 100 thousand users early adopters because they started buying Bitcoin and mining at a time of really bad press when few people with a brain would even touch something as risky and tainted as Bitcoin. The reality is more like the first million or two users are early adopters because when people finally stop holding and start spending Bitcoin there will be billions of users. I survived through all of the early losses and kept acquiring btc. I'm in the group of the first million users so I am an early adopter but I'm no where near a whale. Roger Ver is a whale, the Winklevoss twins are whales and either of them could dump the Bitcoin market to nothing if they chose to. But they wouldn't because they have too much invested to lose. Well... So you don't want to be officially considered a whale even though you alone can make the price drop 100 dollars, as per your own words. At the same time, you obviously wish to be respected as an early adopter even though you started mining bitcoins when it was no longer profitable to mine them using a cpu.  It's really not that hard to start a panic. A well placed story with a small sell off can start a run especially in Bitcoin. See, that's where you're understanding fails. There's nothing respectable or to be respected in being an early adopter. I know a few of them and have met them in person, face to face. Some of them are clowns and dumbasses. One of them is nothing more than a drug addict. But all of them share one thing in common. They acquired Bitcoin early on. That has everything to do with luck of the draw and nothing to do with respect but you don't understand that. Very few people mined them with a CPU. You should call them founders not early adopters. Your talking about people with an in-depth understanding of cryptography, mathematics, economics and coding that allowed them to see the value of something that was worth nothing at the time. |
|
|
|
He's a smart kid.
He is not a smart kid, he is a thief. If he had a decent father, his father would take some time to explain to him why this activity is still theft. "But everyone is doing it" - is the dumbest fucking excuse ever. I guess if MLB wasn't ripping everyone off I'd feel worse. Besides, I'd rather have a rich thief that can pay for his own degree as a son than an unemployed lazy fat punk hanging around my house at 30 yo telling me how superior he is because of his honesty and political stance (I have one of those too). Jeeezus - if ever there was a doubt why the world is so fucked up, there isn't any longer. Teaching your kid to get ahead by fucking his neighbor is just what we need to make this planet a great place. If others adopt you and your son's attitude, then we will all go around cutting in line and cheating and screwing each other. How much fun will that be? Funny how you only see two possibilities: 1) the thief kid, and the 'unemployed lazy fat punk'. What about a decent kid who made a decent living honestly. Have you given up on that possibility? If you have, then it is time for you to stop breeding. You're not an American are you? LOL That possibility hasn't existed in my country in half a century, if not longer. BTW, the MLB doesn't live next door to me. They aren't my neighbor and there are no $30 million dollar a year baseball players living nearby either. |
|
|
|
Right now, no matter how many mine, the block reward is the same.
Your formula would be difficult to implement and it's not future proof. After the last halving the miners will earn only from tx fees. How will you formula apply then? It won't. Sorry, IMHO it's not a good idea.
No more halving. The reward of bitcoins would be dynamic and thus the cap of 21 million would be lifted. Many people argue that what gives Bitcoin its value is scarcity. If you remove bitcoins cap it would lose that benefit. You're system would also need a cap at some point to eliminate the infinite supply concept. Even governments use manipulation of the supply of money to control inflation and deflation. Your system would be continuously inflationary. |
|
|
|
|
Mining reward isn't for mining profit. It's a system to start a new coin and allow it to build up a user base so that transaction fees can take over as the method of payment for mining. You're system would be useful if Bitcoin were never expected to grow enough fast enough for fees to take over mining incentive.
|
|
|
|
He's a smart kid.
He is not a smart kid, he is a thief. If he had a decent father, his father would take some time to explain to him why this activity is still theft. "But everyone is doing it" - is the dumbest fucking excuse ever. I guess if MLB wasn't ripping everyone off I'd feel worse. Besides, I'd rather have a rich thief that can pay for his own degree as a son than an unemployed lazy fat punk hanging around my house at 30 yo telling me how superior he is because of his honesty and political stance (I have one of those too). |
|
|
|
|
I don't know why everyone doesn't just stop worrying about what governments are going to do about Bitcoin and start spending them on everything. More spenders and less hodlers would make Bitcoin so commonplace governments couldn't do anything without ruining part of their economy.
|
|
|
|
That is a very chinese way for them. They don't follow international law and then do what ever they want. They can copy or steal other inventions without them facing any legal obstacle.
LOL You have a point here as they are known for it. A friend of mine says that you will bring your sample of product to china and they can reproduced it copying and stealing the ideas but of course they quality not the same. But maybe there are other good Chinese. I think some of the Chinese products are better than any other I've found. Considering how cheap they are they are definitely more useable. Chinese LED lighting in all forms are better and so are non electronic items like stuffed animals, baseball caps and clothes. I helped my kid order a batch of 500 baseball caps with SF Giants printed on them from a Chinese manufacturer at $1.75 each. They looked good and had good stitching. Sure they were a little lighter than some caps but he sold them on third street in front of AT&T park for $20 each when every other stand was getting $25-$40. He made almost $9k in three weeks and put it down on a new car. LOL! I thought only the Chinese were lying thieving bastards with no respect for intellectual property. As it turns out, you taught your son to do it like that too! SF Giants hats are the intellectual property of MLB. Those stands suffer on every hat he sold because they all pay a high license fee that your son didn't. Taking a gun to man at the stand is the same thing (even though somehow it feels a little worse). Oh well, welcome to the business world. Everyone is ripping off the man. Some how I doubt the stands inside the park suffered very much. I'm sure they sold enough $10 pencils to stay alive. Think of it this way, he allowed the poor man to have some team spirit too. LOL For the record, I didn't teach him. He asked me for help, it was his idea. He's a smart kid. You wouldn't believe his next adventure. I don't know where he comes up with this shit. I think he just sees the stupidity of the American consumer and runs with it. ROFL I've had season tickets for years and, I admit, I've scalped a few for 10 times their value. |
|
|
|
That is a very chinese way for them. They don't follow international law and then do what ever they want. They can copy or steal other inventions without them facing any legal obstacle.
LOL You have a point here as they are known for it. A friend of mine says that you will bring your sample of product to china and they can reproduced it copying and stealing the ideas but of course they quality not the same. But maybe there are other good Chinese. I think some of the Chinese products are better than any other I've found. Considering how cheap they are they are definitely more useable. Chinese LED lighting in all forms are better and so are non electronic items like stuffed animals, baseball caps and clothes. I helped my kid order a batch of 500 baseball caps with SF Giants printed on them from a Chinese manufacturer at $1.75 each. They looked good and had good stitching. Sure they were a little lighter than some caps but he sold them on third street in front of AT&T park for $20 each when every other stand was getting $25-$40. He made almost $9k in three weeks and put it down on a new car. |
|
|
|
Yes, you hit it right where it hurts. In my view, we can count as whales, or super-whales, the first thousand or hundred top Bitcoin holders. We can do basically the same with regard to whales among early adopters. Because their number will be much lower than the number of simple whales for obvious reasons, we should count only the first hundred of them.
Satoshi is gone and not spending any of his. So you can rule him out. Many of the early miners wasted their coins buying shit like 20,000 coin pizzas, Allinvane had his stolen, tons of the early miners lost them at MtGox and so on. I think there's way, way less than 100 early adopters that still have 20,000 coins or more. Your using "early adopter" interchangeably with "whale" and those aren't the same. The Winklevoss twins have mountains of Bitcoin but you wouldn't consider them early adopters. They could sell half of their stash and crash the price to a penny. I've been mining and buying for six years and even I could probably move the price $100 alone when I sell all.Therefore you come to think that you are a big whale still even if you don't quite count as an early adopter? Of course, I can't ask you how much you have just because you wont't tell anyway, but if you don't mind, how high do you place yourself among top Bitcoin holders today, in the first thousand or in the first hundred? Is it like a pissing contest to you? Of course it's a pissing contest to me. I worked hard mining both Bitcoin and altcoins, trading and buying to accrue as much btc as I have. You consider the first thousand users early adopters but what you possibly don't know is the first users were cycling a few Bitcoin through dark markets as drug tokens. They were doing what people today don't do and spending their Bitcoin because it wasn't about holding back then. You could consider the first 20-50 thousand users early adopters. A large group of those lost almost all their btc to scammers like Patrick Harnett, Trendon Shavers, Zhou Tong, Mark Karpeles and others. You could consider the first 100 thousand users early adopters because they started buying Bitcoin and mining at a time of really bad press when few people with a brain would even touch something as risky and tainted as Bitcoin. The reality is more like the first million or two users are early adopters because when people finally stop holding and start spending Bitcoin there will be billions of users. I survived through all of the early losses and kept acquiring btc. I'm in the group of the first million users so I am an early adopter but I'm no where near a whale. Roger Ver is a whale, the Winklevoss twins are whales and either of them could dump the Bitcoin market to nothing if they chose to. But they wouldn't because they have too much invested to lose. |
|
|
|
I think the "fashionable" answer to this nowadays would be "they're going to try and build their own blockchain and coin"  They have to do something, because the current system is failing on a massive scale globally. I think Denmark will be the first country to develop their own digital currency and then the other countries will follow their lead. The signs are already there that they are turning against the use of cash. We will see a clear division between <Private Blockchains> and < Public Blockchains > by the end of 2017. The difference will make it easier for governments to regulate Crypto Currency in the future. ^mark my words^ That makes perfect sense. What better way to have full control of their citizens. Fully traceable currency will allow them to track every aspect of someone's life. Every like and dislike is revealed by what we purchase. Paper currency allows some of that to be hidden. It can eliminate vice crimes completely as people are caught and jailed for crimes based on the blockchain data. |
|
|
|
Federal Reserve They say I'm supposed to worry about you Bitcoin 
|
|
|
|
This guy is weird to say the least. He is the tinfoil hat type of guy, with a bunch of conspiracy theories to make things interresting. When people start talking about Hilary and her body double and her being missing, then the red flag for coocooness goes up for me. He talks about Bitcoin and the price going up and down when there is polital instability, which is normal. The price of Bitcoin are being influenced by political instability, and so is any other commodity that are used for a Safe haven.
Listen to him talking about Space Aliens and Space Goat farts and tell me that he is Satoshi Nakamoto. Seriously?
Holy shit! Do mean Space Goat farts are real? Whoa, dude that's soooo cool. LOL |
|
|
|
That's the big joke surrounding all the discussions of a government taking over mining to destroy Bitcoin. Why set up all that equipment and operate it when they could simply contact a few private owners, threaten them and buy huge stashes of Bitcoin off book. Then they follow the above procedure to keep the exchange rate dumped. Bitcoin has almost no real economy right now. Remove trading from the picture and Bitcoin will be valueless. Oh sure, there are a handful of people that would use it like trading cards. Hell, I'm sure their are a handful of people still using Commodore 64 consoles too but I don't think they're ever making a comeback.
That's what I'm talking about myself Without real economy behind Bitcoin, it will always remain in the power of whales like Satoshi himself and his caliber (well, may be somewhat smaller than him). The real Bitcoin economy would work as a safety cushion against Bitcoin whales if they choose to deliberately dump their coins or the government goes after them taking their coins and dumping them. If such an economy should emerge and expand, then even 1M bitcoins of Satoshi won't change anything. Prices will just readjust, very much like they do when fiat money supply expands I believe to start a strong economy behind Bitcoin with many investors (not holding, passive income, traders investors, but those who can build their projects, pay their employees, accept payment method, all in BTCs), the Bitcoin price must stable first. Nobody starts a concrete business with a very volatile currency, it's dangerous for them, and maybe they can have losses in the middle of process I'm very skeptical myself about Bitcoin ever becoming stable If we are not talking about stabilizing at ground zero, of course. If governments continue to do stupid things like Cyprus hair-cut (which is almost a given), we should eventually see more people using Bitcoin. But that would mean higher prices, while with higher prices the volatility will rise too. And not just in the form of day-to-day price changes (these may actually decrease), but rather abrupt price swings in the range of dozen percentages due to markets becoming thin, i.e. more bitcoins will be stashed and less traded The currency must arouse more interest on them first, and it will happen when Bitcoin stop being a speculative coin to become a stable currency by itself. But looks it won't happen so fast... I think while there are BTCs to be mined, the price will continue changing fast and everytime With fiat money sticking around it may never happen I doubt true stability can ever be achieved without the benefit of government monetary policy. Government fiat is carefully balanced against a closed economy where inflation and deflation can be regulated by adjusting the money supply (along with other metrics like interest rates). Bitcoin's greatest feature and worst nightmare is the absence of supervisory control. Mark Karpeles used trading bots to manipulate the price and bounced it over $1,200. If a single exchange can do that Bitcoin is anything but stable. Chinese exchanges might be doing it again right now. |
|
|
|
RawDog look like he have rabies! I will not eat you! Smile more, then its possible.
Thanks brother! I am glad you won't eat me. Is your real name really "Chew Cock"? That wouldn't go so well in the US. A fellow could get some strange responses. I recommend avoiding the Ozarks for example. It was Chew N Kok, but people no take me serious! Now I just Chew Kok. People here respect that. Suk n Kok would be better. Chew N Kok sounds a bit painful. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
