There seems to be some intention in this article to neutralize some of the pumpy and hype of Ethereum, DAO and to kind of equate "Blockchains"... In other words, it seems to fail to recognize a true superiority of bitcoin and the fact that a lot of alts and a lot of private "blockchains" are engaging in deceptive practices because they are trying to ride on the coattails of bitcoin while failing and refusing to either give bitcoin proper credit nor to couple their investments into the bitcoin ecosystem. Bitcoin is very likely to win out in the end, even while some of these folks seem to engage in false equivalencies and distractions.... at the same time, on a positive note, likely various bitcoin developers can likely learn from some of the "innovations" to the extent that there are any that materially matter of various competing blockchains. I'm not that kind of person who is happy at other's failures and disasters, but I'm happy for what we are in and believe at is making out (Bitcoin and devs I mean). It made me sad, and I think you've witnessed this yesterday, when the wall observer thread turned into a battlefield like the one between r/bitcoin and r/btc on reddit. The time have came again, to thank the devs for what they are making for us, most of us became and become millionaires or simply rich. because of them. There are a lot of folks contributing to bitcoin space, and we all know that bitcoin is intended to be trustless. Sure, there are likely a lot of core devs that stepped up to the plate to prevent various kinds of sabotoging of bitcoin, but in the end, it is not just a system of core devs.. at least, I don't think of it that way... even though sometimes I am also grateful when I see some of them standing up and pointing out some of the flawed proposals that were recently presented to the bitcoin community, including several of the flaws, incompleteness and destructiveness of the XT and Classic proposals. I agree with you that the ecosystem is not only about the devs, we have the believers, avg. joe, startups, speculators, ... etc. But what happened today, tells me that we really must thank the devs a lot. Actually, yep... various folks also wear combination of hats, and may be acting in one capacity in time 1 and another capacity in time 2, and some of these folks may be benevolent and/or honest and other are tricky... but in the end, bitcoin is supposed to be relatively trustless system, though we cannot completely get away from trust - especially because there are also various centralized systems that are built on top of bitcoin that may require some trust, even though bitcoin itself does not require trust (at least that's the theory).. I also think that sometimes, this mechanism to attempt to get protocol changes that makes it very difficult for devs to agree on the causes advantages bitcoin by not allowing changes unless is an overwhelming large number of folks in agreement... so we kind of get stuck with the original design of bitcoin and modest changes to bitcoin and truly vetted changes.. Which is all fine and dandy, so long as the original design is not broken. Regarding what happened today? Do you mean what happened to day in respect to the hacking of the DAO, or something else? I agree with the second paragraph (along with what you said as well for sure), since consensus is a must, this makes me ultra comfortable that we will most of the time if not always have the right decision. I meant with what happened in the Wall Observer thread, the fight between core and classic, as always :\ Love all the informative updates. Keep em coming and thanks!
I will if Allah (God) wanted my friend, you are most welcome and happy to see you passing by  |
|
|
|
Thanks again Raize, thank you I found what you said is really well said and perfectly matches with the way we've to think with. What I want to say is, being extremely conservative, from my humble point of view, is extremely great as you will always be ready for the worst expectations, and since we are talking in numbers here, so it's $10K in Dec. 17 and $60K in 2020/2021, and I KNOW, it's guesses and speculation. Don't worry, for me at least, I'm an investor, not a seasoned or day trader. I didn't look into the turtle strategy yet, but what I think it's about is, to go slow and steady better to go fast and be non-sustainable. If you don't mind, I want to ask you two more questions : 1. I don't know if I've stated this before for you or not, as you may know, the money in circulation in China deposits (I think) is $22 trillion and our market cap is $12 billion, and I highly guess you are aware that China is in love with Bitcoin, so don't you think that we will say at least like $1 trillion moving into Bitcoin, or lets say $500K billion as also China is addicted to gamble on things that get them high returns and don't forget the network effect, what you think ? We didn't talk about China much in our talking. 2. Since you are aware about PwC and Blockstream, they somehow have influence on Core and I've read a medium article that somehow they could benefit us (in terms of price), so in the light of this, what do you think about this ( http://bravenewcoin.com/news/bank-of-england-and-pricewaterhousecoopers-partner-to-explore-putting-fiat-currency-on-a-blockchain/) ? Thank you buddy and waiting to hear from you as always, ASAP On the other hand, my friend, hacknoid, congrats. on achieving $1,000 CAD, my timing was bad I know   , but I knew that we would get there  Edit 1 : Dear Raize, what you think about this and about Vinny in general ?  |
|
|
|
|
IMHO, you will have both.
|
|
|
|
Thanks again Raize for taking the time and the effort to write such a very long and detailed reply. If you don't mind, I would like to take the discussion a bit into the "price" route. In the middle of what you've typed and I can infer from what you type and how you think that you are not that type of person who just write any shit, even if giving out an example. Of course, then that puts a yearly increase from a basis of $1500 to over $300k, which seems silly right now. Since you've said $300K and William Mook ( https://ihb.io/2014-05-01/news/rockets-scientist-william-mooks-700000-bitcoin-price-target-5818) said $700K and others said $1M. What let you say $300K, is that your "non-conservative" target ? If not, what is it ? And, what do you think about the above 3 numbers please ? Thank you my friend and waiting to hear from you. Thank you again hacknoid although I feel pity for you that I didn't see $1,000 CAD yet on BitcoinWisdom (although you've touched it somehow) |
|
|
|
There seems to be some intention in this article to neutralize some of the pumpy and hype of Ethereum, DAO and to kind of equate "Blockchains"... In other words, it seems to fail to recognize a true superiority of bitcoin and the fact that a lot of alts and a lot of private "blockchains" are engaging in deceptive practices because they are trying to ride on the coattails of bitcoin while failing and refusing to either give bitcoin proper credit nor to couple their investments into the bitcoin ecosystem. Bitcoin is very likely to win out in the end, even while some of these folks seem to engage in false equivalencies and distractions.... at the same time, on a positive note, likely various bitcoin developers can likely learn from some of the "innovations" to the extent that there are any that materially matter of various competing blockchains. I'm not that kind of person who is happy at other's failures and disasters, but I'm happy for what we are in and believe at is making out (Bitcoin and devs I mean). It made me sad, and I think you've witnessed this yesterday, when the wall observer thread turned into a battlefield like the one between r/bitcoin and r/btc on reddit. The time have came again, to thank the devs for what they are making for us, most of us became and become millionaires or simply rich. because of them. There are a lot of folks contributing to bitcoin space, and we all know that bitcoin is intended to be trustless. Sure, there are likely a lot of core devs that stepped up to the plate to prevent various kinds of sabotoging of bitcoin, but in the end, it is not just a system of core devs.. at least, I don't think of it that way... even though sometimes I am also grateful when I see some of them standing up and pointing out some of the flawed proposals that were recently presented to the bitcoin community, including several of the flaws, incompleteness and destructiveness of the XT and Classic proposals. I agree with you that the ecosystem is not only about the devs, we have the believers, avg. joe, startups, speculators, ... etc. But what happened today, tells me that we really must thank the devs a lot. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
