Will feel great when investment bankers start pumping.
unless banker think like warren buffet and regard ripple as a blank cheque. (u dont pump on blank cheque right ?) First, I admit to understanding very little of what you said. Second, why not? Buffett: “It’s a mirage basically, it’s a method of transmitting money, it’s a very effective way of transmitting money and you can do it anonymously and all that… a check is a way of transmitting money, too. Are checks worth a whole lot of money?” Will there only ever be 21 million checks? Exactly. Buffett doesn't need to worry about the new technologies because he's mature and mature-means-old-and-old-means-dead. |
|
|
|
After going through that series you will realize that their answers will be nothing but objectivist philosi-babble. Crypto-currencies are a social experiment and deserve the rigors of the experimental process. If this roundtable is any sort of scientific peer review, then there should be tl:dr abstracts available for public viewing. For Gods sake, even if it's just a formal meeting, at least have a secretary and take minutes! No trolling. I actually wrote something much more scathing, but I will just laugh it off to myself. I'm sorry, but this isn't an Ayn Rand discussion, it's about technology. |
|
|
|
Maybe you could address directly what it is that I have wrong....
Not with the time constraints I'm under right now. Maybe by the time part 6 of that series is finished you'll have your answer. Even better, email Daniel about joining the Hangout so that you can ask questions directly. After going through that series you will realize that their answers will be nothing but objectivist philosi-babble. Crypto-currencies are a social experiment and deserve the rigors of the experimental process. If this roundtable is any sort of scientific peer review, then there should be tl:dr abstracts available for public viewing. For Gods sake, even if it's just a formal meeting, at least have a secretary and take minutes! |
|
|
|
A 1:1 pegged sidecoin. Let say it is pegged in such a way that all bitcoins can be moved to scBTC (or none). There will always be a difference in value, due to the different qualities of the two coins. We have discussed the possibility of higher value, in which case all bitcoins will be converted, effectively it becomes an altcoin that takes over.
My opinion is a sxBTC value would not increase without first seeing a correlated increase in BTC. The reason for this is the sidechain in question is an additional value proposition to the use of Bitcoin itself and so the increase in price of the sidechain unit will be caused by an increase in the demand for Bitcoin because of the new feature provided by this sidechain. As you have stated, the sidechain is only applicable to certain areas of transactions whereas Bitcoin covers them all. The logic is : no one is gonna buy some sxBTC on the open market just to be able to do faster or private transactions. They are going to buy BTC and then use some to store wealth, some to transact privately, some for faster confirmations. I agree that side chain fungibility depends on its it's 2-way pegging to Bitcoin, but there can never be perfect 2-way pegging. There will be a penalty for the convenience of using the sxBTC. The side chains won't be a store of value any more than a line of credit is savings. |
|
|
|
|
In principle, counterparty is a side chain because it is parasitic to Bitcoin. The parasitic nature keeps it from being peggable with Bitcoin. It also makes it more flexible with how experimental it can become knowing that you are throwing away bitcoins as a risk for greater rewards. It destroys bitcoins, but the law of diminishing returns would prevent counterparty clones from completely killing its host Bitcoin because they would require less and less bitcoins as bitcoins grow in value.
|
|
|
|
Guy got 259 upvotes for my updated bubble graph and didn't even credit MrPiggles
You forgot to watermark it. |
|
|
|
In order to believe in "post scarcity," you must believe that in the future, all technological progress and innovation will stop. Otherwise technological progress that makes things less scarce will only open up our resources and time to create ever more complex technology and inventions, which will in turn be scarce until we figure out how to make them more efficient.
I am willing to entertain the possibility that at some point technological progress may in fact stop. Eventually there are laws of physics that constrain what can exist and what can be made out of the 90-odd stable atoms. Once you climb to the end of THAT curve, and gain control of all the matter and energy you want, it's hard to understand what else may be done. But, at that point we're also talking about immortal post-human entities having no recognizable resemblance to ourselves, living in Dyson spheres made of computronium and using computers the mass of Jupiter. We're talking about beings who can send their encoded consciousnesses riding laser beams around the galaxy and have new bodies built at the destination, or exist simultaneously in many different bodies, light-years apart, and reintegrate their consciousness into a single coherent (though not necessarily to us today) experiential reality at some later time in some other place, or custom design and fabricate (and at will, become) new biological lifeforms. What "post-scarcity" looks like is difficult for us to imagine or understand. We are still a "species" instead of having whatever biology (or lack thereof) we decide we want. We have DNA, instincts, desires, and abilities which are still influenced by biological evolution, and by the time we hit post-scarcity (if in fact post-scarcity is a thing that can happen) that will no longer be the case. Why do you have to make it so hard to understand? Do you charge your children for their meals because food is scarce? The term scarcity doesn't mean finite. It means not enough to go around to meet basic needs. It's about need, not greed. It's a choice, not an equation. |
|
|
|
It took decades for people to figure out how to harness the power of Uranium. Now we have thousands of bombs aimed to kill us all a hundred times over... all in the name of peace. Bitcoin will replace those bombs by keeping the reins of power bridled.
It will cure cancer, and ward off evis spirits too. At the very least a few trolls. |
|
|
|
Who protects people from the lawgivers? Police seizure laws, government overreach, overambitious regulators, to name a few. Why not to vote for another persons on elections? Few if any of them are elected. Most of them are appointed bureaucrats with tenure. Besides, it's actually legal for government to take your property without due process. It's a civil matter and requires you to sue at your expense or just protect yourself to begin with by keeping some of your wealth out of their reach. |
|
|
|
Yikes! Is Tony Obi-Wan or Anakin? |
|
|
|
This never happens elsewhere, right? This happens everywhere and everytime. But the offline communities have a laws and rules to protect people and punish dishonest persons. Bitcoin onlline community does not protect a person from an attacker. Who protects people from the lawgivers? Police seizure laws, government overreach, overambitious regulators, to name a few. |
|
|
|
I see that there is some really strong support at $0, no way we go under that...  Trust me, someone will try to make a debt based coin, and someone else will buy it. Oh wait, Ripple. |
|
|
|
Actually, in the above gvt attack scenario, arb bots help funnel BTC to scBTC faster thus increasing the speed at which the SC gains dominance.
Speaking of government attack scenarios, BitPay just hired Emperor Palpatine:  this guy is a trojan horse and doesn't even know it  I doubt we hear anything from him. That's what scare me. |
|
|
|
The government just need to force some of the giant miner in US to group up for 51% attack and its done..
What exactly would happen if they did this? 1-3 double spends? The ability to prevent a few transactions from being propagated, temporarily? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWTQgmCuiCwI love it. Government IT competency: www.healthcare.gov |
|
|
|
|
Coinbase only accepts Visa credit cards. Don't apply for a new Mastercard or you will have to hit your credit twice.
|
|
|
|
|
I still have orders to go in under 300. Pray for the best, expect the worst.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin more important than kids? All wars are bankers wars and it looks like they're aiming for another big one. Kids don't conform to the expected 250lbs+ plus $3k+ of designer labels compared with kids sent to die in another war about power and deception.
Babies, puppies, and rainbows, that's what Bitcoin is made for. Finally someone that gets it. Save people, save the environment, save the future. Or keep drinking the coolaid and pretend Saddam had WMDs, Afghanistans opium production was stopped and all the other BS excuses used to justify theft with violence. Most folks looking at Bitcoin don't get just how important it is, if its not one set of power hungry bastards using rigged economies as means of control then it will be another and when the house of cards collapses lives become the currency on the bottom line, happens every time. Ironic that Bitcoin could actually hasten another war instead of preventing it though, the crypto genies out of the bottle and central banking is on an evolutionary dead end. The only sure way of putting the genie back in the bottle is blocking global communications and the only justifiable (lol) way of doing that... It took decades for people to figure out how to harness the power of Uranium. Now we have thousands of bombs aimed to kill us all a hundred times over... all in the name of peace. Bitcoin will replace those bombs by keeping the reins of power bridled. Money is not a weapon of warmongers. |
|
|
|
This is a good thing. It shows that gaming the system doesn't always work because there are always bigger fish than you. That's why Proof of Work doesn't need to be decentralized, it just needs to be competitive and vulnerable to outside incursions.
It depends how you see things. Yes, the competition should make it stronger but I believe that the centralization make the network much weaker because it create a central point of attack or corruption. Once 80% of the network is owned by one ASIC farm, you can take it down or bribe them. Or you can build a bigger farm. |
|
|
|
Choose the moon!
By the end of this decade, Bitcoin will be on the moon! You can quote me on that. |
|
|
|
Just one thing:
"Forget the wife, he'll get rich"?
^^^^
That's fucked up bruh.
Who said that? Probably you are trolling. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
