miners could abandon my SC that offers perfect anonymity. and that would be for another SC that takes my SC with perfect anonymity and adds even better functionality on top of that. then i'd have to move my SC coins yet again! what a hassle and potential security risk.
if the SC tech is in fact better, BTC hodlers would have to defect. as they defect, miners would have to follow. no?
money always seeks the place that treats it best.
There's the rub. They need to create some magic that independently converts coins back and forth. BTC must remain legacy for this scheme to work and must be encoded into the protocol. Of course anything could happen, but preserving BTC legacy cold storage must be ensured. It may become cumbersome and slow. Perhaps they will change their protocol to deny Bitcoin transactions except for conversion and it takes a month, but all Bitcoins must be accounted for in the end. |
|
|
|
so much weird bs fakeness on Huobi. 4k coins sold in 8x 500 blocks, but they only sell when a 500 buy block appears. order book ends up the same but volume goes way up.
and now it's just gone full retard
Looks like their fake volume bot is broken  A clash of bots. |
|
|
|
For the people who think exponential growth is NOT a good model for this, I'd like to point out something.... 640k ought to be enough for anybody. -- Bill Gates
Accusing Satoshi of pulling a Bill Gates when he put in the 7 TPS cap is funny and all that, but it simply doesn't map to the concept of exponential growth very well. It does, however, illustrate what I was talking about when I said that most human minds are simply not wired to register it adequately. Yo Dawg, I hear you like side chains so I put side chains inside your side chains. Now you have 7 7TPS. |
|
|
|
I still haven't heard a good excuse for core dev concentration in one for profit company other than "trust us".
These are two perfectly good reasons and really the only reasons you need: 1) open source code 2) consensus execution of that code by miners voting with their processing power Again, why wouldn't we expect a SC fork of bitcoin with perfect anonymity to take over?
This is not so black and white. I suppose there could be a real threat of a side chain taking over if there is little to no perceived risk by the market to move from chain to chain, but if the market perceives little to no risk then maybe there is little to no risk. Savers will likely park their money in the safest chain, i.e. the chain with the highest hashrate and bitcoin could cease to be the dominant chain at some point. I don't see why it couldn't happen. Neither do I. And it would be very disruptive to hodlers who make up most of bitcoin today. And it could be a never ending transition add new innovations take place. Some of us would rather just leave our coins in cold storage for a few decades. brg444, I'm past the part about core dev altcoin implementations. I do see how it would be a hard sell for them although not impossible to sell to noobs. You forget that we are witnessing the power of what they can do RIGHT NOW with this SC proposal. They've banded together precisely to push this proposal through as a for profit company which requires a fork for them to be successful. It's not a wild thought imagining them trying to implement a new currency some day. LukeJr has talked about demurrage coin on reddit. Why? I could see a day where he starts one on his own and claims its just him personally, not Blockstream. Unlikely but possible. On planes all day so in and out Altcoins can be created as an easy way for governments to create a Bitcoin backed fractional reserve coin. Perhaps Blockstreams's customer base will be governments that can force their acceptance. At least with a guaranteed percentage fractional reserve in Bitcoin it will appease their largest stakeholders. If they are trying to deceive the general public, then they will be exposed. Only governments are allowed to do that and get away with it. I could go for that. Smooth is right. SC'S are just sophisticated forms of altcoins. They can be. BTW, the white paper lays it out pretty simply if you ignore the fallacious arguments. I mean, the paper is highly defensive and biased. The core idea is okay, but too vague to glean much useful information. It's nothing that hasn't been discussed for years. The idea of replacing Bitcoin by merge mining and legacy support has been around for years. I just can't wait to see a truly 1:1 SC coin that is able to magically convert bitcoins back and forth. I think in this situation, the price of BTC would be zero, assuming all miners have left the bitcoin main chain for the SC and all the BTC have been converted to scBTC. and that's because there would be no miners left to perform the proof to get from BTC to scBTC. And even if so, the tx cost would be prohibitive.
What about the coins not converted? If miners abandon them then what makes you think they won't abandon your coin? No. Miners want to preserve the coin integrity they built. They will hold your coin hostage and deny it's existence if you try to break Bitcoin because you will give them 51% control by your abandonment. Then you will have an orphaned altcoin with no more security than any other altcoin. |
|
|
|
Watching bitcoin meandering ~360 is too depressing  im not depressed, we have price increase from 300 to 390 and everybody expect no correction and ppl taking profit ? surely trader taking profit, then whale hammer down the price again, and trader buy back to cover their short. this is great everybody happy except the little miner, which btw atm just like honey badger which doesnt care. Classic Rule of Thirds trading. 360-390 range looks stable. Whalebull is consolidating orders then buys up. If not much resistance, it will break 400 and start the $15 fluctuations to gain short profits. |
|
|
|
Anarchism has never existed in Western Culture because Christianity.
It did and it existed just fine for several thousand years here and strangely enough the records exist because Christians moving here to escape the inquisition made them. Liquid democracy is a suitable platform for the same system on a global scale. It's amazing what people consider a wonderful anarchistic society. Their dirt roads and short disease filled lives must have been paradise. The form of government has nothing to do with scientific progress. Or... actually yes ! Governments work hard to stop progress and maintain status quo : cut in scientific research to fund social benefits. Patent anyone ? A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a sovereign state to an inventor or assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for detailed public disclosure of an invention.Patenting is totally opposed to open-source. Open-source come from people, not government. Says the guy on the internet somewhere in the world using technology his anarchistic heros would have considered god-like. |
|
|
|
I still haven't heard a good excuse for core dev concentration in one for profit company other than "trust us".
These are two perfectly good reasons and really the only reasons you need: 1) open source code 2) consensus execution of that code by miners voting with their processing power Again, why wouldn't we expect a SC fork of bitcoin with perfect anonymity to take over?
This is not so black and white. I suppose there could be a real threat of a side chain taking over if there is little to no perceived risk by the market to move from chain to chain, but if the market perceives little to no risk then maybe there is little to no risk. Savers will likely park their money in the safest chain, i.e. the chain with the highest hashrate and bitcoin could cease to be the dominant chain at some point. I don't see why it couldn't happen. Neither do I. And it would be very disruptive to hodlers who make up most of bitcoin today. And it could be a never ending transition add new innovations take place. Some of us would rather just leave our coins in cold storage for a few decades. brg444, I'm past the part about core dev altcoin implementations. I do see how it would be a hard sell for them although not impossible to sell to noobs. You forget that we are witnessing the power of what they can do RIGHT NOW with this SC proposal. They've banded together precisely to push this proposal through as a for profit company which requires a fork for them to be successful. It's not a wild thought imagining them trying to implement a new currency some day. LukeJr has talked about demurrage coin on reddit. Why? I could see a day where he starts one on his own and claims its just him personally, not Blockstream. Unlikely but possible. On planes all day so in and out Altcoins can be created as an easy way for governments to create a Bitcoin backed fractional reserve coin. Perhaps Blockstreams's customer base will be governments that can force their acceptance. At least with a guaranteed percentage fractional reserve in Bitcoin it will appease their largest stakeholders. If they are trying to deceive the general public, then they will be exposed. Only governments are allowed to do that and get away with it. |
|
|
|
We is atemporal. We "always" am. You is [are/were/will be--temporal rubbish!] without understanding.
*Plurality is illusion.
...
~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords.
That's what we programmed you to think. Your conundrum compartmentalization subroutines are intact. Have a tasty treat. I am he as you are he as you are me. Coo coo cachoo, earthling.  ~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords. I said you could eat your beetle. |
|
|
|
Anarchism has never existed in Western Culture because Christianity.
It did and it existed just fine for several thousand years here and strangely enough the records exist because Christians moving here to escape the inquisition made them. Liquid democracy is a suitable platform for the same system on a global scale. It's amazing what people consider a wonderful anarchistic society. Their dirt roads and short disease filled lives must have been paradise. |
|
|
|
We is atemporal. We "always" am. You is [are/were/will be--temporal rubbish!] without understanding. *Plurality is illusion. ~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords. That's what we programmed you to think. Your conundrum compartmentalization subroutines are intact. Have a tasty treat. |
|
|
|
I still haven't heard a good excuse for core dev concentration in one for profit company other than "trust us".
These are two perfectly good reasons and really the only reasons you need: 1) open source code 2) consensus execution of that code by miners voting with their processing power Again, why wouldn't we expect a SC fork of bitcoin with perfect anonymity to take over?
This is not so black and white. I suppose there could be a real threat of a side chain taking over if there is little to no perceived risk by the market to move from chain to chain, but if the market perceives little to no risk then maybe there is little to no risk. Savers will likely park their money in the safest chain, i.e. the chain with the highest hashrate and bitcoin could cease to be the dominant chain at some point. I don't see why it couldn't happen. Nothing will completely replace Bitcoin. They will have to have legacy support because multisig and lost coins. It doesn't matter if one becomes bigger than Bitcoin because it's pegged. |
|
|
|
Anarchism has never existed in Western Culture because Christianity.
We have provided alternative religions to placate and suppress rebellious earthlings elsewhere. ~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords. Yes, but that was before the Reptilians and you know it scale breath. |
|
|
|
No trade does not mean the price is zero, it simply means there is trade. For example, in a speculative market you would get no trading if everyone agrees on the same price.
Anyway, as I said mining would still happen, and you could potentially buy from miners, but only at better price than what they could get by converting to higher-valued scBTC. There is no arbitrage though, the mining rewards would simply be sought out for their conversion value and miners would compete harder for them, driving up difficulty.
Explain to me how you price something that doesn't exist. If ALL BTC are converted to SCbtc, then that means no more BTC exists. If no more BTC exist then there are no more sellers. Buyers can't buy when there are no sellers and the price is effectively 0. Bitcoins still exist, they can be unlocked by destroying (or locking) your SC coins, effectively swapping keys with the bitcoins. Their location can still be seen on the blockchain. Really it would drive Bitcoin price up, not down because it is the only secure exchange between SC coins. Technically bitcoins still exist, but economically they don't exist until SCbtc is converted back. You can't buy or sell BTC that is in the form of SCbtc, although the underlying peg should be understood by the market. Sure you can. If you have a 1:1 SC coin, then an exchange can do the alchemy to convert the coin to sell in either form because exchanges are off blockchain. I get what you are saying but Smooth says you can't arbitrage between SCbtc and BTC because if SCbtc is superior, then no one will own BTC. You can't arbitrage 1:1. That's why I don't think non 1:1 SC will work. |
|
|
|
|
Anarchism has never existed in Western Culture because Christianity.
|
|
|
|
No trade does not mean the price is zero, it simply means there is trade. For example, in a speculative market you would get no trading if everyone agrees on the same price.
Anyway, as I said mining would still happen, and you could potentially buy from miners, but only at better price than what they could get by converting to higher-valued scBTC. There is no arbitrage though, the mining rewards would simply be sought out for their conversion value and miners would compete harder for them, driving up difficulty.
Explain to me how you price something that doesn't exist. If ALL BTC are converted to SCbtc, then that means no more BTC exists. If no more BTC exist then there are no more sellers. Buyers can't buy when there are no sellers and the price is effectively 0. Bitcoins still exist, they can be unlocked by destroying (or locking) your SC coins, effectively swapping keys with the bitcoins. Their location can still be seen on the blockchain. Really it would drive Bitcoin price up, not down because it is the only secure exchange between SC coins. Technically bitcoins still exist, but economically they don't exist until SCbtc is converted back. You can't buy or sell BTC that is in the form of SCbtc, although the underlying peg should be understood by the market. Sure you can. If you have a 1:1 SC coin, then an exchange can do the alchemy to convert the coin to sell in either form because exchanges are off blockchain. |
|
|
|
No trade does not mean the price is zero, it simply means there is trade. For example, in a speculative market you would get no trading if everyone agrees on the same price.
Anyway, as I said mining would still happen, and you could potentially buy from miners, but only at better price than what they could get by converting to higher-valued scBTC. There is no arbitrage though, the mining rewards would simply be sought out for their conversion value and miners would compete harder for them, driving up difficulty.
Explain to me how you price something that doesn't exist. If ALL BTC are converted to SCbtc, then that means no more BTC exists. If no more BTC exist then there are no more sellers. Buyers can't buy when there are no sellers and the price is effectively 0. Bitcoins still exist, they can be unlocked by destroying (or locking) your SC coins, effectively swapping keys with the bitcoins. Their location can still be seen on the blockchain. Really it would drive Bitcoin price up, not down because it is the only secure exchange between SC coins. |
|
|
|
There were regional kings and High Kings that sat on large Iron Thrones made from the swords of their slain enemies.
The hierarchy doesn't tell about your wealth or power. It is only a title. During feudalism, Kings where most of the time less powerful that rich Duchies. Err... Obama is less wealthy than a number of Americans, what's your point? Obama is not a government. What's your point ? My point was that (1) Europe used to be extremely decentralized for most of its History and (2) that the title of "King" did not mean that you own anything. The king is also not the government. Like the king, being a president does not mean you own anything. I swear, this thread is worse than a Communist kindergarten   |
|
|
|
Right. Then there is no mining in the SC? How are SC blockchains built?
Not quite, I too am having problem wraping my head about how exactly this would work but I believe this to be the relevant part in the whitepaper : Because miners receive compensation from the block subsidy and fees of each chain they provide work for, it is in their economic interest to switch between providing DMMSes for different similarly-valued blockchains following changes in difficulty and movements in market value.
One response is that some blockchains have tweaked their blockheader definition such that it includes a part of Bitcoin’s DMMS, thus enabling miners to provide a single DMMS that commits to Bitcoin as well as one or more other blockchains — this is called merged mining. Since merged mining enables re-use of work for multiple blockchains, miners are able to claim compensation from each blockchain that they provide DMMSes for. Note that the referred "block subsidy" exists only if the altchain issues its own native currency (not a 1:1 peg) Subsidy. A sidechain could also issue its own separate native currency as reward, effectively forming an altcoin. However, these coins would have a free-floating value and as a result would not solve the volatility and market fragmentation issues with altcoins. Yeah. The secondary currency would likely threaten the security of the entrenched bitcoins by having an effect on hashrate through price manipulation. I suppose if the altcoin was used only for microtransactions it might make sense since the mining is subsidized by merge miners. |
|
|
|
You think you're kidding but it's true. At that time, being a kind give no power at all. There are no state and no frontiers.Allegiance to the King is only temporarily. Power is extremely decentralized between many European Noble families.  There were regional kings and High Kings that sat on large Iron Thrones made from the swords of their slain enemies. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
