Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.
The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate. Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds? he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way. you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth. Wow. You played the "T" card so soon? I guess your hand is played out. it seems you are the one who has played and lost every hand.  Nice burn dood. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.
The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate. Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds? he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way. you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth. Wow. You played the "T" card so soon? I guess your hand is played out. |
|
|
|
Is combination of PoS and PoW more secure than Pos or PoW alone?
PoS is fine by itself as a local currency issued by your government. It shares some of the traits of Bitcoin like being non-counterfeitable (except by the majority stakeholder which is the government) and fungibility. You can trust PoS as much as you can trust the people that control the majority stake. As far as security, they also use the same basic cryptography. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.
The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate. Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds? |
|
|
|
It's an interesting discussion point. The argument for PoS put here is not a passing meme, or even a feature, so much as a fundamental efficiency.
I haven't seen a PoS that solves the Byzantine General's problem. You present this as if it was a fact. Can you prove it with an empirical example? Bitcoin solves the Byzantine Generals Problem according to the Satoshi White Paper. I haven't found any PoS White Paper that solves it without PoW. Because you don't understand how Bitcoin solves it. POS solves it to the same degree as POW does (the process is different). You make a ton of posts without understanding the nature of the solution Bitcoin brought and what the shortcomings are that only became visible over time. Almost all the statements you make in here are plain false. Here is my take on it: Both (POW and POS) do not eliminate trust, they distribute the trust (yes you have to trust mining pools and big ASIC mining companies) and both make it economically unprofitable to work against the consensus. POS replaces high energy costs with elections and reputation and can therefore reduce costs significantly while keeping up the high security. Indeed distribution is the key. Bitcoin has a 5 year history of fairly distributing consensus. It started out with Satoshi having 100% of the mining hashrate, but now it is distributed on the world's largest hashing network. You can keep making claims about PoS or DPoS somehow being fair, but you cannot prove that claim. You cannot prove that any of them are not controlled by a single individual owning many accounts. It comes down to what someone is willing to sacrifice. You PoS folks think there is some ENTITY out there that has infinite resources that will dominate and control Bitoin forever because they have some diabolical intent. Yet your solution is to offer a shitcoin that you distribute to yourself and sell a minority stake just to scam us. That's fine if you are a government, but go sell your snake oil elsewhere. |
|
|
|
It's an interesting discussion point. The argument for PoS put here is not a passing meme, or even a feature, so much as a fundamental efficiency.
I haven't seen a PoS that solves the Byzantine General's problem. You present this as if it was a fact. Can you prove it with an empirical example? Bitcoin solves the Byzantine Generals Problem according to the Satoshi White Paper. I haven't found any PoS White Paper that solves it without PoW. |
|
|
|
It's a photoshop. I can tell from the pixels. Good eye! Indeed, the shadow is wrong, there is no reflection on the floor, ... There's actually quite a lot wrong with it. And I'm not even an expert. The first thing that caught my eye was the texture but look at it, they don't even have the "machine" properly centered. That could potentially be a stylistic choice but isn't.9 The perspective is funky too. Yeah after looking at it on a bigger screen it looks like shit. I would buy anything from someone that puts out such low quality.  |
|
|
|
 The girl has a shadow, the glass has a shadow. The ATM has a low light casting the shadow. You can see its reflection. You can see the light lighting up the trim on the wall as well. If it's shopped, it is really pro work. The ATM was rendered from a 3D model with that lighting and alpha channel, then composited over the photo, and the shadow was photoshopped by hand. The light that is supposed to cast the ATM shadow on the floor should also cast a fainter shadow of the glass railing on the floor at left, but there is none. Also the shadow of the ATM on the floor is too sharp. Compare with the shadow of the cheque on the ATM body (which should be sharper). Also, the lighter area at the top of the glass railing, behind the ATM, is the reflection of a light wall located behind the camera. But then there should be a reflection of the ATM as well, just to the left of the ATM. There are other defects, but those should suffice... rendered on a 4" smartphone screen, it looks good. |
|
|
|
What do you think will change following the ETF? Less crazy price swings?
Crazy price swings are what Wall Street is all about. If they want stability, they should invest in gravity. |
|
|
|
It's a photoshop. I can tell from the pixels. Good eye! Indeed, the shadow is wrong, there is no reflection on the floor, ... The girl has a shadow, the glass has a shadow. The ATM has a low light casting the shadow. You can see its reflection. You can see the light lighting up the trim on the wall as well. If it's shopped, it is really pro work. |
|
|
|
Good read. Before the read, I was wondering why huge ask walls appear at regular intervals after a huge dump. Why sell low when you can sell high? After the read, I am aware that one possibility is the manipulators are at the Suppressing Prices stage. I don't know about this for sure but this offers a real and logical explanation. After the Suppressing Prices stage, the following stages follow: (1) Test Pump, (2) Actual Pump, (3) Shakeouts, (4) Re-allocation and distribution, and (5) Exiting - The Dump. That hypothesis sounds like a psyops tactic to cause a panic sell. That's chapter 6. |
|
|
|
BOTTOMS IN BOYS!
I am somehow not convinced. We are hovering very closely to $366, and I do believe if someone is dumping stolen coins, there are much more than what we've seen. the sellers dumping furiously, agree with you, i guess... selling near the bottom to catch the bottom is kinda risky tho, crazy people! Go home dumpers. you're drunk. |
|
|
|
the story that is bitcoin will live on even if EVERYONE capitulates.
bitcoin will never die, that much is certain.
I don't see hashrate declining. The blockchain is as healthy as ever. It's just on a drunken binge at the moment. |
|
|
|
It's an interesting discussion point. The argument for PoS put here is not a passing meme, or even a feature, so much as a fundamental efficiency.
I haven't seen a PoS that solves the Byzantine General's problem. I see PoS as efficient as fiat and just as trustless as fiat. |
|
|
|
Almost 5k to get back to 400.
Obviously we must go down even more.
in rally mode it one would say "only 5K to 400, its going to rocket there any minute!" sadly bitcoin is definitely not in rally mode.  Mostly these are fake walls. If you know the secret button, they move out of the way automatically. not sure about that but we have seen a fake walls fall not long ago, we went up, and then got smashed, so maybe it wasn't fake after all  I don't trust the Central Exchanges at all and believe this is a Reverse Willie. We need a trustless market. |
|
|
|
On the contrary, it's hard to convince people that Bitcoin is decentralized now after Ghash owned 51%-53% of its hashrate back in June, and probably continues to own half or more of its hashrate now disguised at other mining addresses, or do you think they switched off part of their equipment and decided they should lose on their investment? Think again.
You don't seem to understand how mining pools operate. It's possible the 51% was a statistical artifact. You also seem to think that people have expensive capital intentionally sitting idle. That may work for paper investments, but Bitcoiners work for a living. If GHash.io is indeed a super miner, then they deserve the profits they make while the rest of the world drools over their hyperinflating paper notes. Hashrate is growing exponentially. Bitcoin is becoming competitive and you ain't seen nothing yet. It's not about 'deserving the profits'. It's about the effects and possible risks of centralization. And, if you want to make that point, about wasting energy and resources in a competition who can burn the most energy. Which also creates a fiat leak btw: miners háve to sell coins to pay the bills. Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history. |
|
|
|
Almost 5k to get back to 400.
Obviously we must go down even more.
in rally mode it one would say "only 5K to 400, its going to rocket there any minute!" sadly bitcoin is definitely not in rally mode. Mostly these are fake walls. If you know the secret button, they move out of the way automatically. |
|
|
|
a bunch of models in the background, i like it who needs models look at that sexy machine lol i have to admit......i didn't even notice the women. I am a truly sad bitcoin fanatic the last few months i have been spending a lot more time with women then i have been with bitcoin (i saw the down trend coming at the beginning of the year). but now that winter is coming it is time for me to get serious again and get back to business.  |
|
|
|
mmitech if you already sold and you believe Bitcoin is doomed, and that we are all complete fools... what are you still doing here?
It's not a rhetorical question, I would honestly like to know.
nope, Bitcoin is not doomed yet, I will re-buy between 150-200, I am a trader and this is what I do, the question is: you Bitcoin cultist holders have the whole fucking forum, we traders have only this sub-forum, I would really appreciate it if you go troll somewhere else while we discuss our things here. don't fucking tell me to hold and what a bright future Bitcoin has, I know fucking good when I have to hold. So you're saying there's a chance you'll buy back in. |
|
|
|
|
It will. Still DCA buying.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
