Have there been any projects working toward combining lightning and hosting data/bandwidth? Like "pay me 1 satoshi/Mb per day or I drop your data".
Even if it’s encrypted, how do you trust a third party random to reliably host your data? With enough 'third parties' (AKA storage nodes), and an erasure coding layer, this is a solved problem. How do you think Google, Amazon, et al do it? It is not by guaranteeing unlimited uptime for any individual storage node. It is by making the reliability of each individual storage node irrelevant, by employing intelligent redundancy in a layer above the hardware. |
|
|
|
I simply posted interesting article that is open to discussion...
Most sane people deem articles chock-full of bullshit not as 'interesting', but rather as 'irrelevant distraction'. |
|
|
|
But you said BCH was ‘centralized’ despite this fight amongst development? Many have. It seems to be a scripted Core-ian talking point. |
|
|
|
If we break out to $10k+ very soon, we're probably not going to hold that price point for long. It would most likely lead to lower lows (sub $5k).
...because?... |
|
|
|
I found one interesting article about BCH from Jörg Molt
good read
Let’s talk about Roger Ver and BitMain with BCash – BCH
How many times is this fallacious article going to be posted in entire text to this thread? Even well-written articles are usually merely listed once, and that list is typically in the form of a link. Once. Link. Not many times, full text. But that would be for well-written articles. This piece of garbage is chock full of lies, mistakes, slander, and invalid reasoning. Give it up already. |
|
|
|
To scale down the denomination of Byteball on exchanges (from Gigabytes to Megabytes or lower) has been debated for a while now, mainly for reasons of marketing. But someone has pointed out that there are deeper reasons for doing that: to define a Byteball unity as 1 Gigabyte would be like defining an unity of dollar as 1 Million $. Of course this does not make any sense if you are looking for mass adoption, like Byteball is:
(...)
The fact that Byteball is measured in Gigabytes is a problem because it is crucially violating Byteball's mission number one: to achieve mass adoption.
(...)
However, we are in the very early dawn of cryptocurrencies, which sometimes in the future (perhaps a distant future) are logically destined to replace the so much less efficient FIAT finance. As we are just in the dawn of crypto, it doesn't really matter NOW which is the denomination of Byteball on exchanges. At some point it will eventually be changed, when the time will be deemed mature. Meanwhile, we could consider the Byteball-in-Gigabytes world as the club of tomorrow's millionaires.There are coins like Ada-Cardano which have openly claimed to point becoming the first platform to achieve 1 trillion $ capitalization. Well, if Byteball would one day achieve something like that, then every single Gigabyte will be worth 1 Million $ - IF the USD will still exist with some value by then, of course. Therefore, my fellow byteballers, don't waist your time whining but instead enjoy every single Gigabyte you have sitting in your wallet. There are only 1 Million of them, and the world's population is 7+ Bllions. And rising... This shit does not need anyone. Stop your shilling, go and buy 2000 GB if you really need it  Don't you think your reaction is somewhat extreme? Sure, it seems that Kavallo is smoking hopium. But 'shilling'? This _is_ the byteball thread. |
|
|
|
That is a beautiful view. Is it all yours or were you just visiting? Thanks. Mine. Here for a handful of days and nights. Doing some late season maintenance, coinciding with deer muzzleloading season. Mending fences with a rifle in my hand - on the chance one blunders my way. |
|
|
|
That is not what I wrote. Claiming that BCH is bitcoin is not the same as claiming BCH is BTC. BTC is currently Bitcoin, aye. As it is the chain built atop the Satoshi genesis block that has the most accumulated SHA256 proof of work. It may not always be such. As an aside, anyone that mistakes BCH for BTC had obviously not even started to do the necessary due diligence for trading in this market. I have no sympathy for anyone incurring losses on this basis. |
|
|
|
I was off on a remote island for a week with no Internet. I come back to the WO thread and see talk about bcash?
::le sigh:: And once again, it was not I that started the topic. JJG posed a direct query to me regarding my BCH holdings. I simply answered truthfully. At which point, keyboard warriors jumped into the fray. I added some clarifying counterpoint. At which point, everyone wanted to dive into the action. Including, manifestly, yourself. |
|
|
|
Really I wouldn't expect that from you. Bcash was so obviously being propped up by Bitmain, Roger and Craig that I expected nothing to come from it once Bitmain stopped their losses.
I don't much give a damnn what Bitmain, Roger, and Craig do.* For my part, BCH has the properties that made bitcoin great to begin with. Scaling in a logical fashion, and free of the Segwit virus. From my perspective, it is simply technically better than BTC. Hopefully, the world will awaken to this. * Well, I hope they keep mining it. Though, the DAA allows for drops in hashpower to be relative non events.** ** Unlike BTC, which lacks this safeguard. I for one much prefer the virus of segwit rather than the cancer or Jihan and Roger. I wouldn't make debatable transaction methods a hill to die on especially with leaders like that. They are not leaders, so much as fellow travelers. They each likely own several times the BTC that you own as well. Does this mean you are going to abandon BTC? Didn't think so. Some consistency, please. Here's one of your deft retorical tricks. haha. Deft rhetorical trick, hunh? No trick. Just a point of argument. Roger, at least during the pre fork days, and arguably still, may have done more to drive the adoption of bitcoin than anyone else. Jihan is unavoidably the source of the majority of hashpower for both the BCH and the BTC forks. You are unable to impugn BCH for having these people in prominent roles without also impugning BTC. To try to do so is logically invalid. You see, it's not about how much BTC or BCH some guys have.
What is this 'it' of which you speak? It's more about the BTC/BCH ratio. Or the history behind.
Well, which one? |
|
|
|
You are really making the argument that Roger is not the leader of Bitcoincash?
Absolutely. Roger is not the leader of bitcoin cash. In a permissionless, decentralized, uncensorable system, there can be no leader. Kind of Bitcoin 101, that. If you can show me an organizational hierarchy, with proof of orders being issued from above, and obeyed below, then you might have a claim about a leader. But you cannot. So you don't. Roger has tried to trick others into buying Bcash when saying it's bitcoin. He also has spent money to do spam attacks on bitcoin.
If he has claimed that BCH is BTC, then that is news to me. Proof? He met with the mining giant and had them only accept Bcash (most likely as essentially blackmail due to asicboost.
By the mining giant, do you mean Jihan? Are you claiming that Jihan matches to Roger's orders? Jihan has no choice but to follow Roger's edicts? Some supporting evidence would help your assertion here. Whaddayagot? |
|
|
|
Maybe should ask our residential Bcash promoter, jbreher? Wasn't jbreher keeping 50/50, or something like that?
Ask me what? I own many more units of BCH than I do of BTC. I still see BCH as having a bright future. Really I wouldn't expect that from you. Bcash was so obviously being propped up by Bitmain, Roger and Craig that I expected nothing to come from it once Bitmain stopped their losses. I don't much give a damnn what Bitmain, Roger, and Craig do.* For my part, BCH has the properties that made bitcoin great to begin with. Scaling in a logical fashion, and free of the Segwit virus. From my perspective, it is simply technically better than BTC. Hopefully, the world will awaken to this. * Well, I hope they keep mining it. Though, the DAA allows for drops in hashpower to be relative non events.** ** Unlike BTC, which lacks this safeguard. I for one much prefer the virus of segwit rather than the cancer or Jihan and Roger. I wouldn't make debatable transaction methods a hill to die on especially with leaders like that. They are not leaders, so much as fellow travelers. They each likely own several times the BTC that you own as well. Does this mean you are going to abandon BTC? Didn't think so. Some consistency, please. |
|
|
|
Maybe should ask our residential Bcash promoter, jbreher? Wasn't jbreher keeping 50/50, or something like that?
Ask me what? I own many more units of BCH than I do of BTC. I still see BCH as having a bright future. very bright sell some BTC and buy the BCH dip At 14:1 we're nearing the ratio where I made my biggest conversion. If it drops much further, I may have to think about it. I need to make a deeper analysis of the November fifteen probabilities before jumping. |
|
|
|
Maybe should ask our residential Bcash promoter, jbreher? Wasn't jbreher keeping 50/50, or something like that?
Ask me what? I own many more units of BCH than I do of BTC. I still see BCH as having a bright future. Really I wouldn't expect that from you. Bcash was so obviously being propped up by Bitmain, Roger and Craig that I expected nothing to come from it once Bitmain stopped their losses. I don't much give a damnn what Bitmain, Roger, and Craig do.* For my part, BCH has the properties that made bitcoin great to begin with. Scaling in a logical fashion, and free of the Segwit virus. From my perspective, it is simply technically better than BTC. Hopefully, the world will awaken to this. * Well, I hope they keep mining it. Though, the DAA allows for drops in hashpower to be relative non events.** ** Unlike BTC, which lacks this safeguard. |
|
|
|
Maybe should ask our residential Bcash promoter, jbreher? Wasn't jbreher keeping 50/50, or something like that?
Ask me what? I own many more units of BCH than I do of BTC. I still see BCH as having a bright future. |
|
|
|
The ETH / BTC volume on Bitstamp was so low I had to market sell.
::poke:: I _told_ ya that if you were gonna play around with shitcoins, you were gonna get burned. ::poke:: |
|
|
|
Containing as many false statements of "fact" as it does, it is rather hard to take the author seriously in his conclusions. |
|
|
|
Announced? Not that I can see. Article is bereft of supporting evidence. Even if it is true, wouldn't there be a huge tax involved? Plus, whith a huge law suit pending, I don't think this would be a good move at all. Why would a huge tax be involved? Wright is natively Australian. Currently residing in UK? I don't know anything about their taxation laws, but I do know some about that of the US. Being from common legal heritage, I might imagine (admittedly, with some ignorance) that these jurisdictions have taxation laws similar to the US. In the US, wealth itself does not require taxation thereupon. Only in executing a taxable event is a tax obligation incurred. Such as selling for fiat. Or direct purchase of items using the Bitcoin itself. In Australia, the act of trading one cryptocurrency for another is a taxable event. https://www.ato.gov.au/General/Gen/Tax-treatment-of-crypto-currencies-in-Australia---specifically-bitcoin/?page=2#Transacting_with_cryptocurrency It is a taxable event in the UK too. https://blocktax.uk/guide/ Also, if Satoshi is moving his coins, people are going to take notice, especially the attorneys for the Estate of Kleiman. This would be a dumb move, all around. Also, the hopes that this would somehow bolster the market value of BCH is rather speculative. It may give a temporary boost, but if CSW proves that he is Satoshi in this manner, I suspect that it will cause the value of BTC and BCH to plummet in the midterm; since many people don't care for him. Even if CSW just signs a message with one of the early coinbase private keys, it would likely have a negative impact on market value. Exchanging crypto is arguably taxable in the US as well. But I did not see any note of that hypothetical in the quoted article. If CSW were to sign a message using satoshi's keys, I might expect the following: - Much gnashing of teeth, sound and fury, signifying nothing in the twitterverse - BTC market reaction of "meh" - Significant price appreciation for BCH - The SV plan adopted by the majority of the BCH ecosystem. |
|
|
|
Announced? Not that I can see. Article is bereft of supporting evidence. Even if it is true, wouldn't there be a huge tax involved? Plus, whith a huge law suit pending, I don't think this would be a good move at all. Why would a huge tax be involved? Wright is natively Australian. Currently residing in UK? I don't know anything about their taxation laws, but I do know some about that of the US. Being from common legal heritage, I might imagine (admittedly, with some ignorance) that these jurisdictions have taxation laws similar to the US. In the US, wealth itself does not require taxation thereupon. Only in executing a taxable event is a tax obligation incurred. Such as selling for fiat. Or direct purchase of items using the Bitcoin itself. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
