|
It's irrelevant. Cryptocurrencies don't depend on laws to determine ownership. They depend on math. Though I suppose it could even be helpful, as a government could not then compel you to hand over something that you don't legally possess.
|
|
|
|
You’ve managed to somewhat confuse the terms ordinal and discrete into a horrible fashion. Maybe take a look, at that?
A question answered badly is one which was asked badly when the questioner is less intelligent than the answered such as in this case.
You clearly do not know what ordinals are. I asked a perfectly reasonable question, but your mathematical knowledge is deficient. That is very sad. It is a greater tragedy than Hans Christian Andersen's "The Little Mermaid" (I am not talking about the Disney version. You can tell that the Disney version of The Little Mermaid is watered down because you never see nipples on the mermaids because their breasts are covered with seashells). You need Jesus. oooooh, a nerd pissing match. This is gonna get good!  |
|
|
|
For every dollar that is in circulation there is a borrower who used these dollars to borrow goods and services from the general public which is why he is legally obligated by the loan contract (backed by collateral) to return dollars back to the issuer (bank), and in the process have less purchasing power for the goods and services. This is how he "returns" borrowed goods and services back to the general public. Now, tell me, which Bitcoin miner has the obligation to return goods and services back to the general public, he received from them when he released Bitcoins into the circulation?
So, a dollar is useful because it is created by borrowing from a bank, but a bitcoin is not useful because isn't created by borrowing from a bank. What about the mode of creation make one useful and the other not useful? |
|
|
|
|
If you cannot ensure that the rightful owner retains ownership, then the best choice is to do nothing. If you do anything, you are potentially harming someone, and if you do nothing you lose nothing, so the best outcome comes from doing nothing. If you take the coins (or "safeguard" them) you are stealing them since you don't know that they were lost or abandoned.
|
|
|
|
I am creating a money supply which distributes duration to addresses but need a way to verify each person has only one account would you give your fingerprint or eye scan for a fair money supply? see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-based_currencyTime-based currencies have not worked in the past, so I'm curious to see what you come up with. I'm also curious to see your criteria for judging fairness. what do you mean judging fairness? everyone creates the same amount of duration each day unless they are enterprising and selling goods and services then they can obtain more time in the bank. It looks like you are designing a currency with built-in basic income, similar to Nimses ( https://nimses.com/). My first thought is that the amount of money you receive for just being alive would be only a tiny fraction of the amount you would receive by working (because of the huge difference in economic value). It would be similar to the difference in income between working at a job and visiting crypto faucets. As a result, I don't think it would be worth registering for. As for fairness, since the basic income portion would be small, it would have only a small influence on wealth distribution, which I assume is a criteria for fairness. |
|
|
|
|
What exactly do you mean by "run backwards"? Are you asking a question like what would happen right and left were switched? Or are you asking specifically about reversing the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the T violation in B meson decay?
Actually, if you encountered a place where the laws of physics were different, then we would have to change the laws of physics since they are assumed to be universal.
I think one thing it would not allow us to do is to predict the future of the past.
|
|
|
|
It is not as straightforward as you might prefer. You can't just measure testosterone levels. The results are not unambiguous. Radiolab did a podcast a few months ago about this controversy: https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/duteeThe crux of the problem is how maintain a policy of splitting people into male and female when there is no clear distinction. |
|
|
|
I am creating a money supply which distributes duration to addresses but need a way to verify each person has only one account would you give your fingerprint or eye scan for a fair money supply? see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-based_currencyTime-based currencies have not worked in the past, so I'm curious to see what you come up with. I'm also curious to see your criteria for judging fairness. |
|
|
|
|
Miners do not have a significant effect on the price.
|
|
|
|
... dollars by people who were issued dollar loans for the fulfillment of their loan contracts, ...
Like dollars, you can use bitcoins to repay loans, right? So, Bitcoin is useful. ... But transferability in itself is useless ...
I think this is where your point becomes absurd and moot. You write that food is useful, yet it is only useful to me if it is transferred to me. The usefulness of food depends on its transferability. Doesn't that make its transferability useful? Also, you write that loans are what make money useful. Isn't a loan just an agreement to make transfers? |
|
|
|
If you backtest a sufficient amount of strategies you're statistically bound to find a "successful" strategy eventually though. Put differently, you can find "patterns" in any snippet of random data if you look long enough, that doesn't make the pattern applicable to larger amounts of random data from the same source though.
How to ensure that the backtesting results are actually sound and not just some random fluke? Serious question, not a rhetorical one.
That's a big problem in social sciences and medicine. It is called "p-hacking". Researchers tweak their models until they come up a result with 95% confidence, and they think they have found something. The reality is that 95% confidence means that 1 in 20 is just fluke, and they have found the fluke. The same issues applies to tweaking a trading strategy until the back-testing results look good. |
|
|
|
... there seems to be a pattern ...
Oh, look! It's a cute little baby conspiracy theorist! Aren't they just adorable? |
|
|
|
There are many exchanges who do that. It's ethically not correct ...
I assume you don't think it is ethically not correct for an owner of a token to sell it to someone else. After all, that is the entire purpose of the token. So, if it is ethically correct to trade tokens then why is it not ethically correct to trade tokens using an exchange? I think it's illegal to do so because ...
Legality depends on the jurisdiction. There are not very many things that are universally illegal. So, please tell us what locations and what laws you are referring to. |
|
|
|
Some would argue that math is a skill that needs to be learnt and perfected.
And I didn't promote it, just have an opinion on the information available to me.
You are the one disputing what you seem to understand very little of.
I do not know all about technical analysis. But I believe most human actions are the same to similar situations and this could leave a pattern that can be followed and analysed.
I respect your opinion but I'm just trying bring some rationality to the subject. It is funny that when I debunk TA, a common response is a claim that I don't understand it. It is funny because that is so wrong and generally the claim is made by people who don't understand it themselves. So you say you "don't know all about technical analysis", but do you even know the most basic techniques well enough to explain how and why they work? My guess is that you don't. But don't fret because you aren't alone. Most people don't even know where to start. Let's take the humble moving average. Did you know that there is a lag in the moving average? Did you know that moving averages with different windows have different lags, and when you compare them without aligning them (which is what is normally done), you get mostly noise? What about Fibonacci retracement? I would like someone to explain the why the numbers are significant without saying it is because you see Fibonacci numbers everywhere in nature. Oh, and chart patterns and candlesticks ... complete superstition. |
|
|
|
You could be right though - maybe it was hundreds of thousands of mini players who all cashed in their 2 satoshi at the same time across all the centralized exchanges in a worldwide coordinated dump by.........nah.
Or it could be a smaller number of bigger sellers, but that still isn't manipulation. |
|
|
|
I know traders which have achieved great successes using technical analysis based on their ability to correctly read charts and draw patterns.
Do you also know traders that have lost money using TA? If not, then something must be wrong with your information. If so, then why don't you talk about them? It is a skill and like all others needs to be learned and perfected.
It is math (supposedly). There should be no need for skill. If you believe that it really works, then you should be able to explain how it works. If you can't explain how it works, then it must be just magic to you. Do you always go around promoting things that you don't understand? |
|
|
|
Do you have any kind of evidence to back your claim?
Of course he doesn't. It's called gut feeling. Some believe Bcash fork drama is the main cause, others believe it's miner manipulation, and others believe it's insider trading, and so forth. The gut feeling is probably last night's dinner. |
|
|
|
I'm doing a writeup on why SHA256 brainwallets are bad, and I'm working on a list of particularly bad passphrase choices:
...
Any other suggestions?
The standard brain wallet is generated by hashing a passphrase with SHA-256, but I wonder if there are private keys generated by using other hashes. Running a your search-space through RIPEMD-160 followed by one or more SHA-256 passes might generate some hits. I have no doubts that running your search-space through scrypt will generate some hits on Litecoin and its derivatives. |
|
|
|
|
If anything, this thread shows definitively that no brain wallet based on any kind of memorized passphrase is safe.
|
|
|
|
I understand that I'm a small person in the market, but bitcoin needs help now more than ever. People like Dr. Craig Wright are destroying what you've created. Accept the application and destroy the bitcoin cash and their hard fork. Only you can do that.
Do you guys agree with me ?)
Calm down. You don't need to freak out. Nobody is destroying anything. Satoshi is not a god. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
