Can you provide details on "stuff you don't agree with"? thanks.
mostly them working with the fbi and gates foundation in a policing action to fight crime. the foundation should not be a police force. I think they don't have a real choice in cooperating with gov't (which is why I believe Satoshi disappeared). Hard to see what Gavin can do without miners' cooperation. Do you see anything? |
|
|
|
|
Can you provide details on "very big problems with some of the stuff they are doing"? thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
This might be stating the obvious but I didn't realise until just now: whatever Gavin or the foundation proposes must be accepted by a large majority of miners, else they risk a hard fork where the btc community splits. It's a good check againt proposed amendments re: privacy.
I think goat's point is that the Ltc community would never put up with those kinds of changes, as the miners are so diverse and global. I don't think btc miners would agree either. Way too much money invested in it now. Whether the US accepts btcs or not is not that relevant to current mining revenues.
|
|
|
|
umm, bitcoin IS gold 2.0. It's combining gold with features required for money in a tech economy.  |
|
|
|
Thanks. Re 3, I thought maybe you had looked into it. Re, ltc v Btc, which is undervalued now, in your view?
Honestly I don't know what the BTC/LTC ratio should be. If the Bitcoin Foundation keeps trying to destroy BTC we might see LTC higher than BTC soon. Who knows. Very good point, I didn't consider. Though hard to see ltc not being affected also in that scenario. If the Foundation forced code changes to BTC to make it more traceable or whatever people will flee BTC so fast it is not funny. LTC will not have these code changes added. Won't people assume that ltc will also have changes forced on it? I guess price drop will be less until it happens. Also re Btc, in event of forced change, let's say two networks are formed, what happens to existing btcs? Gavin Anderson seems willing to work with these people who want to regulate it. The LTC community does not. The BTC Foundation and Gavin might cause if nothing else a "civil war" in BTC land but this wont happen in LTC. There is no way the miners would support adding any of the code Gavin would want us to add. Let's say one third of the host of angels follow Gavin down the dark path, and two thirds stay with the light. What would happen to existing Btc holdings? Will I hold btcs in both networks? Thanks for taking the time. |
|
|
|
|
The elimination of FRB via divisibility should cure the problem of excessive debts in the future. That is what I hope.
The point of failure during the Great Depression was building FRB on top of the gold standard. Bad move. Led to bank runs and creation of fiat out of thin air which necessitated the formation of the fed to bail out everyone.
As FRB continued, it became obvious that fiat outnumbered gold immensely hence the USD had to be devalued relative to gold. The problem was always FRB not gold.
|
|
|
|
Gold as a alternative currency, well good luck on that one, ever bought something with gold ? ever bought something with gold online ?
Gold is an excellent store of value but really sucks bad as a currency and that is why it has been replaced a long time ago with paper, you just don't carry gold around to pay for stuff, much too risky and as a merchant you just dont except gold as payment either, you need a lot of expertise to determine whether the gold is real or not and how much gold exactly of what purity your customer is offering you, and even if you have the expertise it consumes a lot of time to check all this, chances of getting conned are just too big. No gold really sucks bad as a currency.
Don't mean to bash anyone, but some of you are misinformed. The world used to operate based on a Gold Standard, it actually was an excellent alternative currency - but only when things were "good". The reason for its failure, was because the standard performed/performs poorly during a crisis. Firstly, physical gold wasn't transferred between persons. Gold certificates were used as paper currency in the United States from 1882 to 1933. These certificates were freely convertible into gold coins. So you could "carry gold around and pay for stuff". Now it failed after World War II and is often blamed for prolonging the depression because during a crisis, persons HOARD their certificates/physical gold (of limited supply) which would halt the interchange of money. Production prices would rise, wages would fall, and no one could afford a thing. Adherence to the gold standard prevented the Federal Reserve from expanding the money supply to stimulate the economy, in comes fiat. So stimulation here was a good thing (whenever is it not? :-p). Bitcoin in essence is the cyber version of the gold standard. It operates based on the same principles, easily transferable, limited supply. Its only benefit right now is that it can be transferred easily between hands and is anonymous. Now if bitcoin were the main currency of the world, it would operate the same way as gold, but would fail horribly during a crisis as persons would hoard their bitcoin, and it would be the Great Depression II. As a side note, don't view bitcon as taking over the USD and operating as the worlds currency, that would be naive. If you view bitcoin as an alternative to Gold/a store of $$, then you see its value. If bitcoin were to capture 5% of golds marketcap that would be $200billion. We aren't even close to that yet. As opposed to now, where each round of stimulus pushes debt levels higher? The cure that is offered by central banks is false and hollow. Excessive credit creation led to the first depression and will do so again. We can sustain higher debt levels for now but not for long. |
|
|
|
Thanks. Re 3, I thought maybe you had looked into it. Re, ltc v Btc, which is undervalued now, in your view?
Honestly I don't know what the BTC/LTC ratio should be. If the Bitcoin Foundation keeps trying to destroy BTC we might see LTC higher than BTC soon. Who knows. Very good point, I didn't consider. Though hard to see ltc not being affected also in that scenario. If the Foundation forced code changes to BTC to make it more traceable or whatever people will flee BTC so fast it is not funny. LTC will not have these code changes added. Won't people assume that ltc will also have changes forced on it? I guess price drop will be less until it happens. Also re Btc, in event of forced change, let's say two networks are formed, what happens to existing btcs? |
|
|
|
Thanks. Re 3, I thought maybe you had looked into it. Re, ltc v Btc, which is undervalued now, in your view?
Honestly I don't know what the BTC/LTC ratio should be. If the Bitcoin Foundation keeps trying to destroy BTC we might see LTC higher than BTC soon. Who knows. Very good point, I didn't consider. Though hard to see ltc not being affected also in that scenario. |
|
|
|
If BA could afford to give people double their hash or machines don't you think they'd of done this? They know how this works. They don't need someone to explain to them the difficulty rises every ten days stuff and so what was expected isn't going to be of the same value as 25% extra hash rate for four months. They know that. They just can't afford to give away double the machines or 100% extra hash is most likely the issue.
If they could, they would have sold 4TH miners instead of 2TH and still profit from it.
Very good points, which indicates that chip fabrication should not go ahead and refunds should be organised. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks. Re 3, I thought maybe you had looked into it. Re, ltc v Btc, which is undervalued now, in your view?
|
|
|
|
|
Please note BA chips will be non competitive versus AM chips from day one on power specs. Due to delay of two months, the chances of ROI, even with doubling of hash power, is remote.
Also, a one month tapeout delay has turned into a two month delivery delay. That part requires explanation. Plus the fact they kept quiet about the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
Also, who will be paying you in event minions are launched?
I'm sorry you feel that way. I do not have those answers. Note: not answered. We need to find out, else legal enforcement will be next to impossible. |
|
|
|
Actually during times of stability it's often a good time to buy. And wtf, the price is stable for a month or so and you start comparing bitcoin to Bank savings? Seriously sell your coins and get the hell out of here and don't come back please.
Actually in stable periods historically bitcoin always tended to slide downwards as speculators get bored of it. Only when they see high monthly/weekly returns do they all pile in again. Proof please? Looking at historical data I have more often seen an increase in price after a period of stability than a decrease. Either way stability is good for bitcoin. Ignore dalmar, he is not worth it. |
|
|
|
|
On a more serious note, the p2p network will;
Allow rules to be made into protocols, allow the unfettered transmission of wealth, decentralise society, provide an alternative to fiat, allow micropayments, reduce corruption among other things.
|
|
|
|
What are the future applications of Bitcoins?
For example Bitcoins can be the gold of the future. Governments will not control it, the peer to peer network of Bitcoins will..
Help me retire comfortably. |
|
|
|
Dear Goat, I have a few questions: 1. What is your ltc versus Btc split? And could you please share the reasons? 2. What is your view on the current price of asicminer shares? Approx. 0.57 Btc 3. Is casinobitcoin.in legit? Thanks. |
|
|
|
Dev 5% premine is way to much you greedy bastard.
You forget, you're dealing with the devil. Lol  |
|
|
|
|
I should've phrased my original post better: I would like dz coop to organise a refund from BA. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
I would like a refund of r17 if this is at all possible. I don't like my chances with BA. Anyone who agrees please add your voice. I have 16 shares.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
