Your posts are dog shit because you're just a flat out propagandist liar.  This is the only one where you even speak a glimmer of truth, that you want the price to crash so you can buy.  You don't actually think the price is going to crash, you just spam non-stop "omg the price is going to crash to $1 at any second" praying that it does.

People who do nothing but lie 24 hours a day are called sociopaths and psychopaths.  The fact that you think this is acceptable behavior means you are a trash human and should probably do some self introspection to fix yourself.  Whether someone is my friend or enemy, I have no need to lie to either.

Except your account was sold and is now run by some Zionist banker shills.  Entire post history is "omg price is crashing to $1 tomorrow!

All these low post count posters are just spam shill accounts for banks.  Notice they're all like "halving won't do anything to price it will go down!"

The Kwukduck reality check thread.

This thread is filled to the brim with noobs and shills.  Paypal market cap is 50 billion, and Bitcoin will easily beat that in the near future.  It's also a much more valuable network than Paypal, hence my "it could easily be 100x from here by the end of 2020-2021.

It's very possible Bitcoin will be up 100x from here by the end of 2020-2021

First and second poster are zionist banker shill spammers.  Look at both of their post history.  Every single post is "Price going to crash to $1 any second!"

The kwukduck account was bought by them a long time ago.

It's a close race between option #1 and option #4 though.

Since when is there a non-zionist cash...

Bitcoin core seems to have already agreed on a 2mb hard fork + segwit, and Schnorr multisig savings will *supposedly* lower transaction space requirements as well.  That's a large step up from where we are now and any financial appreciation problems due to block size would be avoided for a long time.

Thought everyone already wrote off this subject as easily explainable:

That's the wrong question to ask.  It's not what can you do with the VM, it's how much load capacity will the system have (slim to none), and do they even have a viable consensus system (no - best case permissioned ledger, worst case none at all).

Why are people still talking about block size?  Isn't Segwit + 2mb fork already agreed upon by core anyway?  Segwit to near 2mb soon and the hardfork would raise it to 4mb in 2017?  If the schnor multisig savings plays out, then you could get something like 56 TPS at 4mb.

Speaking of governance, any closed loop system is a permissioned ledger/centralized company/or kind of shareholder directed business and not an actual decentralized currency.  You're usually required to go through specific channels in order to go public and issue shares of a company, so these things might end in legal mayhem.  The legal and regulatory system doesn't know how any of this stuff works, but once they figure it out, the shit is gonna hit the fan for PoS coins.

Something like Peercoin and Blackcoin (not a fan but whatever) might go unscathed because I believe the entire supply was mined and not issued via IPO.  It's not really a problem for Eth because the load capacity of the network will always be abysmal because it can't be partitioned, functioning only as a commercially unviable proof of concept.  The market cap for Eth should crash to nothingness long before the legal framework catches up.  Maybe that's why Vitalik is hiding in Switzerland right now, just in case the SEC figures things out sooner and wants to make an example.

Fornication seems pretty centralized to me if 1 in 200 people is a descendent of Ghengis Khan.  If you take into account that groups are isolated and never come in contact with each other, and shouldn't even be tallied together, that number would be shockingly higher if you only used the Eurasian population.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2010/08/1-in-200-men-direct-descendants-of-genghis-khan/



First of all, the killer app of the blockchain is likely currency, nothing else.  The next runner up would be a decentralized exchange or marketplace.  Either for financial transactions or an ebay/amazon-like experience.  Bitcoin did rise to prominence from the Silk Road after all.  The 3rd runner up is unknown, but it might not even be these so called dapps.  Ethereum will always have abysmal load capacity, much more problemtic than Bitcoin scaling, so even if dapps were the 3rd killer app of the blockchain, Ethereum is unable to even accomplish that feat.

Not sure why Spoederman would boycott Litecoin over adding a feature.  There's not enough to separate it from Bitcoin now, so it seems like they should be doing something...

All I know is that aristocrats were able to take advantage of the system that was the Roman republic to shape the system entirely to their benefit at the detriment of everyone else (just like today).  Then when Caesar took over, life for the common man was better under him and Octavius, and possibly even people like Nero and Commodus; with the exception of killing random people for no reason, but the statistical odds are on your side.

So, by decentralizing power at the top through a senate or whatever form, you're also decentralizing liability for bad actions, giving them plausible deniabiality, and making them harder to overthrow.  When there's one man at the top, people just kill them and get it over with to fix the system.  The whole "anarchy" thing is stupid, because just like Anonymint always pulls up the power vacuum point in regards to economics, there is always a power vacuum that will be filled by a "strongman" somewhere to abolish anarchy.

I guess you voted for option #4 then

Is the entire thing still hinged on the fact that it fails if the algo becomes optimized by over 2x speedup on specialized hardware to create identical pool centralization?  Even if you believe it's possible to create such a thing, the fact that you need to launch the coin and have it exist for years before the answer is readily apparent makes it a very unattractive target for adoption, because at any time the fundamentals can just completely disappear when some guy like Wolf slightly optimizes the hashing function...

In another thread, both Smooth and I seemed to feel this more traditional PoW-mail, send your own transactions approach would be the Occam's Razor solution for Satoshi and already would have been explored if it was viable.  Instead, Bitcoin went the more Rube Goldberg approach because the other methods weren't deemed feasible.

No:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1398586.0