|
^You're just making it seem intuitively wronger. Wait, dumbening isn't even a word...
>it should be largely negated by a company's incentive to plan for the future
But you got sort of a prisoner's dilemma thing happening -- let's say 3 major megamines, and it only makes sense to scale down if *others don't*. You don't know what others will do, so?
*it might be reasonable to keep mining at a loss, hoping that competition runs out of $$$ faster than you, it might make sense to make backroom deals & cooperate, so many different possibilities...
|
|
|
|
^Yeah, this is just a tangent, not related to the Core/Classic drama. Just something that seems intuitively ...wrong.
But could be missing something, so just asking.
The entire thing seems intuitively wrong to you...  Yeah, but on a different level -- V1 buzz bomb may seem intuitively wrong to me too, which won't keep me from pointing out peculiarities of design (on top of its moral implications)  |
|
|
|
|
^Yeah, this is just a tangent, not related to the Core/Classic drama. Just something that seems intuitively ...wrong.
But could be missing something, so asking.
Re. edit: so how do you see it being done? Miners playing chicken & seeing who drops first, mining at a loss for a while to kill competition? Even then, the bigger reward granularity -> bigger hashrate fluctuation. I think.
|
|
|
|
< >THe btc is shady with such problem about trust, we have a forum that need to support such activities?
The forum should not. Nor should it support illegal gambling (yeah, it's illegal in US, where theymos' at). And yet, here we are... You have a chance to step out of the norms of society and establish a new way of thinking <snip> You mean step out of society's norms & into the traffic to gamble online & invest in Ponzis? Err... How about no? and you want to let the governement creep back in to the discussion of what is legal and what is not?
I'm not letting the government "creep back in" anywhere. Mainly because it never asks for my permission, oddly enough. But it *will* step in, without knocking. And ban the shit out of Bitcoin for everybody. Because you just *had to* gamble away all your money to make a political statement. If you judge what some one does with there bitcoin you are allowed to in a free world. What you should not be allowed to do is restrict what some one does with their funds because you see it do be stupid or ill advised. Any form of expression that is connected to a account is a restriction because it allows people to judge those that partake. If I have to walk around with a label on my head that says I am into granny porn,it would be a rough go. Negative rep works in same way. Dear Confused: Outside of society's norms, you're free to jerk it to grannies, just like other freedom lovers are free to label you & tell everyone about it. No rules for you = no rules for them. Everything not expressly forbidden is permitted |
|
|
|
Again I see that messing up between gambling and ponzi.
Ponzi is not at all similar to gambling.
In ponzi there is no fairness or trust that could get back your invested money.
When you participate in a ponzi your success or failure is entirely dependent on the whims of known scumbags.
In gambling everything can be verified and the website stays for very long time. Have you ever heard of the term probably fair?
Again: Dice, Ponzis, and poker are all forms of gambling, but the rules are different. Though you could insist that poker ain't gambling due to its inherent dishonesty: the guy across the table from you is allowed, within the game ruleset, to lie (bluff). |
|
|
|
The halving schedule is pretty extreme, at the beginning. It becomes less and less extreme quite quickly as the number of transactions scales up with their accompanying fees...
Wait... we're supposed to be scaling up the number of transactions!!?!
Yeah, just have a hard time rationalizing why it had to be *halving* -- why not 10percenting, but more often? |
|
|
|
< >THe btc is shady with such problem about trust, we have a forum that need to support such activities?
The forum should not. Nor should it support illegal gambling (yeah, it's illegal in US, where theymos' at). And yet, here we are... You have a chance to step out of the norms of society and establish a new way of thinking <snip> You mean step out of society's norms & into the traffic to gamble online & invest in Ponzis? Err... How about no? and you want to let the governement creep back in to the discussion of what is legal and what is not?
I'm not letting the government "creep back in" anywhere. Mainly because it never asks for my permission, oddly enough. But it *will* step in, without knocking. And ban the shit out of Bitcoin for everybody. Because you just *had to* gamble away all your money to make a political statement. |
|
|
|
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-March/012489.htmlWe are coming up on the subsidy halving this July, and there have been some
concerns raised that a non-trivial number of miners could potentially drop off
the network. This would result in a significantly longer block interval, which
also means a higher per-block transaction volume, which could cause the block
size limit to legitimately be hit much sooner than expected.
[...]
To alleviate this risk, it seems reasonable to propose a hardfork to the
difficulty adjustment algorithm so it can adapt quicker to such a significant
drop in mining rate. BtcDrak tells me he has well-tested code for this in his
altcoin Hahahaha Go go Core! In all truthfulness, I have always wondered the reason for the 2016-block difficulty adjustment. A finer-grained adjustment seems just natural to me. Though I've never looked into it. What are the arguments against a more continuous adjustment? (The four-year halving always seemed funny to me too. Done merely for simplicity of implementation?) Yeah, I wondered about it too, not the difficulty adjustment but the rate of reward halving reduction (halving seems like adjusting a wristwatch with a 5-pound sledge). My only guess (other than laziness simplicity of implementation) is the chance of hitting some sort of overcompensating feedback loop/parasitic oscillation? The point I was trying to make was Core claiming the evol of hard forks & necessity of keeping the race Bitcoin pure (changing parameters potentially bringing about unpredictable butterfly effects), while, at the same time, coming up with their own reasons to hardfork. Edit: and this ... If the difficulty adjusted very quickly or continuously, the minority side have a better chance of solving some blocks and keeping their chain somewhat functional while they roll out software that changes POW and reboots difficulty (if needed after this idea). ... |
|
|
|
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-March/012489.htmlWe are coming up on the subsidy halving this July, and there have been some
concerns raised that a non-trivial number of miners could potentially drop off
the network. This would result in a significantly longer block interval, which
also means a higher per-block transaction volume, which could cause the block
size limit to legitimately be hit much sooner than expected.
[...]
To alleviate this risk, it seems reasonable to propose a hardfork to the
difficulty adjustment algorithm so it can adapt quicker to such a significant
drop in mining rate. BtcDrak tells me he has well-tested code for this in his
altcoin Hahahaha Go go Core!
|
|
|
|
 The movement of the ETH market keeps me amazed. Light, fast and with a strong bottom. Maybe even too fast, because I'm getting afraid to trade and I'm beginning to feel like a hodler. It is a weird sensation, but I kind of like it.
Ahah ^^ Well the whole question about ETH is: will it be sustainable? I don't see how ETH can sustain its own growth. Eth isn't even used currently am I wrong? Altcoin bla bla bla... This is "Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion". So I would highly appreciate it if you could stick to this topic. I'm glad that you're happy with your investment but please stop shilling.It's more than obvious!! Is this "Bitcoin price, denominated in $US, movement tracking & discussion"? |
|
|
|
If you send money to an online dice site or casino and pull the lever to see if you have won you depend on the players before you being convinced to send money in, in order for you to profit.
No, now you guys are just making up dumb excuses. Thats a gambler's fallacy that any of your previous rolls, or anyone's for that matter, have an effect on your upcoming rolls. Does the sequence of events matter? In other words, does it matter that my winnings come directly from the person who gambles after I do? If they come from the guy who gambled before me, that makes it OK? Of course the sequence of events matters! If you log in to a Dice site, make a deposit of BTC and roll, you have no idea whether the wins/losses of the people before you will mean you will find yourself fortunate enough to be joining in at the best time in the algorithm or the worst. Your wins and losses are not knowingly dictated by the players before you, although they are a factor, the players before you have no way of knowing how their playing will affect your playing. If you join a Ponzi and send money in, you then have to seek out other people and convince them to send money in so that you don't end up being the user who doesn't get paid. The purpose of joining the scheme is to *not* be the mug who doesn't profit, so you have to post encouraging words in their threads to rustle up some other people who, through your post, will be encouraged enough to send in their money, resulting in some of their money being shared with you. Your profit comes, not from a provably-fair algorithm unaffected by other players but, instead, a mathematically unsustainable process of finding other people to take the fall for you. But now we're just talking about the rules of particular gambling games & best strategies to use. Some gambling games have a strong skill/social component (bluffing in poker comes to mind), others do not (dice). Dice [in principle] is a game of pure chance, inevitably impoverishing its players (on the average) due to house edge. Some clearly like losing, see gambling addicts. No sane human being (who is not trying to launder money) would use a dice site, just like no sane human being would use a ponzi site. But we're not a mental health organization, we let people keep their kinks. Ponzi is a more interesting game, that's all. Everyone but the operator will lose, on the average, but that's neither here nor there |
|
|
|
< >THe btc is shady with such problem about trust, we have a forum that need to support such activities?
The forum should not. Nor should it support illegal gambling (yeah, it's illegal in US, where theymos' at). And yet, here we are... |
|
|
|
The profit you seek to make through your participation in these schemes is that which is stolen from other users.
You do understand that's how *all* gambling works, correct? No, it isn't. Most gambling doesn't involve deception. Ponzi scams *do*. Ponzi scams promise their victims that they will make a profit. It's a lie, because not everyone can make a profit. Those who don't make a profit are defrauded. Dice sites make it clear that they are offering a game of chance. They show the odds up front. "You have a 49.5% chance of doubling your money; there is a 1% house edge". Players know they might lose. Nobody's surprised when they lose a coin toss. If you can't see the difference between these two (basically: Ponzi scams are inherently dishonest, Dice sites aren't) then I don't know how to help you. >Most gambling doesn't involve deception. Ponzi scams *do*. Ponzi * scams* do, but so do scam gambling sites. We aren't talking about those -- we're talking about Ponzis which clearly state exactly what they are. See? |
|
|
|
Let's try this one more time for the dumbest fucks in this thread:
1. It matters NOT whether participating in a ponzi is illegal. This is not even the issue.
2. The profit you seek to make through your participation in these schemes is that which is stolen from other users.
You do understand that's how *all* gambling works, correct? Or did you think dice websit operators are secretly manufacturing widgets & passing the profits on to the gamblers? Now I *know* you ain't so dumb, this is just playing dumb. If you send money to an online dice site or casino and pull the lever to see if you have won you don't depend on the players after you being convinced to send money in, in order for you to profit. Next! Where do you suppose dice sites get their money, if not from other players, what do you suppose the business model is? Explain? Every gambling site has a bank to start with you dumbass. For those who cant afford having a bank, they incorporate Moneypot. Since you dont even know that, might as well just stfu and sit by the side. Most Ponzis have a bankroll to start with, even if it's only to start a website & bootstrap the Ponzi. Just like a dice site -- the initial bankroll is replenished & grows from the players' money. Duh. You don't think the dice site starts with a bankroll & just keeps on giving it away, do you? BTW, try to abstain from words like "dumbass" when you talk to your betters. Learn some fucking manners, faggot. |
|
|
|
If you send money to an online dice site or casino and pull the lever to see if you have won you depend on the players before you being convinced to send money in, in order for you to profit.
No, now you guys are just making up dumb excuses. Thats a gambler's fallacy that any of your previous rolls, or anyone's for that matter, have an effect on your upcoming rolls. Does the sequence of events matter? In other words, does it matter that my winnings come directly from the person who gambles after I do? If they come from the guy who gambled before me, that makes it OK? |
|
|
|
Let's try this one more time for the dumbest fucks in this thread:
1. It matters NOT whether participating in a ponzi is illegal. This is not even the issue.
2. The profit you seek to make through your participation in these schemes is that which is stolen from other users.
You do understand that's how *all* gambling works, correct? Or did you think dice websit operators are secretly manufacturing widgets & passing the profits on to the gamblers? Now I *know* you ain't so dumb, this is just playing dumb. If you send money to an online dice site or casino and pull the lever to see if you have won you don't depend on the players after you being convinced to send money in, in order for you to profit. Next! Where do you suppose dice sites get their money, if not from other players, what do you suppose the business model is? Explain? |
|
|
|
Let's try this one more time for the dumbest fucks in this thread:
1. It matters NOT whether participating in a ponzi is illegal. This is not even the issue.
2. The profit you seek to make through your participation in these schemes is that which is stolen from other users.
You do understand that's how *all* gambling works, correct? Or did you think dice websit operators are secretly manufacturing widgets & passing the profits on to the gamblers? P.S. But I liek what you're doing. Dice sites next? No you dont understand how gambling works and why its different from ponzis. i suggest to look both up. No, you're an idiot, it is a fact. I suggest you look it up. <==see, I can make meaningless inane replies too Now either explain you mean, or stfu, K? |
|
|
|
ETH up 25.46 % today
Yeah, but Bitcoin has an awesome community... Get lost Lambie, shit ppl like you are toxic for this community. Mainstream forums are the place for you, you can hang out there with those other trolls, retards and all other scums. Bitcoin Friend: I'm in the midst of a social experiment.  Please don't let me interrupt, pretend I ain't even here; return to Tunneling plz. |
|
|
|
Let's try this one more time for the dumbest fucks in this thread:
1. It matters NOT whether participating in a ponzi is illegal. This is not even the issue.
2. The profit you seek to make through your participation in these schemes is that which is stolen from other users.
You do understand that's how *all* gambling works, correct? Or did you think dice websit operators are secretly manufacturing widgets & passing the profits on to the gamblers? P.S. But I liek what you're doing. Dice sites next? |
|
|
|
ETH up 25.46 % today
Yeah, but Bitcoin has an awesome community... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
