So what is the process to re claim your old wallet if say your computer crashes and all your files were deleted?
sounds unrealistic. What failure would have caused this? |
|
|
|
See that is the problem. People are mixing up their anti-government/anti-establishment sentiments with good science which has changed the world for the better.
if everyone is catalogued, monitored, evaluated by algorithms without their consent, watched for "anomalous behaviour", data-mined for increasing corporate profits and basically treated as a herd of chattels for State "tax farming" is the world really better? (albeit slightly healthier) be careful of the utopia you wish for None of this has any impact on the validity of vaccinations and the science behind it. only if you choose to ignore risk/benefits of totalitarian government "health" controls on general quality of life, well-being and mental health as it influences individual health. I heard the Soviet union had quite an unhealthy populace? |
|
|
|
tell me somebody isn't watching the chart of the Transports and stepping in to reverse almost all intraday attempts to violate this support level as evidenced by the spinning top intraday reversals; especially today after the previous singular violation on 4/6. sure, one can just implicate speculators buying at support but otoh, it could be the Magic Hand of the PPT: tell me anybody is surprised with this? the PPT has gotten a lot more sophisticated since the inaugural 1987 rescue, not the least because of the massive profits to be made by it's market-facing, front-running functionaries (JPM, GS, MS). They are by now undoubtedly running HFT algorithms that monitor, trade (intervene) and control (set levels/bands) all major market pricing to such a fine scale that it is arguable as to whether there isn't ANY major market action that hasn't been officially sanctioned. Flash-crashes being the exception when the FED/USTreas PPT control systems lose control temporarily. It's just a magic fun game hall of mirrors illusion/casino meant to keep the rubes playing the game and the man-on-street asleep to the underlying corrupt, inefficient dysfunctional financial/monetary system. It really is morphing into a modern version of the Soviet era command-economy with all financial control at the center; everything seems to grind along okay for quite a while but it is terribly inefficient economically, ripe for abuse at all levels and inevitably dies due to paralysing stagnation from gross misallocation of resources due to vibrant creative destruction being denied for decades. It is again the gray hand of the State clamping down and strangling free markets to death, only this time in a slow painful manner. Look at what happened to bitcoin in USA since Fed/wall st. took an interest, it died. |
|
|
|
See that is the problem. People are mixing up their anti-government/anti-establishment sentiments with good science which has changed the world for the better.
if everyone is catalogued, monitored, evaluated by algorithms without their consent, watched for "anomalous behaviour", data-mined for increasing corporate profits and basically treated as a herd of chattels for State "tax farming" is the world really better? (albeit slightly healthier) be careful of the utopia you wish for |
|
|
|
miners ... snip .... pay taxes ...
 |
|
|
|
more like fumbling around looking for their keys |
|
|
|
Question: how will we know DOOOM when it gets here? Is it here yet? Is it in arrivals?
When you see giant 20-30k red dildos and the price dropping $30-50 in minutes. Pretty simple really. so we can potentially profit from whales dumping and pumping if we do it at the same time too ? they are all whales in here, didn't you notice? |
|
|
|
Will we finally see some asks today?  Amateur, yes. But this is bitcoin. um, no it is actually wall st. fumbling around with bitcoin ... 2 weeks for paperwork?? the only reason BIT exists is because most of the investors are too stupid to manage their own coins or seek out liquidity ... amateur, yes. |
|
|
|
 Shorts begging for cheap coins ... guys get a life you're stinking up the place with your desperation and nasty humourless trolling. |
|
|
|
 nanobrain and trofli ... get a room already, honeymoon suite in socialist hotel utopia ... cuba? |
|
|
|
In terms of economic incentives toward SC bleeding value out of MC, which appears to be a major misgiving with SCs; it has already happened with alts less so now (but I think it will accelerate again when a bull phase returns) and also with counterparty, mastercoin and bitshares that are in essence one-way pegged assets.
So we already have it in the protocol to create 1-way pegs, you can't stop that and they have shown how they siphon value out of the main chain, e.g. mastercoin has been many multiples of its btc 'cost' at times. In all probability, making a 2-way peg facility available that makes it more efficient to go in and out of the MC makes it less likely than it currently is for value in total to exit the MC via super successful 1-way pegged assets. Therefore in that analysis, as the protocol currently exists it is more vulnerable than one allowing for 2-way pegs. You could consider it as the 2-way peg closing the economic value loophole for an attack with very successful 1-way pegged assets ... shhhhh. After a successful soft-fork allowing for 2-way pegged assets any entity proposing 1-way pegged assets will be viewed skeptically and economically disadvantaged by the market perception of losing interoperability with the MC. The market will prefer 2-way pegged assets over 1-way pegged every time, and that is a net benefit to the total value proposition of bitcoin surely.
That is an interesting way to look at it, thanks so we have supposedly all these one way 2.0's siphoning value out of the MC, so i have an even better idea: we'll make a change to the protocol to make it even easier to facilitate a thousand more at least. but it'll be better b/c the value can come back if it wants to! In a SC the value cannot be permanently lost since it is still in the same circulatory system and the pressure (value) can be efficiently transferred around. Comparing a diode to a copper wire is not controversial; one allows current in one direction only, the other both. Or a non-return valve to a tap. I'm not here to convince you btw, but you do seem to be making it harder than it needs to be. |
|
|
|
|
Disregarding completely any motives (real or imagined) behind people implementing SC consider the following (which i haven't seen elsewhere).
In terms of economic incentives toward SC bleeding value out of MC, which appears to be a major misgiving with SCs; it has already happened with alts less so now (but I think it will accelerate again when a bull phase returns) and also with counterparty, mastercoin and bitshares that are in essence one-way pegged assets.
So we already have it in the protocol to create 1-way pegs, you can't stop that and they have shown how they siphon value out of the main chain, e.g. mastercoin has been many multiples of its btc 'cost' at times. In all probability, making a 2-way peg facility available that makes it more efficient to go in and out of the MC makes it less likely than it currently is for value in total to exit the MC via super successful 1-way pegged assets. Therefore in that analysis, as the protocol currently exists it is more vulnerable than one allowing for 2-way pegs. You could consider it as the 2-way peg closing the economic value loophole for an attack with very successful 1-way pegged assets ... shhhhh. After a successful soft-fork allowing for 2-way pegged assets any entity proposing 1-way pegged assets will be viewed skeptically and economically disadvantaged by the market perception of losing interoperability with the MC. The market will prefer 2-way pegged assets over 1-way pegged every time, and that is a net benefit to the total value proposition of bitcoin surely.
|
|
|
|
Here's another way to think of bitcoin, and sidechains. Picture that bitcoins are like digital real estate and you can already add features to your plot of real estate; create coloured coins, burn them (lock irretrievably) to prove mastercoin/counterparty ownership, multisig, smart scripting conditions, etc. People are already building things on their bitcoin plots that increase the value of their own piece, but also the whole value. A sidechain is just another "building project" that is anticipated to increase the value of their piece of sand, and most likely everyone elses. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Tc_fhTPqbdlvApnWQWsgzG1U6NwN9lgkQsTdm5O-9iA/edit#slide=id.g6eb72e55c_0395see slide 15-19 specifically. i just referenced that talk above. i have a real problem with slide 19 that shows "reversion" or getting your BTC back from the scBTC. as i said above, during a 51% SC attack, the last thing the attacker (miner) will do is include your proof of lock in a block to let you off the SC. he either wants to steal the scBTC or destroy them. most likely the latter, b/c the mere happenstance of the attack will likely destroy all exchange value of scBTC. Without knowing the specific mechanics of the peg it is meaningless to discuss whether or not the reversion would be successful in the case of mining (or other) attacks. E.g. there might be a timelock on the whole sidechain, so that it is like a 10 year or 99 year leasehold arrangement. There are many ways this could go, dismissing SC outright is denying experimenting and innovation that could solve some of bitcoins problems in tangential ways, even if sidechains are never a success. To me, getting militant against SC seems a bit like the goldbuggery with respect to bitcoins being able to have value as a monetary unit. Keeping an open mind can pay huge dividends, dangers and risks can be mitigated when they are apparent, knowable and quantified. fair enough. but the flipside is also true; holding out unrealistic promises & capabilities should not be used as an excuse to block or derail much needed MC development that may in fact be more ideal. it never hurts to discuss these concepts. absolutely, e.g; a chunk of MC dev work is currently being funded by a sidechain research company  , and appears to be the only company funding core infrastructure of MC with a long term view (besides Bitpay's jgarzik) and stated commitments to open, permissionless platforms for innovation, in fact, that is their view of what SC will also allow to stop the energy bleed into alts. this makes an interesting listen in retrospect (also before Blockstream was announced or fully gestated i expect) https://letstalkbitcoin.com/e99-sidechain-innovation/ |
|
|
|
Here's another way to think of bitcoin, and sidechains. Picture that bitcoins are like digital real estate and you can already add features to your plot of real estate; create coloured coins, burn them (lock irretrievably) to prove mastercoin/counterparty ownership, multisig, smart scripting conditions, etc. People are already building things on their bitcoin plots that increase the value of their own piece, but also the whole value. A sidechain is just another "building project" that is anticipated to increase the value of their piece of sand, and most likely everyone elses. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Tc_fhTPqbdlvApnWQWsgzG1U6NwN9lgkQsTdm5O-9iA/edit#slide=id.g6eb72e55c_0395see slide 15-19 specifically. i just referenced that talk above. i have a real problem with slide 19 that shows "reversion" or getting your BTC back from the scBTC. as i said above, during a 51% SC attack, the last thing the attacker (miner) will do is include your proof of lock in a block to let you off the SC. he either wants to steal the scBTC or destroy them. most likely the latter, b/c the mere happenstance of the attack will likely destroy all exchange value of scBTC. Without knowing the specific mechanics of the peg it is meaningless to discuss whether or not the reversion would be successful in the case of mining (or other) attacks. E.g. there might be a timelock on the whole sidechain, so that it is like a 10 year or 99 year leasehold arrangement. There are many ways this could go, dismissing SC outright is denying experimenting and innovation that could solve some of bitcoins problems in tangential ways, even if sidechains are never a success. To me, getting militant against SC seems a bit like the goldbuggery with respect to bitcoins being able to have value as a monetary unit. Keeping an open mind can pay huge dividends, dangers and risks can be mitigated when they are apparent, knowable and quantified. |
|
|
|
Here's another way to think of bitcoin, and sidechains. Picture that bitcoins are like digital real estate and you can already add features/improvements to your plot of real estate; create coloured coins, burn bitcoins (lock irretrievably) to prove mastercoin/counterparty ownership, multisig (P2SH), smart scripting conditions, etc. People are already building things on their bitcoin plots that increase the value of their own piece, but also the whole value. A sidechain is just another "building project" that is anticipated to increase the value of their piece of sand, and most likely everyone elses. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Tc_fhTPqbdlvApnWQWsgzG1U6NwN9lgkQsTdm5O-9iA/edit#slide=id.g6eb72e55c_0395see slide 15-19 specifically. |
|
|
|
Many more bids today, one is at 35.75
bids for $1000/btc go through on localbitcoins.com sometimes too ... Bids don't mean actually executed orders and $35.75 means $350 per Bitcoin, a far stretch from $1,000. And I bet the $1000/BTC bids on local Bitcoins are people trying to get lucky from uneducated buyers and rarely and few such orders would ever happen. Finally, nobody watches localbitcoins while BIT is being watched by everyone, including the media and if we start getting orders being executed at way above market value and with any regularity then I would expect a lot of press and I would expect arbitrage players to quickly close the gap by driving the price of Bitcoin up. ... point being it is like the butchers shop in the old Soviet Union "oh those prices are for sausages that don't exist maam" at least lowly localbitcoins has actual trades but bids without trades are just fantasy markets. |
|
|
|
Many more bids today, one is at 35.75
bids for $1000/btc go through on localbitcoins.com sometimes too ... |
|
|
|
looks interesting, the blurb reads like the book might be worth a read. Key point is that all bitcoin's 'problems' as perceived are just moneys problems ... find me a form of money that hasn't attracted criminals, prostitution, drugs, scams, frauds, those are humanities problems, money is just the tool by which we betray our value interactions with each other, amongst other things. Bitcoin seems to make an excellent looking glass by which to view human failings. |
|
|
|
Hope I'm not disrupting the Troll Observer thread. Anyone have an opinion on Bitreserve? They just poached a Nike exec and have a bitcoin-to-precious-metals feature that is at first glance intriguing. Looking into it, the poached exec who will be COO says he'll be surprised if bitcoin the currency exists in five years. Is this just a questionable hire for a fringe bitcoin company or what? This sentiment is voiced constantly, but not usually from within the industry. http://fortune.com/2015/04/06/nike-cio-bitcoin/I'm kind of surprised they haven't been shutdown or harassed by the Feds for operating an unlicensed banking operation yet. It seems quite similar to what e-gold was doing and that guy ended up in ankle bracelets for a long time awaiting trial on some vague-sounding charges. |
|
|
|
they assume that notion of "government" is still relevant in an era of widespread decentralised networks disintermediating every necessary function that governments currently perform badly. The concepts of 'employment' and 'workforce' will also be redefined in the presence of widespread shared information, arbitration and capital allocation resources. Basically it is nonsense to even contemplate what influences technology might have on society when you have no way of knowing what the full suite of those technologies will be. Like the AT&T ad from the early nineties that has the guy sending a fax from the beach ... envisaged global connectedness but missed fax obsolesence to email/messaging? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZb0avfQme8 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
