You still havent read the szabo article I linked to you many times. Do that first. Iota i agree on.. spectre protocol is much better (aviv's project). But your wrong on so many levels its hard to know where to start with u other than telling you to read more. LOL, the Szabo view makes the erroneous assumption that PoW doesn't centralize more by the day resulting in something resembling a federated chain. So yea, his stupid economic view might work if everyone pretends a federated chain is "decentralized". The so called fundamentals are all lies pushed by people who know it but lie anyway, while the price is entirely a fraud as well. People like the Winklevoss have 200,000 coins they bought for next to nothing they can send to Coinbase and use as margin collateral to 10-50x the price overnight (the same thing that was done to create the artificially high Ethereum price on Poloniex). Do you really think it's a good idea for people to be able to rig markets by putting up collateral that not only has no real value due to not being a real commodity, but it's a completely imaginary asset that doesn't exist in the first place? That's an even bigger scam than the fraudulent Wall Street markets that existed before it. And it's not just bitcoin, they can create an infinite amount of coins and do this over and over. How is that not a scam? lol. These markets are all just fraud bubbles and the only type of assets that have real value are ones that exist in the real world you can take physical delivery of.  |
|
|
|
|
When the buys at the margin are all large and in rapid succession like this where it's stupidly obvious that they're not buying because they actually want bitcoin but because they want to try and move the market, you know you're in a pump and dump.
|
|
|
|
Another day of bitcoin scam: |
|
|
|
An expert on scamming and manipulation sees bitcoin as a manipulated scam. CNN is promoting bitcoin in the video, that's how you can tell it's a govt created scam to try and keep people out of the gold and silver market and then move people into a digital only, cashless society slave system. |
|
|
|
Well, I'm a right-of-center-leaning, Conservative nigger.
How do recommend we resolve this ?
Whites and blacks have a long history of joining forces in order to fight the evil cult known as jews:  |
|
|
|
Relax guys, Satoshi's vision is alive and well, it's just called bitcoin cash now.
All I care about is when this entire ecosystem eventually implodes, I hope the jews and/or wall street (same difference) are left holding the bag instead of idiot middle-americans purchasing $20,000 bitcoins and then having the bottom drop out to $0. It looks like that's how it will play out since the middle-class is already tapped out anyway and has no money to purchase this vapor garbage. Wall street jews attempt to pump bitcoin and discover...wait, nobody else actually has money to buy our pump. |
|
|
|
If bitcoin is worth $100k each then I think $100 fees are reasonable. No crisis.
Wouldn't the logical course of action in said event be to dump all of your bitcoin at once since it requires you to spend $100 everytime you want to use it, and then transfer your money into a cheaper system instead of spending $100+ per day in fees? lol. Of course, said paradigm would have you seeking out two instruments, the base of Exter's pyramid since it provides the best store of value (gold and silver) and then holding what you need to keep liquid to spend in the worst money of gresham's law since it has lowest fees (fiat dollars). |
|
|
|
They can be very good engineers, but they are pretty bad at economics.
Was not Peter Todd the one who argued that bitcoin should have an inflation system integrated?
You are out of your league in this topic, as it's obvious the security model for bitcoin gets worse the more transaction fees make up the bulk of block reward in comparison to fixed emission. There are also different adversarial mining problems in each circumstance. There's far more variables in bitcoin than people believe of things that can go haywire. Another issue is that adversarial mining is like a free win to shut down your opponents assuming you have more hashpower than they do. This is actually quite a big piece of evidence that there's a lot of Chinese miners and others who are colluding in a pump and dump fashion because otherwise you would see far more things like adversarial mining going on. You would likely only see none if...everyone was colluding. Some people do believe the Chinese colluded in order to shut down KNC and try and corner the market, though. |
|
|
|
but ... it really is a failure.
Failure as a *decentralized* payment network - yes. Failure as a 100% speculative pump and dump - no. There might as well just be one centralized exchange with an item called "widgets" that serve no purpose beyond having a fixed supply for people to bid up and down.  |
|
|
|
So the pareto distribution is fucking hax, you know?
Back in the bad old days before bitcoin, I had no money and made no money.
Now I have money and I use that money to make more money. Just made about $300 shuffling money around. That's like two days worth of hard work for low end jobs. Actual effort expended today, about an hour. And a bit of chatting people up which I frankly don't include under the banner of "work" since it's an excuse for me to ramble.
Today was a slow day.
And this is just a side income compared to, uh, sitting back and watching the price go up. I don't strictly speaking need to do it.
Apparently, once you start winning you just keep winning.
Also being poor is expensive.
More like the system was designed to penalize people who actually produce something while rewarding people who produce nothing (aka jewish money changers). So you've discovered that emulating a jewish money changer is the most productive use of your time...until everyone does it and the system collapses from peak financialization scam bubble. Then physical metals win because they're the most scam resistant. |
|
|
|
looks like bcash will overtake btc soon enough
Well, technically all these coins are scams since every single one has centralized mining or stake, but whoever the scam leader is, is determined by who can fool the most people into claiming it's decentralized while also offering the lowest fees. Since Bcash and Bitcoin are both entirely ASIC centralized under the same people, neither wins that department, but it's possible Bcash could win simply by having lower fees. That is, unless it's possible to create a decentralized Lightning network, but it's not possible, it just centralizes bitcoin even further than it already is. So everything depends on how many people you can trick with propaganda between each centralized system. |
|
|
|
We will refer to this day as the day bitcoin died due to becoming an altcoin that also results in the entire sector dying by diffusion since there's no real overhead to create an infinite supply of altcoins, unlike the noble metals where you can't just create a new gold or silver out of the blue. Bitcoin is a system of artificial scarcity of coin count and a fee market that requires artificial scarcity of block size. Altcoins remove both of those things that bitcoin requires to function. This is why people like Luke Jr are always spamming anti-altcoin shit, but they're entirely in the wrong because: <r0ach_> it honestly pisses me off where people like (let's say midnightmagic) claim every coin except bitcoin is automagically a scam yet bitcoin isn't a scam. That's just a pro-usury stance where everyone is forced to buy some idiot's overpriced coins and pay their overpriced fees. <r0ach_> they're literally practicing usury while claiming it's decentralization LOL |
|
|
|
This is a better debate about it, where people claim net neutrality is socialist: http://steemit.com/internet/@schattenjaeger/net-neutrality-is-not-a-human-right-it-s-socialismAnd my reply to it: What are you smoking? Net neutrality is the idea that you pay a flat fee to a broadband provider and they aren't allowed to manipulate your content. If they are allowed to manipulate your content, you aren't using an "internet", you're using an "intranet" because they will firewall off competitors or ideas they don't want people to have access too.
The end result is that there is no internet and there's only serfs who have the ability to choose which corporate walled garden (like the apple store) to subscribe to. So yea, you are sort of correct stating net neutrality is "socialism", if by that you mean all large, complex, public works projects are incapable of being done by the private sector because they don't have the land usage rights or millions of other rights to lay down pipes everywhere on other people's property to facilitate that business.
So I guess the argument boils down to the fact that socialism is anti-freedom, but can temporarily leverage resources to create larger, more complex structures than the private sector, before socialism inevitably collapses from immediately turning into crony capitalism. This makes "freedom" kind of a pro-Amish movement, but a free society will be less able to leverage resources to tackle big problems or create technological spectacles. This makes the Amish kind of right that technology is a deal with the devil. If you want the internet, then you want socialism, otherwise you're getting an intranet. |
|
|
|
And why the Anonymint view on technology being good is (anonymint's favorite word) myopic:From the Steemit thread: https://steemit.com/internet/@schattenjaeger/net-neutrality-is-not-a-human-right-it-s-socialismWhat are you smoking? Net neutrality is the idea that you pay a flat fee to a broadband provider and they aren't allowed to manipulate your content. If they are allowed to manipulate your content, you aren't using an "internet", you're using an "intranet" because they will firewall off competitors or ideas they don't want people to have access too.
The end result is that there is no internet and there's only serfs who have the ability to choose which corporate walled garden (like the apple store) to subscribe to. So yea, you are sort of correct stating net neutrality is "socialism", if by that you mean all large, complex, public works projects are incapable of being done by the private sector because they don't have the land usage rights or millions of other rights to lay down pipes everywhere on other people's property to facilitate that business.
So I guess the argument boils down to the fact that socialism is anti-freedom, but can temporarily leverage resources to create larger, more complex structures than the private sector, before socialism inevitably collapses from immediately turning into crony capitalism. This makes "freedom" kind of a pro-Amish movement, but a free society will be less able to leverage resources to tackle big problems or create technological spectacles. This makes the Amish kind of right that technology is a deal with the devil. If you want the internet, then you want socialism, otherwise you're getting an intranet.
|
|
|
|
let's buy iota then
IOTA is worthless. A DAG is completely counterintuitive to trying to create consensus on some type of variable or balance sheet. To use a DAG, you're required to create an artificial, forced consensus (and that's exactly what they're doing). It's like IOTA and Byteball were created while ignoring any of the issues that had to be researched while trying to create bitcoin (bitcoin - another system that does not work since it's designed to centralize, but at least succeeds in creating centralized consensus). In the case of Byteball, they just use an obfuscated form of bitshares DPOS, thus invalidating any reason to have a DAG at all since the DPOS system completely negates DAG due to the DPOS layer taking precedent in the hierarchy. Systems that have removed the so called "triple entry accounting" aka blockchain, are also way more prone to being instantly destroyed by black swans. But in the case of bitcoin, it's not even real triple entry accounting if it's designed to centralize, now is it? It's like claiming the act of Bank of America giving customers a weekly balance sheet print out is a triple entry accounting breakthrough. It doesn't matter if people have access to store read only digits for no reason, it only matters who controls the fucking digits! If the block validators (aka miners) are designed to centralize, they can insert chain anchor, censor or block transactions, increase or lower coin count, or mutate the protocol any way they want. A 51% attack is NOT a so called miner raising the coin cap above 21 million or double spending only, a 51% attack is any type of collusion to change the protocol in any way because one man's wanted change is always going to be another man's nightmare. If mining is just a power vacuum that is always exploited by centralized cartels, then you have no redundancy, you just have authoritarianism and no reason for bitcoin to exist. |
|
|
|
There probably won't even be a bitcoin or US dollar 10 years from now in the first place. Both the energy industry and the financial scam complex are collapsing, and that's the reason they can't extend and pretend this time in the financial sector, solely due to the energy sector peaking and now declining which implodes all the ponzies that need infinite growth to survive. It's not a very popular opinion for people to hear, but humans go through cyclical dark ages, which is not a surprising result when taking into account increases in complexity have diminishing returns, as well as diminishing returns and backfire of trying to perform top-down centralization management at scale, and the act of trying to apply infinite growth to a closed ecosystem. The dark ages is just a correction to remove inefficient systems, systems that failed due to over-centralization, systems whose output is much less than the input due to being overly complex and thus a waste of energy, and so forth. Contrary to the majority of bitcoin pump and dump shills, bitcoin does absolutely nothing to solve centralization problems; it's designed to centralize. |
|
|
|
|
Soooooo
If bitcoin is a govt created scam: net neutrality change has no effect
If bitcoin is not a govt created scam: incoming block of non-obfuscated bitcoin traffic?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
