Are .bit going to exist on their own, or are they always going to be linked to ICANN?
... they have never been linked to ICANN, in fact that is one of the main features ignoramus. Perhaps a small attempt to inform yourself before blurting out BS on a public forum? |
|
|
|
Re: naked shorts on Stamp
If the 19K coins never existed, then why the 19k BTC move on the block chain? Is this a true Goxxing where lost coins are blamed on a hack that didn't really happen or that happened ages ago?
Naked short-selling could help explain this prolonged bear market, but every short (naked or otherwise) must be covered at some point.
you can cover arbitrarily many shorts with non-delivery |
|
|
|
all those mega bears gone real quiet?
all your short profits locked up in fake fiat in an insolvent fake exchange? boo-hoo ... naked shorted and crashed the asset underwriting the exchange holding your fake profits ... what idiots, you are better off at vegas.
hacker who has the coinz makes the rules.
Bitstamp didn't have margin trading. now they have NO trading whatsoever! hahahaha |
|
|
|
|
all those mega bears gone real quiet?
all your short profits locked up in fake fiat in an insolvent fake exchange? boo-hoo ... naked shorted and crashed the asset underwriting the exchange holding your fake profits ... what idiots, you are better off at vegas.
hacker who has the coinz makes the rules.
|
|
|
|
guess what, a ton of people were selling coins on loan on Bitswamp (that is how they manipulated the price so low over the last 6 months) ... and now bitswamp has conveniently 'lost' coins ... i.e. the swamp is net short of coins.
go figure, it is not rocket science, someone has been selling non-existent coins and the swamp administered it. Good luck to anybody willing to deal with the swamp, you'll need it.
Yes!!!!! Your observations seem to be very logical and grounded in facts,.... NOT....  And, Marcus of Augustus, how is the receptivity in your tin foil hat? Are you getting other vibes regarding the ways of the bitcoin world about which you would like to share with us? oh, yeah goldfoil working great. Are we going to have yet another parade of apologists for a broken exchange trotted out every so often with the usual BS "just trust us", "everything's fine" ... Swamp only has to redeem the small percentage of rubes who actually ask for their coinz back until ... hey what's that!!? nup sorry all coinz gone chaps ... ta-ta. man, people are stupid, they deserve every exchange rip-off they get. |
|
|
|
|
guess what, a ton of people were selling coins on loan on Bitswamp (that is how they manipulated the price so low over the last 6 months) ... and now bitswamp has conveniently 'lost' coins ... i.e. the swamp is net short of coins.
go figure, it is not rocket science, someone has been selling non-existent coins and the swamp administered it. Good luck to anybody willing to deal with the swamp, you'll need it.
|
|
|
|
Your prose is amazingly polished and clear. You are a professor of something. Philosophy is my guess
Uh, thanks! Yes, a prof of Computer Science, at a public univ in Brazil. prof. bitcoin troll. ... all of your claims in that lengthy (worthless) prose are unsubstantiated of course. |
|
|
|
Saw the price, checked the news.
Not again!
Price is unaffected by this, what do u mean? yeah, keep telling yourself that buddy .... the swamp has been stinking up the joint since they started all that KYC/AML crap and blocking users coins for months now, do you people not listen or learn anything?? any time some place says "we are now working closely with the regulators" is code for ... "we lost or stole your coins/money" the regulators in the financial rackets are the biggest crooks in the business, take a look at the 2008 financial crises (they will get laws and enforcement changed retrospectively if necessary to clear themselves of past criminality), whenever the little crooks need cover they run to the bigger crooks for real 'protection'. |
|
|
|
oh, so you went ahead and trusted someone else with your bitcoins .....? What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust,
allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted
third party https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf |
|
|
|
|
first you get goxxed ... and then you get stamped.
fool and his money
|
|
|
|
|
[cough] bitstamp [/cough]
|
|
|
|
|
renounce your sins and send all your coins to a blackhole address ... walk away, never look back, (never believe the economists' lies either, look at the mess they have presided over in fiat banking)
|
|
|
|
If the clowns have really lost their private keys, this is actually pretty good for the rest of us who dont transact at that dump. Takes out a a decent supply out of the bitcoin economy. My bitcoins just got a teeny weeny bit more scarce, so not too bad.
That's an interesting perspective. except he was a rampant bear yesterday so who really knows wtf he's thinking ... centralised exchanges are an unsolved problem and anybody who's using them should be factoring in risks and losses due to incompetence or corruption ... even rampant bears who are naked shorting non-existent coins on the 'non'-exchanges and bulls who think they have 'bitcoins' held on an exchange. anybody who thinks they can trade bitcoins safely will be inevitably screwed ... and good riddance to the locusts |
|
|
|
|
should of got your bitcoins out of the swamp while you still had time ... sounds like the music just stopped.
|
|
|
|
|
all the naked short selling will stop and shorts will got locked out of their profits when the bitswamp bellies up ... it's good for bitcoin when speculators get taught about the counterparty risk on those "oh-so-easy" selling what ya don't own profits
|
|
|
|
Yes, that's a very popular thing to say here, isn't it? These are just my opinions and the historical fact that people vote with their feet. I don't need to design anything. That's not my job. I'm a user of crypto currency. I'm the customer. The designers need to convince me to trust them with my money. ... and at that point you are incentivised to convince everybody else to use your chosen currency, irregardless of the fallacy of your inexperienced or ill-informed opinion ... and so on and so on the bullshit goes |
|
|
|
It needs more people using it everyday as a payment system instead of miners dumping the coin as soon as they're mined.
Exactly. This is why PoS coins without inflation are not falling that much now and even rising BTC-wise. I really really enjoy PoS tbh. Only started messing around with them since Just-dice started taking CLAM. It seems to me it prevents a lot of economy leakage through electric bills and ancient miners (seriously when I look at a miner now days it reminds me of a 1970's printer.) I imagine you'd have a large number of Bitcoin miners who would be seriously butthurt about PoS. Seems silly to expect BTC to go global and WANT to give that much money to the fat cat electric companies rather than reward your own kind. I "mine" about a Bitcoin a day using PoS right now completely eco friendly and no huge electric bill. Yeah, the PoW system is looking more nutty to me every day. It's not just the wastefulness, scalability, or the equipment cost in upgrades and failures but the fact that eventually it has to become centralized. I have been here through every 51% scare starting with Deepbit and understand this system just can't be controlled with "goodwill" anymore. The arguments for the wasteful energy use are always beaten down with the claim that the modern banking system uses at least that much energy or more to move money around. Aren't we trying to be better than the current system though? The "we're the same as they are" argument just seems stupid to me. I don't know if PoS is the answer but something needs to change. PoS coins, as good as they are, don't work long term though They are too unsafe I don't think the winning system has been designed yet. The main problem with any design is the thing that brilliant scientists can't comprehend because they're too logical, that's simple human nature. Any design will have to completely remove any ability for someone or some group to game it. That may be an impossible task. Satoshi believed he solved that problem by thinking the only motivation for any activity involving money was greed and logical self interest but that's not true. The reality of life is that nothing is ever just black or white. Blackhat hackers spend hundreds of man hours to break into some of the most secure systems in the world for no other reason than to see if they can. Companies will spend a fortune to crush a competitor even if the realized return will never pay for the attack. Governments spend hundreds of billions of dollars on things that don't work. PoW isn't the final solution. you seem to know all the answers, where's your blueprint for the perfect system? Working prototype? or just all yap? |
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc: it seems you are against side-chains on an economic principle rather than a specific technical implementation
Does this principle then extend to all other provably-backed (cryptographically-linked) bitcoin substitute tokens? And would you like to specify/define exactly what that principle is so that future technical improvements can be evaluated equally?
There are many new innovations to come that will achieve the same or similar results in principle to the side-chain conversion SPV 2wp, using multi-sig and time-locks, ZKP, etc ... are you going to be opposed to all these innovations also? (Hint: they will allow fast, off-chain, private settlement, or ttx bundling, with near zero-trust, i.e. blockchain level security and low costs).
I think that the economic principle of operation you seem to be vehemently opposed to is inevitable in some form or another. There will be token money substitutes that really will be cryptographically "as good as bitcoin", in a way that paper money substitutes were never "as good as gold".
|
|
|
|
Chernobyl, TMI, and Fukushima were not caused by flaws in the physics of nuclear fusion all these power plants operate on the physics of nuclear fission ... nuclear fusion plants are non-existent. |
|
|
|
Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.
What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?
introducing regulatory/political drawbacks into a technology is sure to compromise its function and benefits to humanity. would you have lawyers/politicians design/build 747's for you to cross the Atlantic in? design/build nuclear power stations to power your cities? leave technology to the technologists unless you want bad outcomes. money is a value information technology not a political tool, it needs to be the best technology it can be to maximally benefit humanity, not a compromised, politicised, perverted tool for oppression and dubious agendas. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
