This place would be so much better if everyone would just stop quoting idiot stolfi.
It's amazing you guys still don't get it. This isn't about Bitcoin. This is about him getting attention. All you are doing is feeding his need for attention. He will keep saying the opposite of what you say just to get attention.
Why don't you people realize this?
If this thread would be closed he would find another high traffic thread about a much talked about subject. He will read it and then start posting in a way that will make a lot of people reply to him. This can be a forum about candy, seals or trees. He doesn't care. He is obsessed with getting attention and you are giving it to him.
Actually he's a paid troll. He's paid to be here. As I'm sure there are others here as well... starting to think mmitech is a paid troll too, the way he blathers on and on ad nauseum... Well unlike most of idiots who talk about me being a troll, I actually owned Bitcoin and I actually made good profits and that was achieved by using so commonsense and objectivity. I am not a Bitcoin die hard cultist and if Bitcoin would crash down and burn that wouldn't change my life style allot... I have a profession that I can start using again anytime, I was(am) a successful engineer even before I learned about Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
These sort of people would never dare post in such an area, because the opposition to their tired unsophisticated "critiques" would get completely decimated and ignored by people with any kind of subject matter expertise.
And it is exactly this sort of reply by "bitcoin experts" (the kind who claim that paying with BitPay or Coinbase is "paying with bitcoin") that keeps most people away from bitcoin. Don't be silly professor. Most people have never heard of bitcoin except superficially, nor do they understand it's properties or obvious advantages over fiat currency. I bought a takeaway last night from my blockchain.info wallet using my smartphone via bitpay. It was seamless, instantaneous and flawless. That is typical of the average bitcoin transaction in the future. this is not an argument for "Bitcoin is better than Fiat", last time I used my paypal it was as fast or faster than you described, in fact today I paid for my groceries with my bank issued debit card and it was as simple and fast transaction as it would get. when Bitcoin becomes that simple and easy and safe and secure and less volatile, then and only then it can get mass adopted and be praised by the average Joe.... and yes I am aware of all what Bitcoins offer, but we are still in Beta and it is still not worth risking too much of money. |
|
|
|
These sort of people would never dare post in such an area, because the opposition to their tired unsophisticated "critiques" would get completely decimated and ignored by people with any kind of subject matter expertise.
don't worry about the other sub-forum, because unlike this sub-forum, people there are aware of these challenges and acknowledge them, and most of them are fairly objective and not a cultist blind speculator like you, I would like to add that most of people there come from IT careers, people that can drive their own dreams, not like some of the speculators here who trash everyone just because they didn't achieve anything in their lives so they count on Bitcoin as their only and last hope. |
|
|
|
--snip--
Amusing that you say bitcoin will fail yet assume the transaction volume goes up 100 times
Don't be ignorant, when did I say Bitcoin will fail ? I said IF these issues wont be fixed then Bitcoin wont survive 20 years, and I added that TCP/IP didn't have much changes in the protocol over a decade, all you wrote above is still theoretically right, but when you get a practical solution that can be implemented we can discuss things further. and no, I don't think Bitcoin is the greatest thing after internet... this is an insult for all the huge innovators and innovations that took place the last 20 years. well done snipping my reply out of context as I immediately followed with a statement of you using the "if it doesn't change in 20 years" excuse. So your argument boils down to "There are potential scalability and security issues if bitcoin is not maintained for 20 years" IPv4 will/is running out of address space. So should I say it is a failed protocol? Should I call it useless? That issue was known for a long time. Or even more to the point. Do the address space limitations of IPv4 directly prevent you from writing witty comments in this forum? (assuming you or your provider still run on it) The same goes for the bitcoin protocol. Absolutely essential changes will come when needed, more is bonus. I asked you why you believe that technically bitcoin is so flawed that it simply can't last 20 years. The issues you posted are possible problems that may or may not be relevant. To make such a definitive claim I would have liked to hear something along the lines of "at difficulty x the nonce is too small to guarantee that a solution can be found" (btw this is a real possibility) That would be a real issue. [edit] just to clarify : the nonce is 4 bytes, the block hash 32. You can vary other things like the timestamp but unless you can ensure that you have at least 32 bytes to modify you may not find a solution Btw I agree with you that bitcoin is not the greatest thing after the internet but I think it is quite significant. Some people get carried away with their enthusiasm. I think we are arguing about the same thing here, I agree with what you said, and yes it is still all theoretically possible, again I will repeat it or rephrase it for you: "I didn't say Bitcoin will fail today or tomorrow but in order for it to be a success and be around for the next 20 years, so many things needs to be changed" BTW: about the IPv4 argument, this is why IPv6 was found  |
|
|
|
--snip--
Amusing that you say bitcoin will fail yet assume the transaction volume goes up 100 times
Don't be ignorant, when did I say Bitcoin will fail ? I said IF these issues wont be fixed then Bitcoin wont survive 20 years, and I added that TCP/IP didn't have much changes in the protocol over a decade, all you wrote above is still theoretically right, but when you get a practical solution that can be implemented we can discuss things further. and no, I don't think Bitcoin is the greatest thing after internet... this is an insult for all the huge innovators and innovations that took place the last 20 years. |
|
|
|
This is you just backing out of the argument. I would love to get into specifics. Btw I am not heavily invested in bitcoin. I have a few but even if the bullish prediction of the vinklevii comes true it won't really change my life.
I am however massively excited about the possibilities provided by cryptocurrencies.
You know I don't have to subscribe to bitcoin as the winning ledger (yes, ledger not protocol) to believe in cryptos.
ok you've got my intention there, this suggest that you have most of the issues figured out, how do you think we will solve: 1-The Block size limit when the number of transaction/minute is 100 times higher than today.  2-The block chain size when it exceeds 200GB or 1TB ? most users or services will have to use clusters of storage, if the adoption rate picks up this has to be fixed really fast.  running a bitcoin node consume so much resources (bandwidth consumption and memory, mempool containing unspent Txid) how do you think a normal user will have to deal with these issues, he will have to use centralized wallets and services which against the fundamentals that Bitcoin was created for in the first place. 3-The energy waste, it has been known that when the price goes up mining becomes more profitable and more resources are brought online...resources that most of us consider wasted, as of today the hashrate is more that 250 Petahash/s, assuming that the worst chip on the network consume 0.5w/ghs (which is way too optimistic) this means that at this point miners consume way more than 125 hourly Megawatts... just FYI a typical nuclear plant produce from 500-2000 hourly Megawatts. 4-DDOS attacks: when Bitcoin become bigger, there will be Big services that run the Bitcoind in order to offer their services, organized groups can run denial of service attacks against these services, you can read more about how they can do it in that wiki I provided before. 5-Malleability issue, and don't tell me it is not an issue, because it really is, and it is not fixed yet, they just found some work around it. 6-Double Spending, even if you don't have 51% of the network you can perform double spending with as little as 25% of the network, and this did happen before7- The 51% attack, we all know what it is, it is achievable, any government can achieve it if they want to kill Bitcoin, even at this point. 8-man in the middle or packet sniffing, also described in that wiki. There many more issues, but these are the one that concerns me for now. now I would like to hear your solutions. |
|
|
|
well I think most of you Bitcoin cultists refuse to be objective, and considering the fact that most of you call Bitcoin the most important innovation after internet, I would just like to point out that TCP/IP protocol didn't change much in a decade or so.... and no, Google is very very bad example in this case, we are talking about protocols that we can build on..
I would say Bitcoin is a larger innovation than the internet really (of course it is dependent on it). how can it be larger than it if it is dependent on it, where you came up with this logic ? listen to your self really. |
|
|
|
well I think most of you Bitcoin cultists refuse to be objective, and considering the fact that most of you call Bitcoin the most important innovation after internet, I would just like to point out that TCP/IP protocol didn't change much in a decade or so.... and no, Google is very very bad example in this case, we are talking about protocols that we can build on..
But this is where you are mistaken. Bitcoin is a protocol, that is true. Yet you fail to understand what it does. Bitcoin forms probabilistic consensus on a ledger of units where ownership is proven through digital signatures. The value lies in the ledger and that consensus is formed on it. Not on the concrete protocol specification See, I know exactly what is Bitcoin, and everything I wrote above has a simple yet a deep meaning to it, now if you fail to see that, this simply means that you are way too much invested (blindly invested) into Bitcoin, and I honestly have no energy to argue or explain that to you. It is my opinion on this matter, consider me wrong with the possibility of being right, also all you said above doesn't argue or solve the real known issues, so I don't see any value with arguing further with you. |
|
|
|
...
if the technical part of Bitcoin stay as it is today, then simply Bitcoin wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure.
You are bullish, in this case I'll only give it 4 - 5 years. apart from the obvious answer to extend functionality would any of you care to elaborate why. And please give concrete technical reasons Even if you cant figure for your self half of the challenges Bitcoin is facing, there is a wiki for that... take some time and read about it here This is exactly what annoys me about your attitude. You pretend to know it all yet when someone posts an embedded image in a quote you have no idea what is going on. A lot of the presented attacks in that wiki are known weaknesses or potential attack vectors, yet many require focussed effort and a lot of financial power to be executed properly. While your statement is totally true (any code that survives 20 years without any modification is either very basic and hence easy to prove fully correct or its effects are so neglectible that there is no real point in focussing attention on it) it was made to throw a bad light on the current status quo of the core protocol code. Show me any complex software or service that will work for 20 years if external factors change. "if the technical part of Google search stay as it is today, then simply Google search wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure. Statements like your original one just make you look like a fool well I think most of you Bitcoin cultists refuse to be objective, and considering the fact that most of you call Bitcoin the most important innovation after internet, I would just like to point out that TCP/IP protocol didn't change much in a decade or so.... and no, Google is very very bad example in this case, we are talking about protocols that we can build on.. |
|
|
|
...
if the technical part of Bitcoin stay as it is today, then simply Bitcoin wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure.
You are bullish, in this case I'll only give it 4 - 5 years. apart from the obvious answer to extend functionality would any of you care to elaborate why. And please give concrete technical reasons Even if you cant figure for your self half of the challenges Bitcoin is facing, there is a wiki for that... take some time and read about it here Edit: for some reason they didn't include the Block size limit and blockchain size problem (could be in the future) |
|
|
|
yes, I am positively sure that the price wont be holding for so long, it is a matter of couple of days before the red candles show up everywhere. Edit: really disturbing image. |
|
|
|
this guy just posted something in his Elliot Waves Analysis thread, worth seeing https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=555289.msg8976473#msg8976473unfortunately he did not provide much commentary, but in the past he has been very good "An update to the Elliot Wave count I have posted previously. As long as the previous low for wave ii-(1)-3 at around 390 holds then this count looks good. " I did look at it, and I dont think this will be happening. |
|
|
|
Last days hours of humanity BTC>400$
The next 12 hours are critical and crucial to the next 20 years of bitcoin... Brace yourselves!!!!!!!!!!!  if the technical part of Bitcoin stay as it is today, then simply Bitcoin wont survive for 20 years... and this is for sure. |
|
|
|
That Paypal bull-trap was one of the most gruesome ones this year. All optimism that was left got smashed with a hammer in no time.
Only the bull-tards who believed it was the start of next bubble got smashed, I knew it all along.... but hey who would listen to an "idiot" bear like me right ? |
|
|
|
and we are back to pre-Paypal news (as expected), I was thinking these past few days and I think that I will start buying back between $100-200.
lol!  At least, he has been thinking... which should help him to formulate more realistic views, unless he's on some kind of fantasy loop in which the thinking does NOT cause him to escape from his fantasy?  |
|
|
|
|
and we are back to pre-Paypal news (as expected), I was thinking these past few days and I think that I will start buying back between $100-200.
|
|
|
|
Anyone else in here use Circle?
I've never experienced a better way to buy bitcoins. So easy my grandma can do it.
yes I got my invite few days ago, it is amazing, I really like the simplicity. |
|
|
|
Good morning, I wont remind you about what I said a couple of days ago but I will leave this here...  Corrected. I tried to be civil about it, but heck this is what I wanted to say  |
|
|
|
Good morning, I wont remind you about what I said a couple of days ago but I will leave this here... less than 13K BTC to under $40 and more than 15K BTC to $600... how much scary is that ?   |
|
|
|
Good morning, I wont remind you about what I said a couple of days ago but I will leave this here... less than 13K BTC to under $40 and more than 15K BTC to $600... how much scary is that ? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
