I think that franky has confused scarcity with shareability. By definition, scarcity is the state of being in short supply. The supply remains the same; the thing that changes is the shareability. These two have nothing in common.
if i had a 21 gold nuggets that had 100million nanograms in europe and i had 21 gold nugget that had 100billion nanograms in america you can pretend that its just 21 nuggets per country but reality is europe can only share gold with upto 100million people -meaning not all europeans can get a bit of gold but reality is america can share gold with upto 100billion people -meaning americans could get 3000 bits of gold each so american gold is less scarce even you know that the block halving events is not technically btc/2 but binary -1bit
[...]
your top down delusions is just your avoidance tactic of not understanding/ignoring/dismissing the real rule of bitcoin
the way i understand it the same bit would still be used (8th). (or whatever it is im not a programmer). not the NEW least significant bit, the OLD least significant bit would still be the one used for halving. IOW you do count from the "top" (most significant bit) not the bottom (least significant bit). its just easier to use the LSB at the moment as its simpler to code in binary arithmetic (just a single opcode? pretty sure all CPUs have a " number=number-1 opcode).. the code would simply not use the LSB anymore and use the 8th MSB (or whatever the term is again not a programmer but the idea seems pretty simple). the funny part is when validating a transaction value in a raw tx data a value from a 2015 transaction of 6.25btc is 100101010000001011111001000000 /100,000,000 but if you put that same /100,000,000 to the deluded 6.25 of the millisat 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000 /100,000,000 you would get 6250btc think about it. if you change the /100,000,000 to /100,000,000,000 you also break the old transactions by making 6.25 become 0.00625 so the code has to be ripped apart and changed and then using different cludgy math to try to not cause a bug where 6250btc is created when it should be 6.25btc or avoid a bug where 6.25 old tx is then deemed 0.00625 |
|
|
|
|
you are again trying to assume the world works at bitcoin creation then split
get out of your delusion.
ask yourself at binary level of bitcoin
where today 6.25btc is shown and logged and fixed at
100101010000001011111001000000
where as in a new world of millisats how would the millisat representation appear as?
hint: 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000
and then in another delusional world how a system producing 6250btc of 8 decimal would be represented?
hint: 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000
you soon realise both msat (6.25 11decimal) and 6250btc of (sat /100m(8decimal btc))
BOTH appear as
1001000110000100111001110010101000000000
do you get that yet!!!
more sharable binary digits.. or in the case of your new gold analogy.. more particles particles of gold
your trying to say that what was
625000000 nanograms of gold (human mathed at 0.65milligrams and then buzzworded as '6.25gold coin)
and then having
625000000000 nanograms of gold(human mathed at 625milligrams, but buzzworded as still '625 coin')
which is where you are not understanding the physics and the chemistry of sharable units from the nanogram level which in reality is a bigger lump of gold being pretended to be the same as the smaller lump before your delusion started
..
you are trying to confuse the issue with the banana split while avoiding the biology of cell multiplying
something i find strange from someone that is supposedly in the medical field
even you know that the block halving events is not technically btc/2 but binary -1bit
also..
saying that because another network has more decimals in its contracts has nothing to do with bitcoin.
bitcoin network is not the lightning network
if people on LN want to play with 11 decimals so be it. but stop thinking another network is a good excuse to mess with bitcoin
havnt you realised it yet
LN was not created to be compatible with bitcoin.. it was set to function with many coins
it is actually a fact that bitcoin is being changed to be more compatible with LN
if you want to change bitcoin to have more binary digits that can be shared. then that is breaking the 2009 scarcity promise rule
get out of your delusions of the human GUI display and understand the code rules
your top down delusions is just your avoidance tactic of not understanding/ignoring/dismissing the real rule of bitcoin
because bitcoins rule is bottom up not top down
so try to understand, conceive how things work from the binary/smallest unit measure prospective that is the real rule
|
|
|
|
So if your theory is right those guys retiring should have trained their successors in their own language instead of having Yankee soldier yell "hey fucktard" (kid you not seen this in a evening news broadcast but fucktard was bleeped out lol). The successors should have trained well and the people that you claim now work in supermarkets or other industries should have gotten off their asses and fought for their own country.
actually YOUR OWN theory.. the extra 4000 troops in 2017(YOU MENTIONED). were added to increase the amount of training and advising.. meaning US had to INCREASE training. US Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis praised the decision: "This assures the department can facilitate our missions and nimbly align our commitment to the situation on the ground. Our overall mission in Afghanistan remains the same, to train, advise and assist the Afghan forces so they can safeguard the Afghan people and terrorists can find no haven in Afghanistan for attacking us or others as for me getting the clip of trump from a comic. it was more about ease of a short clip to display. i had links of trumps whole speach but that 2 hour video was just trumptardy gorilla chest beating. so i just looked up a quick link to a short version. as for the afghans getting off their asses.. well when US done a deal WITH the taliban. its pretty much a stand down order for those fighting against the taliban to not put up a fight oh and lets not forget. the taliban in afghanistan.. actually are afghanistan people too imagine a dystopian version of america over the last 20 years imagine it more like europe invading america 20 years ago and dictating that republicans are the enemy and europeans were training democrats to fight the republicans. then dacade(s) later the europeans withdraw by doing a deal with republicans to win over the country as long as mexicans didnt take over.. no one likes the republicans but they are trying to force in their own government. europeans are pretending that republicans are not true americans even though they let republicans invade the capital.. now its just time to get a real election where maybe the republicans step back and democrats take charge politically |
|
|
|
Probably not. The Afghanistan military more or less put up no fight against the Taliban once Biden pulled American and allied troops out. The Taliban will take over the entire country in short order.
1. it was trump that ordered recruiting and training those troops that didnt defend their own country 2. it was trump that ordered the pulling out of american defense. 3. yes biden sits in the hotseat now. but it was trump that lit that seat on fire first 1. What rock have you been living under? We've been held Afganistan for the last 20 years. The Afghani forces have been trained under Bush, Obama, and lastly Trump. you do know the Afghans trained 20 years ago retired right.. most of the afghan military of 2016+ were not even born when the battles began when you realise that most military frontlines are filled with people 18-24.. you have to realise that the guys trained in 2003 are now like 40yo and retired. probably working as security for supermarkets or bars now. and the afghans in the military 2016+ are fresh recruits in their prime 18-24, trained(if you can call it that) recently 2. I'm actually agreeing with you on this one for once. Trump did want us to pull out of the middle east period. He didn't start any wars like most Republicans do. What is interesting is Trump actually added troops to Afghanistan in 2017. So really your point is somewhat flawed.
funny part is you pretend trump "wanted" as if it was a wish he didnt follow through on.. and not a physical act.. but reality is that he actually created a policy to withdraw troops in 2020.. and he made it so that it was near impossible to undo this policy by any new administration.. oops you forgot that bit even last month trump was proudly chest beating how he actually made the policy that cant be undone https://youtu.be/Fb0oBYkO--I?t=281last year TRUMP organised a reduction of troops by july 2020 and a full removal by may 2021 emphasis trump https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_of_United_States_troops_from_Afghanistan_(2020%E2%80%932021)#Withdrawaltrump cut a deal WITH THE TALIBAN they they can take power as long as the taliban dont let al-queda take power seems your trump fangirlism makes you not see real history and only see trumps glossy pamphlets. and no tweet links from other fangirls will change history. it will just blind other fangirls into being fangirls and ignorant of history |
|
|
|
|
until a biological mass can survive independently.. its not 'living'
(no independent breath or experience or voice)
its the same as the question
is turning off a life support machine of a brain dead relative at families consent immoral?
a fetus is dependant on the mother. a mother is the life support
its a question which the mother and only the mother gets to decide.
it is her responsibility and her decision what happens with her biology
once a fetus gets to the third trimester where if it was birthed early it could independently survive..
thats where abortion should not occur.
but before that point of possible independence.. its the decision of the mother.. not men. not politicians
|
|
|
|
Pandemic of the vaccinated  strains pre vaccine 19A 19B 20A 20B 20C 20D 20E 20F 20G 20H 20I 20J strains after vaccine 21A (DELTA (november 2020)) 21B 21C 21D 21E 21F 21G 21H 12 PRE during 11 month period (dec 2019-oct2020) 8 POST during 9 month period (november 2020-july 2021) more strains than months passed PRE.. less strains than months passed POST. shows that less strains are created per month due to vaccine |
|
|
|
Probably not. The Afghanistan military more or less put up no fight against the Taliban once Biden pulled American and allied troops out. The Taliban will take over the entire country in short order.
it was trump that ordered recruiting and training those troops that didnt defend their own country it was trump that ordered the pulling out of american defense. yes biden sits in the hotseat now. but it was trump that lit that seat on fire first |
|
|
|
This looks amazing. I thought what if all remote payment systems like this used Btc or altcoins, especially for business transactions such as online shops, maybe we wouldn't need a third party like this, namely the online shop page, I mean. We only need to market the product on our personal pages such as blogs or social media. This is so much easier. After reading this i feel like i should do this too but i'm not ready.
third parties are still needed (the btc exchanges to fiat on both sides). it just uses a different third party that doesnt have extreme forex/wire transfer fees/time added on it changes (imagine euro to USD) euro>bank wire>forex central service >bank wire>usd euro>btcexchange>btcexchange>usd the whole bank wire>forex central service >bank wire is a time/fee headache. so still needs middlemen. but just ones causing less time/fee headache |
|
|
|
-snip- Your entire analogy is flawed because the banana is not being made bigger. you really do not understand your own analogy. remember in bitcoin base code, in raw data.. there is not btc.. no banana when you finally admit or realise or remember that the actual unit of account at binary is 100101010000001011111001000000 ( you refer to it as 8decimal 6.25btc) and you want to change that into 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000 (11 decimal 6.25btc) you can clearly see the binary number(banana) is bigger(MORE significant figures) just because you want to say the human converted basket term still says "6.25 bananas' does not mean the banana is the same size it means there are more binary numbers to share emphasis TO SHARE emphasis SHARE emphasis less scarce yes imagine if they decided that a block using standard sats as primary base unit. but they want to increase how many btc is created at 8 decimal by 1000x btc.. guess what the binary unit will be 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000 .. yep again it doesnt matter your new prefered HUMAN converted basket term is 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000= (6.25btc of new format) 625000000000msat or 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000=6250btc(625000000000sat) its the same shareable units which is different to the standard/current sharable units of 100101010000001011111001000000 .. can you see the difference in size?? 100101010000001011111001000000 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000 you concentrating on "same bitcoin" is nonsense stupidity of misunderstanding because even you should know that at data level of shareable units from 2009 is not the same unit as the human GUI basket term you can pretend that its the same banana/same size but when changing 100101010000001011111001000000 to 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000 does then require btc= 625000000/100,000,000 becoming btc= 625000000 000/100,000,000 ,000 |
|
|
|
|
i dont see the volatility being a big issue for this topic creators scenario
he pays the guy in under an hour...
volatility is noticable if people are trading where the request and the payment are days apart..
but when the request and payment are less than an hour the volatility is near meaningless
say a guy in europe buys bitcoin using euro and wants to pay an american.
sending a private key via postal mail on a 7day stamp..
well, then the value change can be noticable when the american recipient gets the btc and then tries to convert to dollar.
same with wire transfers of just euro-usd in a 7 business day contract. the exchange rates can be noticable
especially with forex and international wire transfer fees added on
but a euro guy buying btc on a euro exchange and withdrawing it to the americans us exchange. in under an hour. makes the price difference negligible, especially when skipping the forex/wire transfer fees of fiat methods of remittance
|
|
|
|
Gee Dr. Franky1, a few months ago you diagnosed me to have 'long covid' without the slightest hint of doubt. What changed?
funny part is i diagnosed nothing. what i do is called common sense, logic funnier part is you lie even funnier part is i never claim to be a doctor. that is your assumption i do research, i learn. i use logic and common sense even a 5 year old can see a leg infection by bacteria is not covid. it doesnt require being a licenced doctor to see that common sense. you dont need to be a licensed doctor to learn and understand science, biology, chemistry, technology.. if you want to spout out lies that you had covid. and someone replies based on your words. does not mean you had it, "proved"(facepalm) only by a responders lack of doubt in a post when talking to you.. replying to your scripts and lies. does not mean your scripts/lies are then true. just because out of dozens of posts you found one post where someone hasnt called you an idiot, does not suddenly vindicate you as no longer an idiot same with your leg infection. just because you say in a forum post that you had it. does not mean when someone reads your post, magically creates the infection and makes it real... you could be lying again. you may not be an idiot in the real world. but you sure do act like one on this forum. and me calling you an idiot. is not a 'diagnoses' its an observation. something normal people can do and mention maybe one day you will realise your conspiracy websites are not true just because they wrote something. you will learn that just because someone replies about a conspiracy doesnt then make it true. if someone says they seen a UFO and another person says 'yes you seen a UFO' does not then mean the first person actually seen a UFO due to the second persons reply lacking doubt .. its not how the real world works |
|
|
|
Everything was going smoothly, so what was the reason for the sudden dump to $29k from $64k?
A sudden dump just happened because of Elon Musk said mining bitcoin is not eco-friendly? or it just happened cause china banned bitcoin?
people dont realise that there is a difference between value and price imagine that in spring 2021 the VALUE was in the range of $21k-$32k and above that was just emotional speculative pump bubble excess meaning for spring 2021: value $26k average price $64k ATL so the $64k was never meant to be a stable sustainable price. it was always an over inflated price of value by atleast a 2x factor and yes when emotion broke. the bubble burst and the price corrected back down to a more reasonable value level the reason it didnt break down to $10k..(2020 numbers) is because VALUE increased since 2020 now that more people have sold their cheaper(under $20k in 2020) coins for the $30k+ level in 2021. there are more people with minimum acquisition value of $30k+ and less people with minimums below this this creates more of a support at the $30k+ level. and now as hashrate is rising the mining cost is also rising. which too means less people achieving coin below $30k. this current $47k is a slight inflated bubble. but not as bad as the $64k for $47k to lock in as good support would need hashrate to be 50% more than now. and for enough utxo to have been spend/exchange hands at this level to provide the new holders of the utxos' to deem their minimum as $47k so this will take time. but dont presume this $47k is already some fixed sustainable value. its not. its just a higher price than last month but not as bad inflation as spring 2021 |
|
|
|
-snip- We each have a banana. We each cut our banana in to 10 pieces. I then cut each of those pieces in half, giving me 20 pieces. bitcoin code does not grow banana's that are then split..... bitcoin code grows pieces/cells that are then for human linguistics is refered to as a banana when grouped together in a certain allotment(100,000,000 cells) if i told you that fruit grow biologically cell by cell and a "banana" is defined as 100,000,000 cells. and you wanted to Genetically modify it so that a "banana" has 100billion cells instead of a 100million you would spend years stamping your foot "its still a banana" while everyone else is saying no its a GM banana that traditional banana's would be split by your measure into 20 slices of 0.3inch 3where as the new GM banana can be sliced into 20,000 slices of 0.3inch 3meaning 20,000 people can get to taste banana which broke the hard rule even at your human expression. where only 20 people could have a 0.3inch 3 slice . having a GM banana with more slice capacity. at your human expression level(facepalm) or having 1000x more cells at DNA code level but you trying to call it a normal banana(facepalm).. both result as the same thing.. they both allow more people to have a taste. meaning less scarce .. oh and remember your block reward halving understanding.. where the halving is not btc halved.. but one less binary bit from the smallest unit measure thats actually programmed into the code..!!! yep even you previously knew(but pretend to forget) that its not a banana sliced. but instead cells combined and human expressed as a 'banana' where every 4 years the dna of cells is programmed to create half as many cells as previous. growing less per season you know.. the: 5,000,000,000sat(50btc) =100101010000001011111001000000000 and to half the reward you just remove the last bit =10010101000000101111100100000000 well you want to break that hard limit DNA from 2009 and turn 100101010000001011111001000000 ( you refer to it as 8decimal 6.25btc) into 1001000110000100111001110010101000000000 (11 decimal 6.25btc) pretending your GMO banana that is 1000x bigger is the same sharable scarcity of slices as a traditional banana is very mis-informing.. giving out 20,000 0.3inch 3 slices of a 60inch tall by 10 inch thick GMO banana. pretending its as rare as giving out twenty 0.3inch 3 of a 6inch 3 traditional banana is very very mis-informing and not even factually or practically or biologically or logically correct you seem to have forgotton the rule of remove one binary bit every 210,000 blocks. hard rule supply limit and you want to change it to add several binary bits do you really want to act naive about the concept of the binary limit being broke just to pretend the human linguistics is the same. even though there are more sharable units and what is created is not the same natural rules of what what was the hard DNA code of bitcoin |
|
|
|
*more mindless twattery*
If you want to pretend ketchup is a condiment for burgers, show me where the tomatoes are growing inside a live cow. That's how fucking ridiculous you sound. oh you silly man of drama queen land your over exaggerations over the last few years.. and hype and dreams... is you and your chums pretending that ketchup is a burger (facepalm) fact ketchup is not a burger. they are 2 separate things. ketchup is not reliant on burgers. ketchup can be used with different food stuff. burger is not ketchup and ketchup is not burger |
|
|
|
if you want to pretend LN is bitcoin show me some lines of code in bitcoin core that allow 11 decimals show me code in bitcoin core that understand the LN gossip protocol show me code in bitcoin core that understand invoices you can say what you like. but bitcoin code and bitcoin blockchain data doesnt lie what you find out is lightning wallets. like LND have code for multiple currencies https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/4c010e803e99c28aeee4d1073c2e3fc7f7a74d16/chainreg/chainregistry.go#L47just one example yet bitcoin core has no code for lightning parameters and no, dont even bother trying to slip in bitcoin spv/lite wallets, as for instance electrum didnt even integrate LN compatibility until after 2019(after the pizza event) and electrum also supports other altcoins too. so dont even suggest that lightning is bitcoin 'coz electrum' as thats as silly as saying litecoin is bitcoin 'coz electrum' |
|
|
|
|
i understand your philosophy of
bitcoin civilisation. under the same concepts of
stone age civilisation
iron age civilisation
bronze age
gold era
where by a large community functions and works and survives on the mineral(asset) of that era
but for bitcoin to become that centred around peoples lives, doesnt happen with just hype and hope.
yes if a metaverse of online shopping, communicating and socialising becomes relient on bitcoin to function/survive. then yes a bitcoin civilisation can occur.
but it has to be life affecting and not just the economy.
EG the british empire had laws and work and social functions it was not just about the pound
but bitcoin is not going to be the 'one world' currency. and in many ways it shouldnt
it should be a OPTION/choice as an escape/safetynet if other currencies fail.
yes we can see some bitcoin nations. but a whole civilisation is a stretch too far.
and the funny part
you promote a bitcoin civilisation....... but then want to break away and make your own blockchain..
sorry but another altcoin is not helping bitcoin. its moving away from bitcoin
maybe try to think of ways to build WITHIN bitcoin. rather than making a separate network(nation/civilisation)
its like saying "i support a US dollar civilisation.. so lets make euros instead"
or "i like the british empire. but i want to make the ottoman empire instead"
|
|
|
|
its not a bitcoin second layer.. as that falsely assumes it is bitcoin and is solely for bitcoin and has all the benefits and security of bitcoin.. LN is not and does not.
That's like saying ketchup isn't a condiment for burgers because you can put it on hot dogs too. Your laughable attempt to twist things with your subjective interpretation of the English language is a clear act of desperation on your part. You aren't fooling anyone. It is not exclusively a Bitcoin second layer, but it does act as a layer on top of Bitcoin. There is no possible way for you to deny this, so why continue to discredit yourself by repeating it non-stop for years on end? Oh, that's right, credibility isn't important to you anymore because you are blinded by hatred and bitterness. no its not ontop of bitcoin. its a separate network. .. the hint is in the N of LN you are the worse mis-information and overhyper of what LN is. and yet from reading your posts you are not even that involved in LN.. the top of the bitcoin network is mining pools. the bottom is lite wallets. LN is not even a side chain.. its another network which just copies and pastes via LN bridges.. yep LN is a separate island. bitcoin does not 'bridge' to LN because bitcoin does not understand LN's network gossip. its LN that is a bridge to many coins(islands). LN can function without bitcoin. because it can be used with many coins. its not a sole feature that relies on bitcoin. so again not ontop of bitcoin to truly understand you need to learn no bitcoin ever leaves the bitcoin network. LN justs sees bitcoin from a distance. and copies a transaction ID LN uses this ID as its justification for allowing LN to create its own 11 decimal transactions on the separate network but what happens within the LN island is 11 decimal traffic that cant cross the bridge and then when closing, with the authorisation of the other party.. it can send a commitment bitcoin can accept. even the articles about the LN pizza event pretend it was a success in the title.. even though when reading the actual article it shows it was a failure with only 10% payments going through https://decrypt.co/5321/folds-bitcoin-lightning-pizza-turns-out-to-have-been-a-successWhile the Lightning Network itself performed well during the Lightning Pizza launch, it was onboarding and user-experience-related issues that proved to be the most challenging. In the 24hrs after releasing Lightning Pizza, over 1,500 orders were created, however only 10% resulted in sales due to frictions associated with onboarding and troubleshooting Lightning wallets, And you try to manipulate that to imply that 90% of payments were attempted but failed to be routed, which would be a lie. That's not what happened. You just expect people to believe you without looking any further into it. You deceitful little maggot. Taken from another article: “The largest barrier to conversion was setting up a new lightning wallet,” Reeves said, adding there were roughly 1,500 orders but only a 10 percent conversion rate because people struggled to use lightning-enabled bitcoin wallets.
“We’ve learned a lesson that in order to grow the lightning ecosystem we not only need the best products, but the best education as well,” Reeves said. “We will incorporate that into our plan going forward.”
So, back in the realms of reality and facts, it actually had very little to do with difficulty routing a payment and more to do with how people get to grips with a new technology they hadn't used before. Just once in your pathetic life, tell the truth. It shouldn't be this difficult for you. Unless you truly are a sociopath like I'm starting to suspect you are. so you want to blame the BITCOIN enabled lightning wallets.. you are soo funny with your lame attempts its actually LN wallets. and the fact that the liquidity was not there to allow the gateways at/toward the 'fold' node to allow all payments maybe you need to learn how routing works and stop blaming bitcoin as if you want people to hate bitcoin you are too transparent with your bitcoin hate and other network adoration |
|
|
|
lightning is a different network. a different network that many coins can use. its not a bitcoin second layer.. as that falsely assumes it is bitcoin and is solely for bitcoin and has all the benefits and security of bitcoin.. LN is not and does not. as for saying it is bitcoins solution. is suggesting that people should abandon bitcoin because bitcoin has no solution but this other network does. if you think the solution to bitcoin is to lock up bitcoin and stop using bitcoin, to then use another network.. then you are not advertising a bitcoin solution your advertising another network.. the bitcoin-core client. does not communicate with LN network direct. the bitcoin-core client. does not understand the gossip protocol of LN the bitcoin-core client. does not understand invoices. the bitcoin-core client. does not accept 11 decimal transactions in short. LN is not bitcoin. bitcoins feature is no middlemen.. LN replies on co-signing counterparties and middlemen(routes) LN measure payments in 11 decimals. something bitcoin does not. LN is not bitcoin. if people actually dispell the oversell of LN and actually describe it for what it is. actually give people factual information about the risks and issues. they can be more informed. then with actual information they can make a true clear decision, understanding the risks. and then use it if they want. however trying to oversell it as bitcoin2.0 and pretend its perfect fluffy limitless utility. is not a way to win any long term favours with the community even the articles about the LN pizza event pretend it was a success in the title.. even though when reading the actual article it shows it was a failure with only 10% payments going through https://decrypt.co/5321/folds-bitcoin-lightning-pizza-turns-out-to-have-been-a-successWhile the Lightning Network itself performed well during the Lightning Pizza launch, it was onboarding and user-experience-related issues that proved to be the most challenging. In the 24hrs after releasing Lightning Pizza, over 1,500 orders were created, however only 10% resulted in sales due to frictions associated with onboarding and troubleshooting Lightning wallets, if your still unclear. think about the 1970's banking structure change 3 words. and you will see the comparison bitcoin=gold LN=bank msat=dollar if you still want to think dollar and gold are the same thing if you want to think a bank note is gold.. then you are missing out some basics bitcoin is not the 11 decimal token that LN uses. yes when you decide to exit the LN network you can have a 'commitment' that converts msats into a btc value using a format of that contract that bitcoin does understand.. and then with counterparties signature then get some btc. but thats the same as getting a banks authorisation who you locked your gold up with, to authorise getting your gold out when you want to close your bank account. the funny part is the next phase is to over expression of how much "weight" bitcoin(gold) is so that LN counterparties can offer cheaper weight altcoins(nickel and brass) as the exit strategy of LN yep the strategy of abandoning bitcoin is this get them to lock up bitcoin with middlemen. use an alternative token and then offer an altcoin instead of bitcoin as their LN exit i hope you are now caught up wit the actual plans. and not just the fluffy glossy pamphlet of hype,hope, and dreams |
|
|
|
It will be interesting to see further developments in the Bitcoin Lightning Network as the market progresses. However, widescale adoption will only be possible if it can provide solutions at par with giants like Visa and Mastercard. The Lightning Network can already offer an excellent solution, one that is even better than those provided by credit cards and banks. Credit cards have a throughput of several ten thousand transactions per second right? Well the Lightning Network can route a million transactions per second, probably even more than that. seems someone has been reading the glossy pamphlets and now thinks of himself as PR guy number 50 anyway.. no it cant. LN relies on 'hot potato' transactions. (pass the parcel) requiring users to have liquidity to pass the payment of others LN suffers a 'payment success' flaw. where not all payments are successful when using LN for actually real world price of good values. it will hit many problems. that prevent anywhere near to 'millions of transactions a second' not so long ago there was a LN pizza campaign.. 1500 payment attempts were tried to buy pizza. only 10% got their payment accepted yes silly 'proof of concept' scenarios of minimum msat payments suffer less. but the real world doesnt work at msat payment amounts.. you cant buy coffee for an msat LN is not a solution. because if LN has a failure rate of 90% at just 1500 attempts to buy pizza over 1 evening.. its no where near the hype of "one million transactions a second" as for the fee's with each channel along a route you have to pay a fee to each party along the route. the more hops needed the more you pay. as for the 'capacity' well 90% of it is not average joe users own funds in outbound ready to spend positions.. . its services locking up value to offer 'inbound balance'.. even if users dont even get it to spend for themselves. its just sat there please dont exaggerate, over promise, over commit the features/utility of other networks hoping to get people to abandon using the bitcoin network in favour of another network LN is not even a network for the sole use of bitcoin. so stop trying to pretend it IS bitcoin |
|
|
|
|
looking at the past.
in 2009 bitcoin was an interesting project. for geeks.
but it didnt actually gain any real fame until it started to be used.
(dark side of history, silkroad, mtgox)
but also things like the laszlo pizza and the alpaca socks. then exchanges then bitpay
then many retailers. even car showrooms
it actually became useful and successful when people could actually buy things with it and exchange it to fiat.
so its actually the utilities and services that actually took the effort and the risk in offering something for bitcoin that then made people want to use bitcoin more.
i actually got many people interested in bitcoin when the question of 'how real is it' was asked in the early days by buying them real pizza with it. if i just showed them code or a youtube video they would have passed
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
