Too much now. Need to go. You figure it out...
You keep going but keep coming back. |
|
|
|
not 'pegged' ... 'pegged' isn't possible.
Exactly. That's my point. |
|
|
|
Alts or sidechains are the obvious answer at the mo but transaction handling could evolve methods for handling huge volumes within Bitcoin. That's in my very limited understanding, there may be some reason transaction handling can't be expanded and it would have to be handled externally but I doubt it.
How does a sidechain work? Is there an existing sidechain implementation? |
|
|
|
|
Suppose you add a new Microcoin (for microtransactions, that is). At what point is a transaction considered micro? What happens if people start hoarding Microcoin, effectively disregarding what it was created for? Will there be a limit, so that Microcoin will be used exclusively micro? If not, then it's just another altcoin, and I don't see the point.
|
|
|
|
there are already solutions for the conversion worked on. Conversion between currencies will not be a problem. Everything can be denominated in btc without the need to be actually btc. Don't know what's so hard to understand about it.
It doesn't make sense to bloat to 1 terrabyte in a year and force every user to download all these microtransactions when using another chain is the most rational thing. Man, i'm getting tired. I'm out for now.
Are these currencies pegged to Bitcoin? If not, when why should I choose not to use Bitcoin? |
|
|
|
Everything should be the same currency, and Bitcoin is capable of handling microtransactions. I don't understand why people say the opposite.
Not indefinitelly, even with the cap removed completely, networking streamlined, etc. it would still reach a point where bundling small transactions together would be more efficient. How would such bundling work? |
|
|
|
I don't think
Everything should
Lolk, go away. Well, yes. I don't state my opinions as fact, unlike others in this thread. |
|
|
|
Do we want Bitcoin to be a currency used for all types of transactions or a transfer of wealth?
Do we want an altcoin to be used for micro transactions and push for a two coin system? if so which coin?
I don't think having another coin for micro transactions is a good idea. For example, I have a bank account, but also have bills in my wallet and change in my pocket. If all these were different currencies, it would be a pain in the ass to know exactly how much money I have. What if I want to withdraw from an ATM? How many Billcoins are my Bankcoins worth? If I buy a coffee and pay with a Billcoin, how many Changecoins will I get in exchange? Everything should be the same currency, and Bitcoin is capable of handling microtransactions. I don't understand why people say the opposite. |
|
|
|
|
The Riemann hypothesis has nothing to do with Bitcoin, at all.
This should go in Off-Topic.
|
|
|
|
If transactions keep on their current course and keep growing the 1mb limit WILL BE REACHED. This is a fact and in the future.
You can't have a fact with such an assumption. What if transactions don't actually keep on their current course? What you're stating is a prediction. It may be more than 99% probable, but it's still a prediction and not a fact. |
|
|
|
how is you arguing with a comparison to climatechange less absurd than unicorns?
It was an analogy. If you don't know what an analogy is, it's obvious it may seem absurd to you. |
|
|
|
i never said anything about climate change deying and in fact i don't even care because this discussion isn't about the weather. You want to start a discussion about climatechange now? Seriously?
I used climate change as an anology about how we can't get 100% consensus even on scientific facts. Then you reply to me with absurdities about unicorns and such. The problem is not climate change, but the fact that you seem to disregard logical reasoning, something that is needed to determine whether the proposed change in the Bitcoin protocol is a good idea or not. |
|
|
|
Oh, fuck. So you ARE one of those people that think climate change is not real. There's no point arguing with you, then.
-ad hominem -i did not say that -you are offtopic you lost the argument threefold I never said your argument was invalid because you were a climate change denier. If you don't think climate change is real but neither that it's fake, then what do you think? |
|
|
|
Not everyone even agrees there would be problems arising.
The same way not everyone agrees that climate change is a real thing. now it's 'climate change' - last decade it was 'global warming' ... but it's getting colder. Conclusion: the smartasses aren't all that smart. Scientists aren't infallible gods. More questions? Maybe you admire the scientists and follow them blindly - others don't and think for themselves. Refering to Bitcoin now, not climate change... Different scientists have different opinions, assumption, hypothesis and way of working. Just because someone says unicorns fart rainbows in the future and that someone is a scientist with credentials doesn't necessarily make unicorns fart rainbows in the future. (same as the unthinkable happened and bitcoin crashed another time in january. That wasn't planned that way ... so why should unicorns now fart rainbows again in the future? I don't believe in a unicorn until i see one) Oh, fuck. So you ARE one of those people that think climate change is not real. There's no point arguing with you, then. |
|
|
|
Not everyone even agrees there would be problems arising.
The same way not everyone agrees that climate change is a real thing. |
|
|
|
Technically speaking, Bitcoin is the biggest shitcoin
I didn't know “shitcoin” was a technical term. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is money, and money is just a tool. Money by itself has no morality and no sides.
If ISIS succeeds in whatever ISIS is doing it will not be because of the currency of their choice.
|
|
|
|
Let's put it this way: In times of internecine blockchain fork warfare
[...]
Again, I would expect there to be more than just Gavin and Mircea involved in a war.
[...]
Do you people seriously think this will result in some sort of war? I think you are exaggerating everything. |
|
|
|
This is the same as “the year of the Linux desktop”. I personally think this is utter nonsense.
except bitcoin has some mayor advantages over cash, unlike linux. You're right, but predicting that this year will be “the year of [something]” has no value, because we don't know how things will happen. We will only be able to tell the year of success of a technology after the fact. That's why I think, discussing about this in the present is useless. |
|
|
|
Mc Dumb will only accept Dogecoin in the future
Bitcoin will be no more soon due to a fork into at least 2 new coins.
Stupid thought, it won't fork into two coins. The 20mb fork will happen and the exchanges will use that fork, that easy and done. There might be a few lunatics who disagree but once no one accepts their unforked chain they will fork as well. well, let's wait and see. I will not support Gavincoin just for the simple reason that there has been no consensus and you are all pigs and i will not be bullied into using Gavincoin - it's inaccesible anyways. So you will see how your shit plays out ... You'll be epically be caught off guard. Prepare your anus. A second ecosystem will emerge, new exchanges and all ... in case not both forks become totally worthless which is the most likely outcome. You're getting off topic. This discussion is about McDonald's. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
