Folks would trade bitcoins with other cryptofiat coin's. Governments would have the best of both worlds and bitcoin becomes the defacto reserve currency. Or the de facto killed currency. "You are in the Eurozone and you insist on being paid with something else than Euro? What is wrong with you? Maybe I should call the police." Exactly my point. If everyone chooses a cryptofiat of their own, nobody will accept anyone else's as legal tender. They will have to exchange them at the border. Rather than pick one nation like USA to be the reserve currency so they can enjoy all the benefits of that status, why not a neutral gold-like cryptocurrency? |
|
|
|
I spend 20% of my income partying and traveling for football games.
This is extremely wise The rest was wasted. |
|
|
|
...
You are finally going on ignore.
Not the ignore button. My only weakness! You cursed brat! Look what you've done! I'm melting! melting! Oh, what a world! What a world...
Your posts demonstrate that you surely have other weaknesses, and I did watch wizard of oz a lot as a kid.. seems to be fresh in your mind... as well as some funny kid cartoons... HM? Spaceballs |
|
|
|
Ok, now for some biggies:
-) Bitcoin mining is an ecological disaster
-) No incentive for nodes to relay transactions once the block subsidy has demised.
-) There are Governments who actually do ban Bitcoin itself.
One about the fundamentals of life on earth, one about the fundamentals of the protocol and one about the fundamentals of society.
1. Technology will improve, chips will become more efficient, driven by the next run up and all the free money to be made  2. Transaction fees 3. State gambling laws. Drugs. Prohibition. Digital "Piracy". Human desires trump law every time. Your examples are certainly friction, but none of them are showstoppers (imho). 1. Chips becoming more efficient doesn't solve the problem. As long as Bitcoin has the risk of a 50+% attack the dollars to get 50% is the level of security. Not the hash rate. With Bitcoin rising in price mining will cost more and more. With 1000x the market cap of today it is likely that mining will consume 1000x more dollars. I think Bitcoin can only solve this with new features to complicate a 50%+ attack. 2. Sure. But this could make transactions very costly. But there are ways to reduce the relay cost of a transaction... 3. If Bitcoin gets banned, this is not good. But I don't think this will happen in the capitalist counrties... The 50% attack is only ever used by people that don't really understand it. The white paper itself explains why, assuming rational actors, its just not worth it. Then there is the simple fact that 50% doesn't guarantee anything (its just a bit more likely than if you had 49%). It just tips the odds slightly in your favour. In actually fact you are going to want more than half to have anything more than a marginal chance of being able to do what you want with the blockchain. The only real threat is a malicious actor that only had the total destruction of BTC in mind. I can't argue against that possibility, stranger things have happened. Seems unlikely someone would spend all that money on mining BTC in order to see it fail? I can think of cheaper ways. (corner the market etc) sure, sure. I am aware of the probabilities. It doesn't matter in that respect. Compare to get 1% of the hashing power will cost you 1000$ or 1billion $. What is more secure? On the other hand the dollar investment will always get determined by the expected return. At $300 $1.1mio get created every day. So running the miners will not cost more than 1.1Mio. So if the price 10fold it is likely that mining will cost 10times more. So efficiency doesn't solve that problem. Mining today is much more efficient compared to 2011 but much more electricity gets used. How much energy used is irrelevant because e=mc 2 or because volcanos or because sunshine. |
|
|
|
Cryptofiat: governments (and megacorpo) recognize the usefulness of the blockchain tech but don't want to share the power of minting money with the world at large (Bitcoin) but want to keep tight control over it... Please alert me when this FascismCoin hits the market, I'd sure love to divest my savings from bitcoin and dump them there. I'm sure I'm not the only one, either!  This is what I've been proposing for a long time. Basically it has the security, pseudonymity, and protection from counterfeiting of a cryptocurrency, but no speculative value because it is fiat and issued by a state. Basically it's a bitcoin premined coin backed by the treasury debt. It's also an ideal platform for a PoS coin. Folks would trade bitcoins with other cryptofiat coin's. Governments would have the best of both worlds and bitcoin becomes the defacto reserve currency. |
|
|
|
Hope the recovery isn't a dead cat bounce.  There have been a lot of false alarms about recoveries till now. If one or two speculators can do this much damage to price, that kind of say something about bitcoin and give reasons why merchants should not take the risk of accepting it for payment. I googled 'bitcoin "dead cat bounce"' and got - About 14,300 results |
|
|
|
|
So if the stock market becomes decentralized, what will that do to the HFT industry? Will they become miners?
|
|
|
|
And you can't have Govt regulation with anon...
For example, cars are regulated so they are safe... and you can find out who killed your mom in a hit and run...
With any degree on anon you cannot regulate cars... or planes... or your heart transplant team. No problem. People who want to continue to have government regulation and not have anonymity can stick to using people who are regulated by their government. You want it, you guys all agree together. Meanwhile, people who feel that the free market is adequate regulation can stick to that. It really comes down to what you just said. Good post. Here we go again. The libertarians are usurping a story and twisting it completely out of context. Nothing in the article said anything about avoiding government regulation. |
|
|
|
This is a disheartening post. Likewise  It misses so many points that have been discussed many times. That's why I clearly stated that the OP wasn't exhaustive or even comprehensive in its scope. But I'm genuinely curious which points you're referring to and how they impact affect what I'm saying. Because there is so much negativity now I don't want to be accused of being a bag holder. Oh well, I'm happy for you to feel like you won a game or something. Oh give me a break. Thanks for just ignoring everything except the last line in the OP which I reluctantly posted to be transparent as possible. The mere inclusion of that last line unquestionably removes bias from the OP. You can make vague observations, but it's hardly speculation. You think?! Thanks, Captain Obvious. Dude, Systems Theory isn't supposed to lead to speculation no matter what discipline it's applied to. For example, systems theory as applied to psychology doesn't outline treatment or a course of action, but rather it helps you understand the psychology of a person or group in a context that can be consistently applied again and again. All your reply shows is that you don't understand the theory or what it's intended for. I even flatly stated that the OP is extremely general as it uses a theory which can be, and routinely is, applied to literally dozens of various disciplines. In other words, I never even tried to speculate. These systems you speak of sound like spirituality. That's fine too. Everything is connected and kumbaya right back at ya. Now you're just going overboard. The post is supposed to help people who are struggling to grasp the context of the situation due to intense emotions and/or a host of other factors. The point is to set Bitcoin into a context that is internally and externally consistent throughout. I'm not going to do your speculating for you or anyone else, but since I have significant experience with modeling these types of things, I thought this was another way I could contribute. I held back on that post because I thought maybe you were just feeling sorry for someone and wanted to add a little advice. I just wanted to frame your post in the context that it isn't a win-lose game... mostly because I admit to being a firm believer in Bitcoin. Now I just need to clarify why I felt it was in remiss. You made good points about history, but then you talked about systemic death and entropy. Misuse of the term entropy is a pet peeve of mine. It's worse than quantum. There's no need to argue about them here. But I am completely at a loss why you felt you needed to post this in the first place. What was your presumption? Emotions aren't something people need to be talked through by posting, they are what people need to learn to deal with. If people are simply speculating without any understanding, then they deserve no advice at all, nor would they want any. Better advice would have been to go talk to someone IRL, not try to feel some sense of "internally and externally consistent context" that Bitcoin is somehow part of some machine and that sometimes machine parts fail. I don't see it that way at all. Forgive me for saying this but you had no moral authority to talk about Bitcoin failing as if you understood the emergent complexities of OPEN SOURCE systems. There are no books on this yet. They are being written as this technology and philosophy unfolds. Besides, the post ended up being a rallying post for Bitcoin bashers that agreed with you without even understanding what you were talking about. |
|
|
|
NXT may be controlled by one party. There's no real world way to verify either way. It's like Byzantine Generals using anonymous couriers instead of their own recruits (to borrow a metaphor to use as a simile). The couriers may be trustworthy or they may be spies. No military trained General would ever trust such a courier, yet NXT people trust anonymous stakeholders (or their appointees) to not be bad agents. It's downright irresponsible to develop such a system.
It's funny how so many people claim they are pro-crypto when in fact they are anti-crypto. Guys like cbeast are just in it for the money, it's obvious, they don't care about the crypto movement and only want to protect their holdings (BTC). Jeff is even worse, he should be a supporter of all new projects, yet he does his best to try and discredit anything that isn't BTC related. It's no wonder BTC is down so much. People are working against each other rather then with each other. Nobody is against any projects. Just quit bashing Bitcoin on the Bitcoin forum and maybe you won't look like such a fool. |
|
|
|
Proof of Work, It says it all right there. A proof that fair work has been done. If you dig a ditch you can proof the work has been done but you will have a hard time exchanging it, Bitcoin takes care of this. If you used a shovel or a digger is irrelevant its a matter what is the best economic choice. Miners purpose is to mine and thats it just like a gold miner is mining to sell to have a functional business and just keeps a small amount for the lean times. A miner invest in machinery and a lot of other thins and not in gold/bitcoin, another investor will do that. Bitcoin is a commodity, it is modern Gold the currency aspect of it is just a added bonus just like gold is legal tender (depending on jurisdiction). Money is not something you buy like a ripple cost nothing to produce and millions are given to the banks for free, and you can buy some, lol. That system sound familiar. Why would anyone pay for something which cost nothing to produce, is not scarce as it can be copied endlessly and it does not matter when its started. Increase the market cap by 100B with the push of a button from $ 40 000 000 to $ 140 000 000 is literately worse scam than the the FED. Zero transparency, corporate centralized at least 92% of available still to be sold at any price which is dreamed up. Oh yeh give it to me baby a dream come true.  Its amazing how many people struggle with the word work. Satoshi is so far ahead its not funny in due time even the slowest one will catch up. 1. even when Bitcoin coin supply is zero, PoW is still needed in order to secure the network, therefore PoW has nothing to do with cost of producing Bitcoin. Bitcoin is not gold, PoW miners are not real miners. Real mining is required to extract gold, PoW mining is NOT required to produce Bitcoin, a PoS mining network could do the same thing, with nearly zero cost. 2. PoW's work is useless and meaningless work, there's no value in it. PoW extracts value from the Bitcoin eco-system, because Bitcoin eco-system is where the value is at, not the PoW network. 3. PoS can secure the network better than PoW, it's a proven concept as many PoW altcoins fall victim to 51% attack, and PoS altcoin are all secure and not attacked. 4. PoS re-invest in the community and eco-system, PoW extracts value out of the eco-system, and into the pockets of the mining interest group (miners/pools/hardware vendor/electric company). This is again a proven concept, as PoS eco-systems are rising to the top of coinmarketcap. Do you really consider PoS networks more secure than PoW? even when you can attack the network at zero cost with PoS? I dont know if post is troll or not I see now from your other posts you simply dont know understand how PoS works.. it is ok, when the attack happens and your coins are worthless maybe you will change opinion  Just ignore him. I don't know or care why he suddenly forked from Bitcoin. He ignores your points and stuffs you with strawmen or slaps you with red herrings. Whatever the reason, he spends way too much time in the Bitcoin forum talking about altcoins. PoW is work. You hit the nail on the head. He is basically saying that the value of work diminishes after the work is done (an old prostitute adage), which is true, but that's why we put value on it immediately and pay for it. PoS gets paid by debt which is a zero sum game. That's the subtle difference. If a miner doesn't work he doesn't get paid and vice versa. Successful miners work more efficiently than non. PoS would only if a government backs it with compounded debt. |
|
|
|
bought in at yesterdays low You just made a few percent. Kudos. Are you HODLING? |
|
|
|
|
IANAL but if it was intentional market manipulation in China, well, I wouldn't want to be that CEO.
|
|
|
|
Satoshi is dead, probably.
Satoshis don't die... they join that big Colored Coin in the Blockchain. |
|
|
|
|
All in all, just another coin in the wall.
|
|
|
|
|
Remember the caldera exploding and killing half the world's population? No? You can thank Satoshi.
|
|
|
|
The other options i left out is front running the news. Like ETF not being approved or something of that nature.
That would scare more than just bitcoiners. It would show the fear and contempt held by the regulators for any disruption of the status quo. |
|
|
|
|
I don't think it's necessarily Bitstamp. I've noticed a pattern for a few months. It was such a tight algo that I couldn't find a kink in it I could use without taking a risk. I figured it was just trying to trigger stop loss orders. This move surprised me because I think it is a good agent that just wanted to take advantage of the system from the inside without hurting the market too much. I think they went too far and some bigger fish decided to cause a panic.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
