|
25
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: February 20, 2022, 08:55:49 AM
|
Not only is Bitcoin NOT fungible it is ABSOLUTELY NOT fungible from a pure mathematical aspect. EVERY satoshi has a pedigree. You can trace it's origin all the way to the coinbase it was initially realized in. And you can see the trail of addresses it is passed through to wherever it currently rests.
Not really. When you combine inputs you make the source indeterminate. Coins may taint coins they're mixed with if you want to take that view but that's something different. From a statist's viewpoint, you've just tanked every coin involved in the join. Cheers! |
|
|
|
|
26
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: February 20, 2022, 08:54:23 AM
|
Not only is Bitcoin NOT fungible it is ABSOLUTELY NOT fungible from a pure mathematical aspect. EVERY satoshi has a pedigree. You can trace it's origin all the way to the coinbase it was initially realized in. And you can see the trail of addresses it is passed through to wherever it currently rests.
Before you get all mad at me, and Batslap me... I am NOT making a case for a shitcoin. I am just being honest about a feature of bitcoin that we need to come to grips with, and the sooner we do the better.
Careful there, brother - you're deviating from the anointed canon. You might be drawn and quartered over the coals. |
|
|
|
|
27
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: What happens to my Bitcoin when I die?
|
on: December 25, 2021, 08:12:39 AM
|
If I die (let's be honest, that will probably happen), would my wife or family get my coins? What if they don't know my passwords/private key?
I dunno - what arrangements have you made? None? That's on you, buddy. Sux to be yer fam. |
|
|
|
|
31
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: December 25, 2021, 07:39:03 AM
|
|
Yeah, it's-a meee.
You can't tell from the linguistics? What would the satoshi-whisperers conclude from that!?
I'll probably not hang 'round, but it is indeed good to visit the old neighborhood for the holidays.
A little bit creepy, a little bit nostalgic, and just a little bit morose. But, the thing must be done.
I do indeed wish you all well.
|
|
|
|
|
37
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: September 25, 2020, 06:59:42 AM
|
Regarding criminals:
Leaked documents reveal some of the world’s biggest banks allowed criminals to move dirty money around the world
I'm sure this is true. But what is the alternative? The remedy you seem to be seeking is to have the banks refuse to follow the directions of their customers for what to do with that customer's money. That cure is orders of magnitude worse than the disease. (Of course, I am of the bent that 'money laundering' is a phony trumped up 'crime'. If money being moved is the proceeds of some crime, prosecute the crime that yielded the money in the first place, not the simple transaction of free commerce) |
|
|
|
|
38
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: September 25, 2020, 06:23:02 AM
|
**LOTTA CAPSTYPINGS***
Happy Saturday!
Just to be clear, you seem to be stating that a future where transaction fees being $100, $1000 or even more per on-chain tx is a distinct possibility? That as a possibility is implicit in my thoughts, I'd say, yes. OK, so here's the relevant followup question. When average tx fees are $1000, what is the typical profile of a person willing to run a non-mining validator? Let's start simple on this - how many tx per year might the average such person make? I like where you are going. But since the requirement for validating nodes is kept low it would continue to be in EVERYONE's best interest to run one. Even if I am not directly writing data to the block chain I would benefit by monitoring those who do. In fact monitoring the whale moves of banks, governments, and retired WO members would be of great sport and interest. Not just for security, but for knowledge. I used to think the Whale Alert accounts on twitter were a novelty, but they are actually an indicator. People ran Seti@Home even though they got no green stamps from Martians for doing it, and same thing with the folding app for the genome. And I would say validating one of the most important ledgers on the planet would command MUCH greater incentive. Bitcoin is for enemies after all. And as layer 2 is currently being built out people who run lightning nodes are STRONGLY incentivized to run a corresponding Bitcoin node. I think as second+ layer solutions are developed we will see more and more interest in that among a much wider group than the hobbyists (like me) who do now. On top of that I think we will see mining hardware possibly become commoditised. As energy production changes BITCOIN is poised to soak up a lot of spotlight. This will most likely decentralize even MINING nodes. People with solar energy systems may be able to choose to sell excess energy to the grid, or instead use it on commodity ASIC hardware to produce Bitcoin. And by that time the price of energy will be at least joined at the hip with BTC production if not outright dictated by it. What do you think? Well, I know several people that run non-mining validators. I am not aware of a single one that regularly run reports upon the chain data in order to uncover trends and such. I mean, other than the commercial (e.g. blockchain.info) or avocational (e.g. WhaleCalls) operators. Maybe I'm just living a cloistered life, but I don't believe that such data mining is something that the typical non-mining validator does. Accordingly, I really don't think that it is realistic for such hobby to cause many to run non-mining validators regardless of computing infrastructure demands. What I think is that it is unrealistic to expect anyone that does zero, one, or even a handful of txs a year to have an incentive to go through the effort of running a non-mining validator. I think that forcing people off-chain for their txs due to cost will limit the population of Bitcoiners that would even consider such. You say it is in everyone's interest to run a non-mining validator. I really can't disagree with you there, with the caveat that 'everyone' is really 'every user of Bitcoin'. And that that interest is countermanded by the time, toil, and treasure demands. I just don't think the tradeoff is worth it for the average Bitcoin user. Yet even today, when the demands are quite small, and there is still a pretty significant percentage of Bitcoiners among Bitcoin users, vanishingly few run non-mining validators. And while I don't have figures in front of me, I don't think the count of peers is growing at all, let along at the apparent rate of new entrants into the ecosystem. I also think Lightning is a non-starter. It was gonna be ready 'in two weeks'* four years ago. Yet today, there is more Bitcoin using Ethereum as L2 than Lightning. Maybe the complexity that is foisted upon the user can be lessened somehow, but last I looked, it was still just an inscrutable mess. Unless it gets a massive UX upgrade, I really can't see it being used by other than niche hobbyists and custodial middlemen. *OK, in 18 months five years ago. I would like to see mining power disseminated further as well. Though I don't expect such, Sure, maybe cheap hashers can be spread all around. But hashers as a general rule don't decide what goes into the blocks they are trying to solve. Those decisions lay in a small number of pool operators. Oh well, that's my two bits. |
|
|
|
|
39
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion
|
on: September 20, 2020, 11:40:05 PM
|
**LOTTA CAPSTYPINGS***
Happy Saturday!
Just to be clear, you seem to be stating that a future where transaction fees being $100, $1000 or even more per on-chain tx is a distinct possibility? That as a possibility is implicit in my thoughts, I'd say, yes. OK, so here's the relevant followup question. When average tx fees are $1000, what is the typical profile of a person willing to run a non-mining validator? Let's start simple on this - how many tx per year might the average such person make? 1? or even 0? average person will fully transact on L2+ Hmmm, while I am a full fan of L2+ for day to day transactions the idea of $1000 fees for transacting on-chain is somewhat hard to digest though. What kind of marketcap are we considering for this scenario? What level of adoption? I do agree that, with a high enough level of worldwide adoption, the average person will probably NEVER transact onchain even if he do use Bitcoin directly (but L2+) or indirectly (100% custodial/off-chain). What is the incentive for anyone to expend time, toil, and treasure in the exercise of validating a chain upon which they never transact? |
|
|
|
|
40
|
Economy / Speculation / Re: [WO] On the false dichotomy of prohibitive fees and prohibitive hardware costs
|
on: September 20, 2020, 10:17:40 PM
|
jbreher probably agrees with rolling, except for the relished fantasy part. Of course, his solution will be to increase the blocksize to the point that ordinary people cannot run nodes. He is on record as alleging that non-mining validators are useless [emphasis added by jbreher, as that is quite clearly NOT what I wrote], anyway. For example; boldface is his:You are delusional. I have demonstrated over and over again that the count of non-mining validators is a powerless metric in regards to Bitcoin consensus.
[...]
A count of non-mining validators has fuck-all to do with a measure of the economic majority. No. No you do not. Obviously. Can't even understand simple English. Or maybe you are lying by misattributing words to me that I clearly have not uttered. Fucking liars running around starting brigaded neg campaigns based upon unfounded allegations that they are incapable of even understanding. In case it is not clear, I am referring to you, nullius (you fucking liar). For my part, I think that most transactions will and should be off-chain.
Mmm Hmm. And when most people seldom or never make an on-chain transaction, where is the incentive for them to run a non-mining validator? Anybody who does not understand this should try, just try running Bitcoin and syncing mainnet on old and/or very cheap hardware. You will soon wish for smaller blocks. If you have a bit of vision, thereupon contemplate network effects and the resistance to centralization brought by keeping full nodes within the reach of people who are not rich.
False inflammatory statement. I run several non-mining validators on the same machine. That I bought years ago. Used. And added an SSD thereto. Total cost: about $400. One might say 'even that is too much money'. As compared to a $1000 tx fee? Riiiight. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
