Bitcoin Forum
April 24, 2018, 07:34:19 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.0  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
  Home Help Search Donate Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 [52] 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 »
1021  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: maybe pirate is just a front for banks/governments/people who would destroy btc? on: August 24, 2012, 12:20:51 PM
if someone controls, say, 2 million BTC, then the issue is that they can constantly mess with the exchange rate, create panics, etc.

and why would they be able to constantly mess with the exchange rate and create panics?
1022  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: maybe pirate is just a front for banks/governments/people who would destroy btc? on: August 24, 2012, 12:10:32 PM
the first rule of bitcoin: do not question the limited supply

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=11627.0
1023  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Announcements (Altcoins) / Re: [ANN] [PPC] PPCoin Released! - First Long-Term Energy-Efficient Crypto-Currency on: August 24, 2012, 10:25:31 AM
Why must the code be read to understand the coin distribution system and possibly whatever "proof-of-excellence" is?

There is nothing in the paper nor the wiki detailing these things. At least nowhere near satisfactorily. 16x cuts the reward in half, so does 8x cut it by 25%? Is this increase permanent, even if difficulty lowers? Does the starting difficulty make sense in this scenario?

You talk about "consumed coin age" in the paper, but why is proof-of-stake even necessary with this mechanic? I've talked about it in several other threads, and really all you're accomplishing is giving an incentive for people with wealth to make transactions and consume their coin age to create a proof-of-stake block. But with consumed coin age as you call it, it already does this. What additional protection does the stake really offer? It seems possible that at certain points no one will be able to create proof-of-stake blocks (or choose not to) if no one can consume enough coin age, so proof-of-work will have to take over or everyone will have to wait a potentially long time before a new block. If PoW is your backup anyway, you may as well just stick with consumed coin age and leave it at that.
1024  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Dafuq is this? Swiftcoin? Came in an email, i suspect scam? on: August 24, 2012, 09:49:25 AM
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91157.0

should probably stay away
1025  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Alt Chains are the future on: August 15, 2012, 02:46:30 AM
Quote
Ideally there should be more than one hashing methods being used, so even a successful attack on one algorithm will not be able to compromise system's integrity.
There is.  SHA-256 and RIPEMD-160

RIPEMD-160 has little bearing on the security of the network. It doesn't back up SHA-2 in any way. If something went wrong with RIPEMD-160, everyone could instead use the regular public addresses. If something went wrong with SHA-2, I doubt it would even affect the network unless it was something very major. Sure, maybe you can get a collision with a block, but how will you ever get it to have useful data that somehow advantages you and/or DoSes the network? Maybe there is a way, I dunno.
1026  Economy / Economics / Re: Would Paul Ryan as Vice President let banks collapse? on: August 12, 2012, 03:12:24 AM
Sources? People shouldn't just believe things they read or see on tv/internet. I am not pro-romney, or pro-ryan at all. But people should strive to be superior to the US press, not inferior.

uhh public record?

http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/26344/
1027  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [ANN] [PPC] PPCoin Beta Release Soon on: August 12, 2012, 02:54:25 AM
Can you elaborate on how the proof of stake will work? And why is a central checkpoint involved if there is proof of stake?

And personally I wouldn't use the same license as bitcoin as it allows closed source developing. Or at least release the daemon under GPL and the client under MIT if necessary.
1028  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will deflation be the fatal weakness of bitcoin? on: August 11, 2012, 06:43:39 PM
Unfortunately for you, I did not make an argument against anything in that sentence, so there is no ad hominem fallacy.

You, however, have twice now used a red herring.

Quote
I think you have a misunderstanding of deflation as I mean it.

mm hmm, carry on.
1029  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will deflation be the fatal weakness of bitcoin? on: August 11, 2012, 12:28:52 AM
The theoretical fiat-currency system I came up with, which I haven't shared with anyone, including you, you believe is not theoretical?  Huh

I didn't realize that you were a nutjob and pontificating on something that had no relation whatsoever to the discussion.

Quote
I don't know what you're trying to convey here.

Right because for some reason I was obscure in my meaning of hard currency so you gave me an irrelevant wikipedia link and went off on a tangent rather than respond to what I had said in that paragraph. Not that it was anything that important.

Quote
No, it's not the exact same result. If you notice in my BoomTown example, all of the residents had equal amounts of money. And obviously all of them were not bankers, rather they equally worked for the money they obtained.

Where again is this perfect world you speak of? We can make lots of things sound nice when it's a perfect world, but it's not reality.

Quote
This is why deflation is preferred. Your economic exchange is more based on value than debt.

Based on what evidence? That bankers didn't exist during pre-government gold currencies? Maybe in that perfect world that we don't live in.

Quote
Now, when do you think a government will "award" people 500 gold nuggets?

This is your response? The point is that the value of those peoples' production does not hinge on currency. Value exists regardless of currency. Currency is only a means to trade value easily. All BoomTowners did was mine gold, and it's worth something because it's rare and they got lucky. They didn't do anything productive to get it except mine, which in the grand scheme of things is rather unproductive.

Quote
That's not taking advantage of anyone. If you can't see that, you've missed the point.

All these new peasants moved in and we just happen to be richer! Free money! Oh wait, existing money is just worth more it's totally different! You may think deflation is a fairer system, but it is still a system that takes advantage of people. These simplistic arguments that fly in the face of the history of gold and what was done with it should not carry much weight with people who have studied that history. It is not the governments that started this wealth siphoning, it was the bankers. With 50% of all the bitcoins in existing to be mined by the end of this year, loans are going to be a big part of the bitcoin economy if it is to go anywhere. Rather than actually fixing the problem of wealth transfer, bitcoiners would just prefer that they be the receivers rather than the existing bourgeoisie. Maybe a larger part of the economy will benefit, but probably not.
1030  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will deflation be the fatal weakness of bitcoin? on: August 10, 2012, 11:26:21 PM
First, debt-based for whom, the government, or citizens? I designed a theoretical fiat-currency system that is debt-based for citizens but not the government.

lolwut? It's not theoretical, and you were simply stating what could happen if currency were created that way. You call that "designing a theoretical fiat-currency that is debt-based for citizens but not the government"? Awfully lofty.

Quote
Second, when you say "hard currency" I must say I don't like that term at all. To me you can't say hard currency if you're not talking about hard backed, as in backed by a precious metal.

Uhh, deflect much? And I was referring to the gold standard, so it seems we are in agreement unless you are of the purist non-FRB gold standard as the only hard money.

Quote
I designed a theoretical system where neither bankers or corporations is at the helm.

Sure buddy.

Quote
Deflation has no shame in saying those who have money benefit... What are you saying exactly? There shouldn't be a benefit to having money? What use would money be then? As least with deflation even if you have little money you can rest assured the value you have will be the value you expect, at a minimum.

Well anti-inflationists whine that the bankers get the "new" wealth, but somehow this is absolutely not a problem when existing wealth increases in value even though it is the exact same result.

Quote
What does that have the effect of? The people with the gold nuggets are now richer. They can get goods and services, like buying groceries, for less. If you're suddenly richer you will probably spend money more freely... Don't have a car? Buy one. Even if it costs 100 gold nuggets, you can now afford it because everything else now is cheaper for you.

So, yes, more people can and will now buy cars.

This is because value is added to the system. New producers are in the economy, and that is what presumably would drive the deflation rate. This, however, exists just the same with any currency. If the government awarded all those new people with 500 gold nuggets too, then the price of everything would remain the same and no one would benefit disproportionately (and some of them would buy cars!). But instead, the people who save get to take advantage of those who are new or who don't save, not because of their own production, but only because of the attributes of the currency. While bitcoin isn't government-managed, neither was gold in the gold smith money lending days. People still did many awful things then revolving around the manipulation of money. There is nothing inherent in deflation that is going to make car sales increase over a stable currency or an inflationary one, it only changes who might be purchasing those cars.
1031  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will deflation be the fatal weakness of bitcoin? on: August 10, 2012, 10:33:40 PM
Short answer to OP: no.

Reason being deflation is by definition a shortage of money in the economy, i.e, demand exceeding supply. Since OS, p2p crypto-currencies like bitcoin can essentially be cloned and created at will, there will never be a self-imposed "shortage" of the money supply as happens within an economy based on a single, monopolised money supply. It is only central bank fiat money based economies that are uniquely prone to the deflationary death spiral brought about by errors or incompetence of the centralised planning, which over time are inevitable since no-one bats 100 forever. They even enforce these central planning mistakes with the full force of the law, (gold confiscation, imprisonment, propaganda etc) to prevent competing currencies from fulfilling the need in the market for more currency, it is pure evil. Basically, deflation can only take place at the end of the state gun backing up it's failed monetary policies.

Deflation is not an issue for bitcoin, of course you could have read the already archived hundreds of posts, and the sticky in the "Economics" section to know this but here you are ....

Great post, by the way. You have definitely hit the heart of the matter of both traditional government currencies and bitcoin. Bitcoin isn't the final solution because other cryptocurrencies will crop up in droves (or ramp up in popularity) to solve financial crises. To me that means bitcoin is fundamentally flawed, but many seem to disagree.
1032  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will deflation be the fatal weakness of bitcoin? on: August 10, 2012, 09:34:55 PM
However, the Federal Reserve bank was conceived of outside of Congress and brought into law dubiously - over a holiday when lawmakers were headed home, as opposed to being ardently debated.

Any system using hard currency has to be partially debt-based as well. The US has had mostly a debt-based currency through its history, though there were periods without it (scrip, greenbacks). The Federal Reserve was the "solution" to the problems of a fixed supply, it did not introduce the national debt.

Quote
What you mean by governments spending debt-free fiat into existence is, for example, if a government decided to build a bridge and other infrastructure for the public good. The government then paid contractors to hire workers and complete all the work. The money then enters the economy. Unfortunately, however, government is a natural magnet for corruption and abuse. So those with favorable influence over government can benefit disproportionately.

But this is the way it works anyway, so the only difference it probably makes is one has bankers at the helm, the other has large corporations.

Quote
If you have inflation, the ones that get the money first always benefit more than ones getting it later. Inflation saps purchasing power, and I don't see how that can be argued to be a good thing.

Because we witnessed the power of deflation with the great depression. Why this little nugget is so easy for deflationistas to forget is beyond me. Inflation saps purchasing power only because there is a preference to who receives new money first. Deflation doesn't have any shame in saying it is those who have money who benefit.

Quote
I don't think bitcoins would have much problem competing against other currencies, especially inflationary ones. Just look at gold, for example. Gold is winning in value compared to fiat by a margin of about 1500 to 1. And bitcoins are better suited for currency exchange than gold.

This doesn't address what I said and is just rhetoric.

Quote
No, salary doesn't go down in a deflationary economy. No boss will walk into your office and say, "Your groceries are going to cost you less this month, so I'm cutting your pay". That doesn't happen. Deflation means job opportunities decrease, but it doesn't affect people who have jobs, unless it gets to the point they lose them totally.

One way or the other, "more people can buy cars" is a complete falsehood. Salaries reduce or people get fired. Assuming a healthy economy aware of the deflationary aspects, salaries would have to go down over time just like many now receive a typical 3% cost-of-living raise every year.
1033  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: Scalability tsunami coming on fast on: August 10, 2012, 09:21:14 PM
Using an account ledger with account numbers in lieu of public keys or pubkey hashes, you can get transactions down to around 100 bytes each which is scalable with visa-like transaction volumes on consumer bandwidth. It will also make life much easier if there is a move to post-QC cryptography with huge public keys and signatures. The sigs will still be tough, but at least the pubkeys are taken care of. Ed25519 also works a lot faster than ECDSA in batch verification.
1034  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will deflation be the fatal weakness of bitcoin? on: August 10, 2012, 07:52:49 PM
There is a simple reason.  Inflation hurts the productive and helps the debtors.  

Collectively around the world who are the largest debtors?  Governments of course.
Who sets monetary policy?  Governments of course.
Who benefits the most from an inflaitonary policy?  Governments of course.

Governments are the ones that voluntarily signed on to debt-based money. Did they really need to? There are historic examples of somewhat successful government debt-free fiat. With debt-free fiat, governments spend money into existence; with debt fiat banks loan it into existence. In the end, there isn't much difference in the money supply. But in debt-free, producers receive the benefit of inflation; in debt-based, it is the banks.

It's a collaboration between the wealthy and government that has been going on for a long time. Inflation is not the root of the problem, it is a side effect.

I just don't see how fractional reserve banking will ever be a major force wrt Bitcoin. FRB only operates to expand the money supply when I.O.U.'s begin to be treated as the equivalent of money. Why would we expect this to happen with Bitcoin?

If bitcoin became seen as a better currency than some of the typical reserve currencies, people may very well accept FRB, perhaps at a discount. It could be very dangerous not to considering the chunks of bitcoins that currently sit around unused.

If you see the trend is cars are becoming cheaper and cheaper in BTC every month what does that mean? Yep. More people can afford them.

Your logic here fails the giggle test. Everything goes down, including your salary in a deflationary economy. Sure, maybe the top 50% saves every month and deflation is a bonus, but these are the same people that lend money in an inflationary economy.
1035  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will deflation be the fatal weakness of bitcoin? on: August 08, 2012, 11:37:51 PM
Is gold still a currency? lols
1036  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will deflation be the fatal weakness of bitcoin? on: August 08, 2012, 04:32:52 PM
I bet you that, if given a long enough term, Bitcoin will be less volatile than any government fiat currency. On one hand, we have a currency with a fixed (non-volatile) supply, and on the other hand, we have currencies with very volatile supplies. To disagree with me, you have to make the absurd claim that a currency with a highly volatile supply will tend to be less volatile than one with a perfectly predictable supply in the long run. 

Supply doesn't matter, velocity does. It is possible, and hell probably likely, that hyperinflation will happen with some of the world's biggest currencies, but it hasn't happened yet. So far, as far as absolute, economic catastrophes go, the limited supply currency loses. And really, fiat currencies are only so bad today because of central banks and all of the ills that come along with that and debt-based money.

Quote
Bitcoin's price volatility will roughly resemble the asymptotic curve shape of its inflation schedule. Volatility is already far lower than a year ago, and a year from now will be lower than today, and so on.

Whoa you mean volatility is lower from when someone pumped $3 million into a ~$50k market?? Bitcoin's "market cap" is still insanely tiny compared to the world economy. It has to go through one of these volatility periods for every market expansion. Every new market will be at the mercy of the previous markets. "Hey switch over to bitcoin, you only have to give up 20-30% of your revenue to us for the first couple years to get in!" Pumps, dumps, manipulations, bankruptcies--it is all quite accessible in this format. "Bit Street" arguably already exists and will only get smarter.
1037  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Will deflation be the fatal weakness of bitcoin? on: August 08, 2012, 03:21:06 PM
The problem of deflation in the classical sense stems from the lack of granularity of paper money.
You can't practically spend less then 1 cent.

I've seen this argument before, and it is hilariously awful. The indivisibility of a cent has absolutely nothing to do with the problems of deflation. Ok, theoretically in some bizarro world it could have potentially been a problem, but not in any historic era of deflation. Not even close. The problem of bitcoin's coin distribution is "resolved" by having near infinitely divisible coins.

As far as deflation itself being a weakness, I don't think it will cause the end of the currency or anything, but I think it will hinder its widespread adoption. Volatility may be fun to play, but it's not fun to run a business around.
1038  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 2 Million unspent pristine bitcoins on: August 07, 2012, 09:40:03 AM
Now, as to the design, the reason why I strongly believe it was not the
work of a single person is because there are just damn too many very
good and novel ideas in there, and those actually span multiple disciplines:

Quote
    - distributed proof of work (idea originated in the spam fighting community)
     - the elegant solution the byzantine general problem, (problem from the distributed computing community)
     - fairly smart use of crypto in general (double sha based adjustable difficulty, ECDSA with "just the right number of bits")

This is all from the cryptography discipline though. If you were a real crypto geek you'd probably be aware of these things at least in passing. There was a thread questioning the thought behind using the double SHA hash, with I think the best guess being "it made it initially slightly harder" but the difficulty would have taken care of that anyway. However, I believe it is Applied Cryptography that mentions the potential length extension attack on SHA2 and it is eliminated by double hashing. Though the attack doesn't apply to bitcoin, it's possible he did it just in case. As far as ECDSA, it has inherently reduced the problems of large RSA keys; nothing in particular that Satoshi did there.

Quote
    - scriptable transaction outputs to allow complex contracts in the future (economic insight)
     - the economics "just work" : the system has many self-balancing properties in the form of negative feedback loops (economics, chaos theory, etc ...)

Cryptography's use as a digital fingerprint is something that has been combined with the idea of contracts since the first digital signature algorithm. As far as the economics just working, that absolutely remains to be seen and is not proven by a bunch of vague phrases. Especially given the evident pyramidal nature of coin distribution.

With that all said, I would not be surprised that several people did work closely on the project.



I think the "potential to cause serious damage" is vastly overblown. An individual or group who held lots of coins could, at worst, cause a very sudden drop in price.

But an individual or group who was a bank that lent lots of money could, at worst, stop loaning money and cause a very sharp increase in price, buy up lots of stuff, and then start the process all over again.
1039  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 2 Million bitcoins unspent coins on: August 05, 2012, 03:05:04 PM
The first Bitcoinusers did think of Bitcoin as an Prototyp. It was a Toy, they didnt save the coins, and i think Satoshi didnt save his first coins too.

In my opinion, at least 1 million coins from those 2 Million are lost.

Smart enough to invent a new currency whose production runs out within the creator's lifetime, but too naive to think that they could ever be worth something? Unlikely.
1040  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: StakeCoin Bounty on: August 02, 2012, 11:50:36 AM
Oh well it's hard to understand what you mean sometimes. You say a lot of things without understanding what you say, so forgive me for being confused.

For example

Quote
There is no special tier in StakeCoin, no thresholds. Everyone can participate, big or small.

So you propose that every account with a satoshi in it gets to sign the block chain, right? Do you have any idea how much bandwidth and data that would take? Do you realize miners will just drop these signatures anyway? Perhaps you should sit on the sidelines and let the big boys talk about these kinds of changes. You should stick to quoting the wiki where someone has spent time actually making up a bullshit argument for you.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 [52] 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 »
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!