Bitcoin Forum
January 21, 2018, 07:31:59 PM *
News: Electrum users must upgrade to 3.0.5 if they haven't already. More info.
 
  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 ... 93 »
41  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: New Altcoin Searching for Team members (An opportunity 'you dream about' ) on: December 19, 2013, 07:45:31 PM
Quote
but we need something good and promising and we want to make it happen,

Does that imply that you don't have anything? I mean is there at least a goal of what type of currency you want to create, beyond the basic scrypt/sha type stuff?
42  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: New Altcoin Searching for Team members (An opportunity 'you dream about' ) on: December 19, 2013, 07:27:53 PM
Do you have any details? Is it a fork of bitcoin? What kind of effort has been put into this other than "we want to make a coin"? Because a lot of people have asked for help, and very, very few ever answer the call, and at this point I'd probably say none have ever produced anything of note.

What do you bring to the table?
43  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Trying To Make A New CryptoCurrency on: December 18, 2013, 09:22:13 PM
Percentage fees cannot work in a bitcoin-style block chain. They can't really work for any cryptocurrency. Specifically in bitcoin you will never know which tx is the spend and which is the change, so all change will have to pay the fee as well. This is horrific for making small transactions from larger inputs.
44  Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: New paper: Accelerating Bitcoin's Trasaction Processing on: December 18, 2013, 02:41:12 PM
Your attitude is too cavalier... Just because you weren't supposed to know the non-public inputs doesn't mean that those inputs don't leak when you examine the SNARK proof, you need a zero-knowledge proof to guarantee that nothing leaks besides the output.
But for the last time, why do you care whether the proof is zero-knowledge or not in this context?

I think the distinction of must-not-have and not-necessarily-need of ZKP vs. SNARK is being lost here. Probably not necessary to keep asking this question.
45  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Proof-of-Stake is a Bad Idea.Proof-of-stake coins are potentially limitless qty! on: December 18, 2013, 12:42:57 AM
That being said I do like the potential extra security proof-of-stake brings but this factor does not outweigh my dislike for this interest inflation quality, most likely motivated by greed.

So if you hold more coins and then you get more free coins this is inflation. Wouldn't this increase the maximum number of coins of that currency? Is this figured in to the max coins that are supposed to be issued in a cryptocurrency? Or will the "21 million total coins" of a proof of stake coin turn into 50 million total coins after x number of years with all the coins brought into circulation due to the proof of stake generation? Printing money for no work done-- sound familiar? (*cough* U.S. government?)

"Printing money for no work done" is not what is happening, the network is being secured--that is work. It isn't motivated by greed. Who gains from it? Certainly not the early adopters. There is no debt that becomes easier to repay for the network by printing more money. The reality is a small amount of inflation mildly counteracts the free lunch hoarders get over spenders. Spenders pay for the network with transaction fees. Hoarders benefit for doing nothing. With mild inflation, the hoarders must pay some small share for protecting their wealth, rather than relying on others. Try to think a tad more critically.
46  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: JPMorgan's "Bitcoin-Alternative" Patent Rejected on: December 16, 2013, 08:03:52 AM
That is pretty f'kin sweet.
47  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [GIVEAWAY][MOL] Million Molecule Marvel - 1,000,000 MOL Giveaway 100x10,000 on: December 15, 2013, 06:36:35 AM
what the hell: K6oMdovWBzCWnxeAiwndDeJrd3otDEgJW6
48  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: [ANN][XRC] ReCoin: the first cryptocoin with renewal of lost funds on: December 13, 2013, 07:06:14 PM
It'll be new and innovative once I get around to coding it! Roll Eyes
49  Economy / Economics / Re: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) on: December 13, 2013, 05:01:12 PM
Bitcoin thus serves a role in wealth maintenance, like gold,

You hope.

Quote
for when the markets trainwreck themselves by gambling with fiat inappropriately.

Because bitcoin doesn't fix anything. A replacement for gold isn't what society needs, it needs a replacement for fiat so we can stop worrying about having to run to gold. If bitcoin doesn't get used in commerce (which will require lending), it will never have a tangible grasp over society like gold, in which case it becomes easily replaceable. Not a good property to have for a value store.
50  Economy / Economics / Re: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) on: December 13, 2013, 03:58:15 PM
Except that Jimmy isn't the only debtor in this scenario the bank is one as well so now the depositors will have to accept that their deposits are indexed to deflation. Except they don't have to as they can withdraw their BTC.

I guess the banks will just have to stop dabbling in so much fractional reserve gambling if they want to stay afloat.

FRB does not have to be in effect for this scenario. Lending of any kind will be a massive risk.
51  Economy / Economics / Re: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) on: December 12, 2013, 02:03:32 PM
I tell you that a store of value cannot be losing (one of those three properties you claim it might have) in value in the long term, otherwise it won't be a store of value in the first place.

Then you simply do not know or do not understand the correct definition. But feel free to make up a new one, that is a commonplace way of arguing one's point around here.
52  Economy / Economics / Re: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) on: December 12, 2013, 01:08:51 PM
I think that I've given here enough both historical example and logical reason to deem this question closed for now unless you provide substantial evidence that would actually refute my arguments besides just stating that I am wrong because I am wrong and sticking to petty semantics...

What is this, a 6th grade debate class? There is no question, there is a definition that has the logical property "X can be either A, B, or C" and you have attempted to refute this by saying "here is an X with property C, your definition is invalid!" and tried to use a statement of mine out of context a post later as something--I'm not sure what--but it definitely isn't an argument.
53  Economy / Economics / Re: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) on: December 11, 2013, 10:44:04 PM
How is that correlated with what you said before about a store of value not having to gain, lose, or remain stable in purchasing power?

Because I was saying then that there is no specific requirement for a store of value in regards to purchasing power other than it cannot quickly become worthless. Obviously a store has to be at least one of the three, it certainly does not have to increase in value. And stability and near term are rather subjective terms.

Firstly, in nominal terms through depreciation of the currency its price is denominated in, and, secondly, in real purchasing power due to expansion of economy and growth of population, as was the case with gold backed dollar throughout the 19th century (excluding the period of Civil War)...

You are making the presumption (in the first sentence) that a store of value has to have some fixed quantity which is not true of any store of value in the history of ever, including bitcoin when considering its derivatives. And then you compare today's depreciating currencies with a relatively stable one (lol except for time period X) as an example of the store which is a rather confused comparison. Differing policies lead to differing results. Gold-backed currency was used to back Lincoln into a corner where his only option was to devise a new currency to fund the war. This, of course, significantly reduced the value of gold-backed currency (but it did not eliminate it as a store of value, it just became a quickly depreciated one that was far from worthless), but we're getting fairly tangential to the topic.
54  Economy / Economics / Re: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) on: December 11, 2013, 09:55:46 PM
A store of value would not be that if it were to lose its purchasing power, by definition. It has to gain through time,

By what nonsense would it have to gain through time?

Quote
or at least remain stable in near term.

Is all that is required. "Store of value" does not imply in perpetuity. Virtually every definition of store of value considers fiat currencies of stable governments stores of value even though they lose value over time. They are still predictable stores of value. I do not believe you are a bitcoin homer, so I really hope you don't have to resort to bitcoinomics here to explain that the modern economic definition is wrong.
55  Economy / Economics / Re: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) on: December 11, 2013, 09:30:43 PM
As a counter-argument I can refer you to "paper" gold (gold futures and other derivatives) whose volume by far exceeds actual physical gold available for delivery.

Right, bitcoin plus the clones are vaguely equal to "gold and its derivatives 2.0", not gold.

Quote
Also, if we talk about real gold (methinks, only this can be counted as a store of value),

I disagree with you here. A store of value does not have to gain, lose, or remain stable in purchasing power to be a store of value, it just has to not become (mostly) worthless on short timescales. At least in the traditional way of thinking. Of course bitcoinomics would probably describe the perfect store of value as a pyramid scheme.

Quote
As you can see, gold 1.0 is likely not as good as it may appear at first glance

:shrug: I have little appreciation for gold 1.0 as more than a metal that doesn't corrode.
56  Economy / Economics / Re: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) on: December 11, 2013, 08:55:52 PM
Actually, I'm not very familiar with the clones you refer to, though I agree that bitcoin (and likely the rest of the crew) makes a poor means of exchange. But if you are right and the clones are really as good as you paint them, what's the point actually? We could just as well use a clone if it does prove to be really better than bitcoin as a store of value...

I was referring specifically to it being gold 2.0. Bitcoin is easily copied and there is copious evidence to this, and those copies have quite handily stolen some percentage of marketshare from bitcoin. This is not analogous to gold vs other precious metals as there is essentially no cost to bootstrapping these new currencies. The store of value property can only hold for as long as people are willing to transact in the currency and pay what will be exorbitant tx fees (comparatively) to support mining. This is a serious conflict.
57  Economy / Economics / Re: Why Bitcoin is ultimately doomed to fail (not today or tomorrow) on: December 11, 2013, 08:32:44 PM
Yes, probably some form of electronic gold (Gold 2.0 in local parlance). It has properties such as security, limited supply of coins, independence from authorities, etc that correspond to those of real gold (without many of gold inherent deficiencies) and make it useful as a store of value in the first place. These properties are useful to people, so it may actually have a chance to replace gold...

I really don't see how. Bitcoin has zero advantage as a store of value over any clone, and if they're all terrible media of exchange, limited supply, independence, etc. don't really mean much. And when coins start arriving that don't rely on proof of work for security, bitcoin will be far more costly to transact with, leaving it only valuable in the eyes of the bagholders hanging on desperately to their "network effect".
58  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: New altcoin - Searching for dreamers- Code name: Bernoulli on: December 10, 2013, 08:05:39 PM
I am a big believer in 0 premine, however the challenge is to find a way to get an inicial amout of coins in order to suport the launch and the developers.
What do you think guys?

Are you actually looking to do something really different or just a few hacks on the bitcoin code? What is your programming ability? I'm developing a "dreamer" codebase, see sig for more info.
59  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Bitcoin 3 coming soon on: December 09, 2013, 09:55:13 PM
What feedback is anyone supposed to provide for such a generic and open ended thread?
60  Alternate cryptocurrencies / Altcoin Discussion / Re: Decrits: The 99%+ attack-proof coin on: December 06, 2013, 10:32:24 PM
Bump- is this still under development?

No updates since August 11, 2013.  Angry

Yes, development is progressing, albeit slowly. I can only work on it part time. Still working on the network protocol and is currently around 3.5k lines, but they are highly functional lines that are laying the foundation for "features never before seen in cryptocurrency." The network protocol aims to be very efficient on bandwidth (about 1/3rd of bitcoin) and allows for nodes seeing only fractions of the data to prove transaction validity and shareholder maliciousness. Altogether adding up to something much more decentralized than bitcoin, and cheap to use.
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 ... 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!