1.V Buterin is meeting with investors and holding talks at the European parliament and shit. There is a whole dev team doing the actual developing.
Watch him, he just needs some free lunch. |
|
|
|
And by the way, a forked ETH chain with smart-contracts (and all the same issues I outlined upthreat) will run as a BTC-sidechain soon, "backward comp" promised here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1375724.0So what exactly is the ETH good for? Speculation? |
|
|
|
|
In order to better secure a big chunks of BTC, I'd say it should be a good idea to check your own wealth by running
1. your own node, with some software on top that very regular checks if your stake is still yours (big business like exchanges are hopefully doing that, correct?). Costs of that is minimal.
2. ... ? I can only think of running a big mining pool (5-10% of hashpool might be ok) is the most secure way of keeping things yours, but that is most expensive Option, but could also pay back, if you can get cheap Power!
Is there sth. else one could do?
I was just thinking about getting around the decentralisation issue by bringing in 'big' players and really with point 2. AND big money the system gets safer and shared better (than just right now, where about 60% of mining power is concentrated).
If just 10-20 big players (home offices, Magnetes, ...) would do so - each separately- BTC would do really well.
Anyone can calculate what minimum cash (buy Miners) would be needed for ensuring all that?
Next, who might be those big ones?
|
|
|
|
The basic difference is that Ethereum is controlled by companies, a few people who will have control over it.. while Bitcoins is totally different. there is no authority to control bitcoins
Bitcoin development is controlled by the Blockstream company. 3 Core developers are employed by BS. By this logic put your money into gold. |
|
|
|
So let's hear you display some knowledge of functional polymorphism? Explain ML functors? What is a type class and why are there no inductive types in Haskell?
Etc..
It's not functional polymorphism, but parametric polymorphism. A type class is the way of doing ad-hoc polymorphism in Haskell. There is not inductive types in Haskell because all types include bottom value. Do you still think you're the only one in here that know things?
Vanillacoin is a gem. Vanillacoin forumWell I was thinking of precisely the following post which says "(parametric) polymorphism", but I term it functional polymorphism since it using functional parameters instead of parametric types of instantiable OOP objects: http://scala-language.1934581.n4.nabble.com/scala-usefulness-of-OOP-tp2000320p2000339.html(what a small world, I see Gregory Meredith participated in the above discussion) No why would you assume such an absurd notion when I never indicated  I suppose you just have an ego problem (must be your irrational association with VNL, did you invest your lunch money?). I obviously know I am not the only one since I learned about Haskell's bottom type populating all types via Robert Harper's blog post. I didn't ask you, I asked Fuserleer. But I already was aware that Haskell inverts the type hierarchy and puts bottom at the top of the hierarchy, or rather let's say Haskell is the dual and has co-inductive types. I wrote more about that here: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/scala-language/PIhmEeMg-Ms/SUdf950G_T0JIf you truly know these matters and didn't just Google for them, then why on God's earth do you think VanillaCoin is a gem. Cripes surely you are smart enough to realize Zerotime and Chainblender are highly flawed. Here one can try to follow and will find out that Casper might work with a reduced set of "well" defined type sub class so that scripts can terminate. https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/comment/18130/#Comment_18130Referenced paper is guess that: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-540-24727-2_7Still performance vs. convergence is not clear. |
|
|
|
Same reason as for ETH. Banks will not buy XRP ETH or any coin. They will run all on a private ledger using private miner all secured by themselfes. |
|
|
|
what i want to know is this
if its entirely open source why will huge corps with their own top coders just not clone a version for themselves?
It is completely open source. It already has several clones. Shift, Expanse and Soil are all clones. Yes, and so if R3 decides to use it than will fork it for their own, private use.... |
|
|
|
I wonder if ETH will reach the price of Bitcoin.
In terms of fiat- sure, some day.... |
|
|
|
My understanding is following (not sure if correct):
So in short, bitcoin is decentralized currency, Ethereum is decentralized applications.
Hm, As decentralized as we have just seen in the Bitcoin world (consensus table) and that combined with the planned PoS in Ether.... |
|
|
|
|
The problem is rather to distinguish what Ether wants to be from what it is right now.
Right now bitcoin is considered to be an experiment, Ether is one in beta phase.
So maybe nobody can give any final answer here....
|
|
|
|
For only 200 Bitcoins in advance, I'll write some auto-trol-o-matic scripts to do the abovementioned steps for you.
Send your BTC to
1KodyKiGhCMUSRha8sEritDu7MJA8JAvWu
This Is greate- and should work for headers / OPs as well...  |
|
|
|
Thanks for posting that.  I feel I'm too junior, and don't have enough technical knowledge to justify my comments, so I'll let somebody else do it. Actually I can see another long term advantage in reducing block generation times. As mining becomes less profitable, it will become more centralised, and because of the influence of miners, this will be bad for Bitcoin. I understand that some banks are now refusing to provide loans for mining equipment purchases because of the questionable RoI. Coin reward halving, and possible increases in energy prices will further reduce profits, and this doesn't take into account the increase in hashing difficulty because of improved hardware. With more frequent block generation, it may become possible for some nodes to become miners in a fee based system, and this will help to decentralise mining. Still in my mind: Give some bonus here (time or hashrate), so that blocks get really packed with many tx - (but not just fake & generated ones for exact that reason)... so no empty blocks gets rewared.... |
|
|
|
There's this notion of side-chains basically deprecating everything that altcoins have to offer, including ambitious projects like Ethereum. As we have seen with Rootstock, we can have Ethereum basically using BTC thanks to sidechains. Of course I will need to see further development to fully buy in, but it's looking promising.
My question is if sidechains would allow to run something like Maidsafe, which is a mega ambitious project (older than Bitcoin) to run through BTC as well thanks to a sidechain. Let's remember that Maidsafe basically attempts to replace the entire internet into a decentralized network where apps can be built for this network and so on, and the SafeCoin would be a token that you get by giving some hard disk space to the network.
Im just wondering what devs think of Maidsafe and if in the future a sidechain could mimic it's features therefore rendering SafeCoin as a token as a yet another irrelevant altcoin. Right now Maidsafe is the only thing that isn't BTC that I consider holding long term, and maybe some XMR as well even tho Bitcoin is starting to look better and better privacy wise for the future so I may sell my XMR at some point and stay 100% BTC only.
Could You pls be a bit more precise and point me to what you ve seen with Rootstock? SafeCoin runs with proof of resource, correct? |
|
|
|
|
Confirming own transactions is a bad thing anyway. Could sb think of a permission system for not allowing that as a winning side effect?
|
|
|
|
TAX & redemption payments will be in fiat, I hope  |
|
|
|
Only temporary, when China Gov. decides to do own coin and take over existing mining power by politcal act. Maybe in combination with a >50% attack and massive short selling...
After that decentralisation might be better and trust might come back by time.
That will create a lot of chaos and huge dumps but I agree it may be for the best in the long run. Another way to see it is that if the dumps are too big it could damage Bitcoin irreversible if many people get burned all of a sudden, including many here hehe. I am not sure this is going to happen. Governements are not understanding bitcoin at all, let alone would they participate. It's just not the right sentiment now. I'm not saying it will happen tomorrow, if happens at all. But the topic here comes down to the probability of a real Black Swan event and I estimate the joint prob of all three events up in my post ito be quite high. Much more higher than e.g. the CHF event from 15th Jan 2015 where the Swiss Nat Bank removed the floor... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
