Bitcoin Forum
May 06, 2024, 02:13:25 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: IOTA - Permissioned ledger Russian extortion scheme  (Read 20095 times)
cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1167

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 01:12:04 AM
 #201

Ok IOTa is permissioned ledger. So what? Why does it matter?

Is permissioned ledger same thing as private blockchain?

never have I seen so many sock puppets and posting ninjas promoting one scheme.

why hide... be yourself. Only shame can explain this stealth posting.

1714961605
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714961605

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714961605
Reply with quote  #2

1714961605
Report to moderator
1714961605
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714961605

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714961605
Reply with quote  #2

1714961605
Report to moderator
1714961605
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714961605

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714961605
Reply with quote  #2

1714961605
Report to moderator
"Your bitcoin is secured in a way that is physically impossible for others to access, no matter for what reason, no matter how good the excuse, no matter a majority of miners, no matter what." -- Greg Maxwell
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714961605
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714961605

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714961605
Reply with quote  #2

1714961605
Report to moderator
1714961605
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714961605

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714961605
Reply with quote  #2

1714961605
Report to moderator
1714961605
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714961605

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714961605
Reply with quote  #2

1714961605
Report to moderator
r0ach (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 02:27:10 AM
 #202

Ok IOTa is permissioned ledger. So what? Why does it matter?

Is permissioned ledger same thing as private blockchain?

never have I seen so many sock puppets and posting ninjas promoting one scheme.

why hide... be yourself. Only shame can explain this stealth posting.

I feel like that Bluemeanie guy is bound to show up any second.  It will probably turn out he invested in IOTA and him and CFB are on the same team again.

......ATLANT......
..Real Estate Blockchain Platform..
                    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                    ████████████░
                  ▄██████████████░
                 ▒███████▄████████░
                ▒█████████░████████░
                ▀███████▀█████████
                  ██████████████
           ███████▐██▀████▐██▄████████░
          ▄████▄█████████▒████▌█████████░
         ███████▄█████████▀██████████████░
        █████████▌█████████▐█████▄████████░
        ▀█████████████████▐███████████████
          █████▀████████ ░███████████████
    ██████▐██████████▄████████████████████████░
  ▄████▄████████▐███████████████░▄▄▄▄░████████░
 ▄██████▄█████████▐█████▄█████████▀████▄█████████░
███████████████████▐█████▄█████████▐██████████████░
▀████████▀█████████▒██████████████▐█████▀█████████
  ████████████████ █████▀█████████████████████████
   ▀██▀██████████ ▐█████████████  ▀██▀██████████
    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀██████████

..INVEST  ●  RENT  ●  TRADE..
 ✓Assurance     ✓Price Discovery     ✓Liquidity     ✓Low Fees





███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███

◣Whitepaper ◣ANN ThreadTelegram
◣ Facebook     ◣ Reddit          ◣ Slack


███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███








Hero/Legendary members
contraband
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 528


Community Manager: ETN


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 02:46:54 AM
 #203

Ok IOTa is permissioned ledger. So what? Why does it matter?

Is permissioned ledger same thing as private blockchain?

never have I seen so many sock puppets and posting ninjas promoting one scheme.

why hide... be yourself. Only shame can explain this stealth posting.

Im right here. No hiding. Guess what? No one cares about all your trolling, crybaby.

For those just tuning in...

Cryptohunter knew about this "stealth" ICO. The PROOF is the fact that he actually posted in more than one Iota thread prior and during the ICO.

As we can all plainly see, he's not too bright. He didn't invest.

Then, he begged incessantly for a 2nd ICO. When he didn't get his way, he tried to convince the Iota devs to change their mind by creating a poll. When that didn't work, that's when he started trolling, making silly topics, and becoming an all out pest.

Regardless of proven facts, he continues to push the theory that the ICO was "hidden" from the public.

He talks about how there were no Iota threads on the "main board" even when his posts are in them.

He seems to think a story in CoinTelegraph is non-existent.

The ICO wasn't long enough even though it lasted a MONTH.

He says it has poor distribution while it had over 300 investors and raised over $500,000 dollars.

He refers to a poll that has an imaginary 50% of the voters saying that Iota is a scam. And...you guessed it... there isn't one.

All of this while Iota has been mentioned by Forbes magazine, has received a grant, and was added to Microsoft Azure before it even launched. And there is more.

 If he would just spend his energy doing some chores around the house and cleaning his room in the basement, maybe his mother would give him some money so he could invest in his prized Iota.

He could still make a killing.

Instead he rants and raves about its value being 30x the ICO price. If he would spend some time learning more about the potential of IOT and how Iota will play a big part in it, he would still be able to make 100 times his investment by the end of the year.

But no, he will stick his fingers in his ears and yell, nah nah stealth scam NXT2 - NXT3 etc etc and then bitch that Iota stole his Xmas!!

So now you're up to date on the Cryptohunter debacle!!
cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1167

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 03:11:22 AM
Last edit: March 31, 2016, 03:46:31 AM by cryptohunter
 #204

Ok IOTa is permissioned ledger. So what? Why does it matter?

Is permissioned ledger same thing as private blockchain?

never have I seen so many sock puppets and posting ninjas promoting one scheme.

why hide... be yourself. Only shame can explain this stealth posting.

Im right here. No hiding. Guess what? No one cares about all your trolling, crybaby.

For those just tuning in...

Cryptohunter knew about this "stealth" ICO. The PROOF is the fact that he actually posted in more than one Iota thread prior and during the ICO.

As we can all plainly see, he's not too bright. He didn't invest.

Then, he begged incessantly for a 2nd ICO. When he didn't get his way, he tried to convince the Iota devs to change their mind by creating a poll. When that didn't work, that's when he started trolling, making silly topics, and becoming an all out pest.

Regardless of proven facts, he continues to push the theory that the ICO was "hidden" from the public.

He talks about how there were no Iota threads on the "main board" even when his posts are in them.

He seems to think a story in CoinTelegraph is non-existent.

The ICO wasn't long enough even though it lasted a MONTH.

He says it has poor distribution while it had over 300 investors and raised over $500,000 dollars.

He refers to a poll that has an imaginary 50% of the voters saying that Iota is a scam. And...you guessed it... there isn't one.

All of this while Iota has been mentioned by Forbes magazine, has received a grant, and was added to Microsoft Azure before it even launched. And there is more.

 If he would just spend his energy doing some chores around the house and cleaning his room in the basement, maybe his mother would give him some money so he could invest in his prized Iota.

He could still make a killing.

Instead he rants and raves about its value being 30x the ICO price. If he would spend some time learning more about the potential of IOT and how Iota will play a big part in it, he would still be able to make 100 times his investment by the end of the year.

But no, he will stick his fingers in his ears and yell, nah nah stealth scam NXT2 - NXT3 etc etc and then bitch that Iota stole his Xmas!!

So now you're up to date on the Cryptohunter debacle!!


I will reply to each of your points one at a time.

1. Cryptohunter knew about this "stealth" ICO. The PROOF is the fact that he actually posted in more than one Iota thread prior and during the ICO.

No the ICO was not mentioned at the time I commented in the thread. At that time people were being told not to ask about how to go about buying them....By the time I checked back it was over.
Also the fact the ICO was under advertised and attracted 20 X less than other big ICO is not dependent only myself. What does it matter about 1 person. I am stating a fact that it was under advertised in general and on purpose. So that it could be pumped after and ransomed of for 3000% more than it was sold for first time around. The price being demanded is a testament to this fact. How else can you pumpers and scammers be demanding 3000+ sats for 130sats coins? that is as great a price rise as ethereums ico tokens?? your only claim to fame is using dag? that has not even been proven a viable concept for basing a token??

2. Then, he begged incessantly for a 2nd ICO. When he didn't get his way, he tried to convince the Iota devs to change their mind by creating a poll. When that didn't work, that's when he started trolling, making silly topics, and becoming an all out pest.

I stated it was only the right thing to do and give the other forum members that never heard about the ico because the advertising on this board was so terrible and stealthy UNTIL AFTER THE ICO WHEN ALL THE PUMPERS STARTED TO ADVERTISE IT HOURLY ON THE MAIN BOARD. I suggested give the other members of the forum that were interested a chance to invest at 130sats or even 100% higher prices like 260 sats. It would broaden distribution and raise more funds for the project. NO NO NO they all scream? why?? because we don't want a broader distribution and larger community and more dev funds??? why you may ask I mean it wasn't released? the reason is simple they want to dump it on everyone else for 3000% profits or now they are talking about mugging everyone else for 200000% profits.

3.He says it has poor distribution while it had over 300 investors and raised over $500,000 dollars.

WOW - all other ICO have raised MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of dollars. That is a tiny amount now you are all dreaming of billion dollar coins LOL
Maid raised millions, ethereum raised millions, lisk raised millions. 20x, 30x more than you stealth ico.

On top of this I would doubt even 300 people invested. In fact I may start a POLL.   If you invested in IOTA post your username. I would wager most will be sock puppets or those with long periods of inactivity since they are older sock puppets used for a previous scam probably nxt. I bet we could hardly get 200 real users on this board that invested.

4. All of this while Iota has been mentioned by Forbes magazine, has received a grant, and was added to Microsoft Azure before it even launched. And there is more.

Oh dear the azure project. Wow that old chestnut is getting old now I think we established it means little. Forbes article? the one bitshares was mentioned in too along with a few other coins?? I think forbes has mentioned a few coins in its time.

5.He refers to a poll that has an imaginary 50% of the voters saying that Iota is a scam. And...you guessed it... there isn't one.

This part is critical and proves the extent to which Iota pumper accounts are worried about this.  The poll existed at at the time As soon as I brought attention to this fact the votes for all other coins (because you could vote for multiple coins) started growing and growing and soon iota was only like at 30%. Strange thing that all of a sudden lots of people went to the polll and voted for all other coins with very few now voting for iota?

What follows now though shows even more how serious the pumping issue is on the main board.

I started a poll. The original options were

a - iota should have a 2nd ico for fair opportunity for those that didn't hear about the ico due to poor advertising.
b - no i think paying 3000% mark up already is okay
c - no iota is a scam from the next people.

I then asked if people could leave their username if they voted b so I could see if these were iota people voting or others.

it was like

a - 11 votes
b - 23 votes
c-  15 votes

but you guessed it....nobody left a post to say they voted b??  So I suspected all iota voters right?

So I change the poll to more accurately represent what people are actually voting for. It is now obvious that only iota people were voting on option b before but neglecting to leave their names.

Polls on this board have to run a very long time and I would love to see a feature for displaying usernames next to votes.

I remember when I and then a few others joined in and started a campaign against dark coins instamining and minting slashing   and Evans  put a poll about air dropping 3M tokens for free to all board members that were here on this board at the start of the launch. Can you believe it was an open poll that ran for a few hours and somehow dark scammers managed to vote not in favour?? they put up more votes that the entire board could even though they would have got free airdropped coins for nothing. I actually think Evans would have honestly done it if he wasn't bullied by the other dash whales. The dark market crashed hard that day he gave in and said he would.

6. Yes it is run by the original NXT people ....they should have gone that extra mile to make sure it was given a broader distribution this time. Instead they made it one of the smallest ico's of recent times.

As I told your sock puppet pals. There is no point trying to discredit me. It makes no difference if I am the devil. It will not change the facts that the ICO was not advertised as other big ICO's have been. It also does not even afford a POW period of distribution as ethereum does. This is ethereum that people are calling one of the biggest pumps of all time?? you scam coin has already pumped as much as ethereum has over ICO price and still you believe it is not a scam? it offers what except using DAG as the concept for the token?? it's not even on exchange or proven to function as yet and you think the pump should be = to ethereum already? and you are telling people it can go up another 30x. So it will apparently be a pump 3000% greater than ethereums pump?   wow ethereum ico investors will look like paupers time you scammers take you scam profits.

I hope someone makes a different DAG token and does a proper advertised ICO and I Own Tons Assholes led by the Criminal From Belarus will not get to scam the board and small investors out of even more BTC than they did with NXT1. NXT2 (iota) can be a lesson to future insta ico scammers.




DecentralizeEconomics
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1042


White Male Libertarian Bro


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 03:19:51 AM
 #205

5. Yes it is run by the NXT people

Unless you believe that David Sonstebo was BCNext (which is totally implausible), he had nothing to do with NXT.  Please stop comparing this IOTA garbage to NXT.  Don't drag NXT into this ridiculous charade.  CfB might have been hired by BCNext, but according to his own statements, he wasn't BCNext either.

"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties." - Areopagitica
cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1167

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 03:52:55 AM
 #206

5. Yes it is run by the NXT people

Unless you believe that David Sonstebo was BCNext (which is totally implausible), he had nothing to do with NXT.  Please stop comparing this IOTA garbage to NXT.  Don't drag NXT into this ridiculous charade.  CfB might have been hired by BCNext, but according to his own statements, he wasn't BCNext either.

CFB would have been BCNext. If he is not BCNext he was still core to the start of NXT. According to his own statements? okay.

I am not picking on NXT any more than I am picking on Bitbay. The people left in these projects are  not the scammers. The people who made the huge money are long gone from both. I probably have more NXT than you so I am not saying that project currently is a scam. However a project where the entire minting is given to 21 people is not ideal.

Right now the pumpers and scammers are locked into this iota project. They should not exit with the huge returns whilst others hold the bags this time.


DecentralizeEconomics
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1042


White Male Libertarian Bro


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 04:01:07 AM
 #207

Right now the pumpers and scammers are locked into this iota project. They should not exit with the huge returns whilst others hold the bags this time.

I wouldn't worry too much about that one.

"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties." - Areopagitica
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 257


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 06:24:56 AM
 #208

Most people don't even realize Bitcoin has it's own decentralized exchange, but it does.

Which only 0.001% of the population can participate in profitably. And it ceases roughly 2033 or unless transaction fees scale up but there is a Tragedy of the Commons dilemma there as well.

It doesn't really even matter if it's profitable or not.  You can define Bitcoin in one sentence:

The purpose of mining is to create a permanent two way peg, decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissionless system.

The economic incentives are a side issue, but seem to work thus far.  It's designed to bounce back and forth between profitable and unprofitable.  The fact that it's deflationary creates a time opportunity cost reward to generally remain profitable over the long haul.

You missed the point entirely. Only 0.001% have the economies-of-scale to mine Bitcoin profitably. Sorry your argument fails on the economics of proof-of-work hash functions, unless you can argue there is one that can't be significantly optimized for an ASIC and economies-of-scale for cheaper electricity located next to utility scale hydropower (even free electricity perhaps if you do a handshake and wink in China with a Communist Party official).

DecentralizeEconomics
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1042


White Male Libertarian Bro


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 08:43:27 AM
 #209

Most people don't even realize Bitcoin has it's own decentralized exchange, but it does.

Which only 0.001% of the population can participate in profitably. And it ceases roughly 2033 or unless transaction fees scale up but there is a Tragedy of the Commons dilemma there as well.

It doesn't really even matter if it's profitable or not.  You can define Bitcoin in one sentence:

The purpose of mining is to create a permanent two way peg, decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissionless system.

The economic incentives are a side issue, but seem to work thus far.  It's designed to bounce back and forth between profitable and unprofitable.  The fact that it's deflationary creates a time opportunity cost reward to generally remain profitable over the long haul.

You missed the point entirely. Only 0.001% have the economies-of-scale to mine Bitcoin profitably. Sorry your argument fails on the economics of proof-of-work hash functions, unless you can argue there is one that can't be significantly optimized for an ASIC and economies-of-scale for cheaper electricity located next to utility scale hydropower (even free electricity perhaps if you do a handshake and wink in China with a Communist Party official).

Whoa... Hold on!  Are you telling us that it is entirely possible, if not extremely likely, that the Chinese Communists are in fact subsidizing PoW mining in an effort to undermine the decentralization of Bitcoin and control the currency in the hopes of applying capital controls to the digital economy through underhanded tactics which will further solidify their hegemony?

"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties." - Areopagitica
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 257


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 09:22:45 AM
Last edit: March 31, 2016, 02:35:59 PM by TPTB_need_war
 #210


You missed the point entirely. Only 0.001% have the economies-of-scale to mine Bitcoin profitably. Sorry your argument fails on the economics of proof-of-work hash functions, unless you can argue there is one that can't be significantly optimized for an ASIC and economies-of-scale for cheaper electricity located next to utility scale hydropower (even free electricity perhaps if you do a handshake and wink in China with a Communist Party official).

Whoa... Hold on!  Are you telling us that it is entirely possible, if not extremely likely, that the Chinese Communists are in fact subsidizing PoW mining in an effort to undermine the decentralization of Bitcoin and control the currency in the hopes of applying capital controls to the digital economy through underhanded tactics which will further solidify their hegemony?

I've been hinting at that for months and finally an astute reader articulates it.

If you are wondering who created Bitcoin though, I think more likely the globalist DEEP STATE funded by the $trillions Black Budget and knowing full well they could hide their capture of Bitcoin blaming it on the "enemy". Nick Rockefeller (the one who warned Aaron Russo about 9/11 before it happened) has been spending most of his time in China.

winterzauber
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 95
Merit: 10


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 05:56:34 PM
 #211

Guys!

According to the POLL - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1420030.0

r0ach and cryptohunter just F....rabble

Thank you for your voting

NXT-BXK9-6SJ2-ET7T-D9R9P
r0ach (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 07:04:24 PM
 #212

Most people don't even realize Bitcoin has it's own decentralized exchange, but it does.

Which only 0.001% of the population can participate in profitably. And it ceases roughly 2033 or unless transaction fees scale up but there is a Tragedy of the Commons dilemma there as well.

It doesn't really even matter if it's profitable or not.  You can define Bitcoin in one sentence:

The purpose of mining is to create a permanent two way peg, decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissionless system.

The economic incentives are a side issue, but seem to work thus far.  It's designed to bounce back and forth between profitable and unprofitable.  The fact that it's deflationary creates a time opportunity cost reward to generally remain profitable over the long haul.

You missed the point entirely. Only 0.001% have the economies-of-scale to mine Bitcoin profitably. Sorry your argument fails on the economics of proof-of-work hash functions, unless you can argue there is one that can't be significantly optimized for an ASIC and economies-of-scale for cheaper electricity located next to utility scale hydropower (even free electricity perhaps if you do a handshake and wink in China with a Communist Party official).

It's just an externality that can change at any given time.  I guess it's only a problem if you for some reason believe sha256 will not be commoditized.  The fact that energy costs keep becoming an ever higher percentage of the price per Bitcoin instead of hardware seems like it won't be a problem.

......ATLANT......
..Real Estate Blockchain Platform..
                    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                    ████████████░
                  ▄██████████████░
                 ▒███████▄████████░
                ▒█████████░████████░
                ▀███████▀█████████
                  ██████████████
           ███████▐██▀████▐██▄████████░
          ▄████▄█████████▒████▌█████████░
         ███████▄█████████▀██████████████░
        █████████▌█████████▐█████▄████████░
        ▀█████████████████▐███████████████
          █████▀████████ ░███████████████
    ██████▐██████████▄████████████████████████░
  ▄████▄████████▐███████████████░▄▄▄▄░████████░
 ▄██████▄█████████▐█████▄█████████▀████▄█████████░
███████████████████▐█████▄█████████▐██████████████░
▀████████▀█████████▒██████████████▐█████▀█████████
  ████████████████ █████▀█████████████████████████
   ▀██▀██████████ ▐█████████████  ▀██▀██████████
    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀██████████

..INVEST  ●  RENT  ●  TRADE..
 ✓Assurance     ✓Price Discovery     ✓Liquidity     ✓Low Fees





███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███

◣Whitepaper ◣ANN ThreadTelegram
◣ Facebook     ◣ Reddit          ◣ Slack


███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███








Hero/Legendary members
illodin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 966
Merit: 1003


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 07:46:55 PM
 #213

Real world example

Let's say North Korea is sanctioned by every nation on earth for smoking too much marijuana.  They're now cut off from all international trade and economically suffering.  If Bitcoin is the world reserve currency, they can use their technological know how to start mining Bitcoins because it's a permissionless system.  They now have a currency they can use to buy food and supplies from a semi-friendly but not complete ally proxy nation like China.

If IOTA was the world reserve currency, they do not have a permissionless entry point into the system at all because Bitcoin is a system of permanent coin turnover and IOTA isn't because it's a permissioned ledger.  They're now forced to attempt to trade something with China to acquire IOTAs, but maybe they don't have anything China wants so they can acquire no coins at all and they're completely locked out (obviously not a permissionless decentralized currency).  

Their best case scenario is, since China only sees them as useful idiots and not a real ally, they will then charge them with a markup for coins, along with another markup for whatever proxy goods they want through them.  Let's not forget the Come from Beyond day 0 extortion tax either since he cornered the market by design at release.  Thus, you have now been extorted three times in this chain of command due to it being a permissioned ledger and not a real decentralized currency.


If Bitcoin is the world reserve currency, the rest of the world has way more hash power than North Korea and can reject their blocks.  Huh
illodin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 966
Merit: 1003


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 07:49:54 PM
 #214

Most people don't even realize Bitcoin has it's own decentralized exchange, but it does.

Which only 0.001% of the population can participate in profitably. And it ceases roughly 2033 or unless transaction fees scale up but there is a Tragedy of the Commons dilemma there as well.

It doesn't really even matter if it's profitable or not.  You can define Bitcoin in one sentence:

The purpose of mining is to create a permanent two way peg, decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissionless system.

The economic incentives are a side issue, but seem to work thus far.  It's designed to bounce back and forth between profitable and unprofitable.  The fact that it's deflationary creates a time opportunity cost reward to generally remain profitable over the long haul.

But as it pertains to this thread, we are obviously missing those elements here, and Come from Beyond, who is supposed to have a 4000 IQ, is unable to come up with any sort of argument whatsoever.

Perhaps IOTA is not trying to be Bitcoin. And why should it as Bitcoin already exists.
DecentralizeEconomics
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162
Merit: 1042


White Male Libertarian Bro


View Profile
March 31, 2016, 10:07:01 PM
 #215


You missed the point entirely. Only 0.001% have the economies-of-scale to mine Bitcoin profitably. Sorry your argument fails on the economics of proof-of-work hash functions, unless you can argue there is one that can't be significantly optimized for an ASIC and economies-of-scale for cheaper electricity located next to utility scale hydropower (even free electricity perhaps if you do a handshake and wink in China with a Communist Party official).

Whoa... Hold on!  Are you telling us that it is entirely possible, if not extremely likely, that the Chinese Communists are in fact subsidizing PoW mining in an effort to undermine the decentralization of Bitcoin and control the currency in the hopes of applying capital controls to the digital economy through underhanded tactics which will further solidify their hegemony?

I've been hinting at that for months and finally an astute reader articulates it.

If you are wondering who created Bitcoin though, I think more likely the globalist DEEP STATE funded by the $trillions Black Budget and knowing full well they could hide their capture of Bitcoin blaming it on the "enemy". Nick Rockefeller (the one who warned Aaron Russo about 9/11 before it happened) has been spending most of his time in China.


"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties." - Areopagitica
cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1167

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
April 01, 2016, 02:20:03 PM
 #216

Guys!

According to the POLL - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1420030.0

r0ach and cryptohunter just F....rabble

Thank you for your voting


looks like your poll is gone Sad

r0ach (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 02, 2016, 03:23:28 AM
 #217

I think he got banned for copy and pasting my entire posts, rearranging the words around with different coin names, then spamming new threads everywhere.

......ATLANT......
..Real Estate Blockchain Platform..
                    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
                    ████████████░
                  ▄██████████████░
                 ▒███████▄████████░
                ▒█████████░████████░
                ▀███████▀█████████
                  ██████████████
           ███████▐██▀████▐██▄████████░
          ▄████▄█████████▒████▌█████████░
         ███████▄█████████▀██████████████░
        █████████▌█████████▐█████▄████████░
        ▀█████████████████▐███████████████
          █████▀████████ ░███████████████
    ██████▐██████████▄████████████████████████░
  ▄████▄████████▐███████████████░▄▄▄▄░████████░
 ▄██████▄█████████▐█████▄█████████▀████▄█████████░
███████████████████▐█████▄█████████▐██████████████░
▀████████▀█████████▒██████████████▐█████▀█████████
  ████████████████ █████▀█████████████████████████
   ▀██▀██████████ ▐█████████████  ▀██▀██████████
    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀█████████    ▀▀██████████

..INVEST  ●  RENT  ●  TRADE..
 ✓Assurance     ✓Price Discovery     ✓Liquidity     ✓Low Fees





███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███

◣Whitepaper ◣ANN ThreadTelegram
◣ Facebook     ◣ Reddit          ◣ Slack


███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███





███
███
███
███
███
███








Hero/Legendary members
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198



View Profile
April 03, 2016, 04:24:02 AM
 #218

It's just an externality that can change at any given time.  I guess it's only a problem if you for some reason believe sha256 will not be commoditized.  The fact that energy costs keep becoming an ever higher percentage of the price per Bitcoin instead of hardware seems like it won't be a problem.

I see no evidence of that. In the GPU mining era, there was no extraordinarily efficient mining as there is now with the most efficient ASICs.  All Bitcoins had approximately the same energy input. Now there a steep curve between the least efficient but still-viable ASICs and the most efficient. The area above that curve is missing energy. As far as I can tell the energy density of Bitcoin has decreased.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198



View Profile
April 03, 2016, 04:31:33 AM
 #219

Most people don't even realize Bitcoin has it's own decentralized exchange, but it does.

Which only 0.001% of the population can participate in profitably. And it ceases roughly 2033 or unless transaction fees scale up but there is a Tragedy of the Commons dilemma there as well.

It doesn't really even matter if it's profitable or not.  You can define Bitcoin in one sentence:

The purpose of mining is to create a permanent two way peg, decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissionless system.

The economic incentives are a side issue, but seem to work thus far.  It's designed to bounce back and forth between profitable and unprofitable.  The fact that it's deflationary creates a time opportunity cost reward to generally remain profitable over the long haul.

You missed the point entirely. Only 0.001% have the economies-of-scale to mine Bitcoin profitably. Sorry your argument fails on the economics of proof-of-work hash functions, unless you can argue there is one that can't be significantly optimized for an ASIC and economies-of-scale for cheaper electricity located next to utility scale hydropower (even free electricity perhaps if you do a handshake and wink in China with a Communist Party official).

R0ach's argument is valid, to a point. Even if only 0.001% can mine (hypothetical number of course) then 70000 can mine (importantly, as independent entities), enough to create a competitive market. If you believe the number is even much smaller than that, as I suggest has been the case with ASIC mining, then there may not be a competitive market and his argument fails (with respect to Bitcoin at least).



TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 257


View Profile
April 03, 2016, 04:43:48 AM
 #220

Most people don't even realize Bitcoin has it's own decentralized exchange, but it does.

Which only 0.001% of the population can participate in profitably. And it ceases roughly 2033 or unless transaction fees scale up but there is a Tragedy of the Commons dilemma there as well.

It doesn't really even matter if it's profitable or not.  You can define Bitcoin in one sentence:

The purpose of mining is to create a permanent two way peg, decentralized exchange, which thus results in a permissionless system.

The economic incentives are a side issue, but seem to work thus far.  It's designed to bounce back and forth between profitable and unprofitable.  The fact that it's deflationary creates a time opportunity cost reward to generally remain profitable over the long haul.

You missed the point entirely. Only 0.001% have the economies-of-scale to mine Bitcoin profitably. Sorry your argument fails on the economics of proof-of-work hash functions, unless you can argue there is one that can't be significantly optimized for an ASIC and economies-of-scale for cheaper electricity located next to utility scale hydropower (even free electricity perhaps if you do a handshake and wink in China with a Communist Party official).

R0ach's argument is valid, to a point. Even if only 0.001% can mine (hypothetical number of course) then 70000 can mine (importantly, as independent entities), enough to create a competitive market. If you believe the number is even much smaller than that, as I suggest has been the case with ASIC mining, then there may not be a competitive market and his argument fails (with respect to Bitcoin at least).

Satoshi's design makes the marginal miner lose relative share of the hashrate over time due to reinvestment of profits, because they are less profitable, so the ultimate end game is only the miners with the lowest costs.

In a normal market, the marginal producers are more nimble and can respond to changes in the market more quickly and thus they are always regenerated.

But Satoshi's design is static and the marginal miners have no competitive advantage in order to sustain their existence.

QED.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!