Bitcoin Forum
May 11, 2024, 12:19:01 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: [2016-05-17] Video: Ethereum is mainly a casino for BTC  (Read 218 times)
LiteCoinGuy (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148
Merit: 1010


In Satoshi I Trust


View Profile WWW
May 17, 2016, 02:50:22 PM
 #1

Ethereum is mainly a casino for bitcoin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3L2Rdz06NM

1715429941
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715429941

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715429941
Reply with quote  #2

1715429941
Report to moderator
1715429941
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715429941

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715429941
Reply with quote  #2

1715429941
Report to moderator
"Bitcoin: the cutting edge of begging technology." -- Giraffe.BTC
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
TraderTimm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2408
Merit: 1121



View Profile
May 17, 2016, 07:29:03 PM
 #2

Would it have killed you to actually post the descriptive text?

Quote
Empirically, what benefits result from Permissionless Implementation (in contrast to Miner privatization)? When Bitcoin's messages were made more flexible by Ethereum, what new services were made possible as a result?

The answer is disappointing: the new uses were mostly of a single new category -- the Casino. The entire remainder could be grouped into a mere two additional categories -- Oracles and Names.

The Blockchain has been referred to as "The Trust Machine". However, a Casino involves a different type of trust than a Bank. Casinos
[1] consume disposable income to provide a brief experience, [2] they exist in a competitive environment, and [3] they have custody of a small amount of funds for a small amount of time. A Bank (comparable to Bitcoin) is almost the exact opposite -- [1] stores up funds for further use, [2] has monopoly power over their customer's funds (if you fail to withdraw from a frozen Barclay's account, you cannot "take your withdrawal business elsewhere" to Bank of America), and [3] holds a large amount of funds for a large amount of time.

Money is sent to Casino-types ("value-accepters") in many ways, but it is sent to Bank-types ("value-storers") in very few ways.

In fact, the structure of a blockchain -- everyone downloads and verifies everything -- implies that they will only be efficient where "what other people do" affects you. With Money this is true (as no one wants to end up holding a counterfeit bearer asset), but with Contracts it is false (I couldn't care less about my neighbor's car payments).

This argument is applied *< nasal honk >* to Slock.it, which *literally* does not require a blockchain. Moreover, the features of the blockchain -- censorship resistance, regulatory arbitrage, anonymity, open access, etc. -- contradict the concept of visiting a physical place at a known time.

These conditions favor solutions which are *specific*, and not *general*.


Of course, all views are my own and do not necessarily represent Bloq's or anyone's, and so forth ( http://www.truthcoin.info/#disclaimer ).

Essentially, Sidechains will be second-rate to the blockchain that secures it.

fortitudinem multis - catenum regit omnia
Pages: [1]
  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!