billyjoeallen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1007
Hide your women
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:21:11 PM |
|
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree. The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin network. The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap. How many goddamn exaflops or whatever? You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying.
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:24:41 PM |
|
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree. The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin network. The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap. How many goddamn exaflops or whatever? You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying. I've heard it's way oversecure. Good point. Idk. I'm not trying to snow a n00b.
|
|
|
|
wachtwoord
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1136
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:27:56 PM |
|
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree. The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin network. The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap. How many goddamn exaflops or whatever? You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying. Security is the most important feature. Without a block subsidy today the Bitcoin network would be extremely insecure. The subsidy is going to go away. I want Bitcoin to work long term. It doesnt seem that those that want to increase the block size want that....
|
|
|
|
AlexGR
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1049
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:28:56 PM Last edit: December 22, 2015, 12:19:36 AM by AlexGR |
|
If colored coins, title transfers, and timestamps are out, it's just a less useful technology.
Yeah I mean we could fit the world's data in the blockchain and it would be very useful and stuff when it reached a few zillionbytes, but guess what... it doesn't scale and it becomes unusable. When you go for too much you may end up losing even the basic functionality: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28935#msg28935Obviously Satoshi was a cripplecoiner for not wanting his bird to fly as high as it could... so much untapped potential wasted. Right?
|
|
|
|
aminorex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1030
Sine secretum non libertas
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:29:07 PM |
|
Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrong Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support.
|
|
|
|
chopstick
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 992
Merit: 1000
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:34:48 PM |
|
Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrong Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support. CONFIRMED
|
|
|
|
crossabdd
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1316
Merit: 1145
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:36:16 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
billyjoeallen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1007
Hide your women
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:37:36 PM |
|
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree. The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin network. The network is ridiculously oversecure for it's current market cap. How many goddamn exaflops or whatever? You might be able to snow the noobs with technobabble but I've been around too long. I'm not buying. Security is the most important feature. Without a block subsidy today the Bitcoin network would be extremely insecure. The subsidy is going to go away. I want Bitcoin to work long term. It doesnt seem that those that want to increase the block size want that.... You don't overinsure a house for fire damage. It's called "moral hazard" and it makes the house statistically MORE likely to burn. You don't put a $1000 case ona $100 phone. It means someone will be MORE likely to steal it. If you put too much armor on an armored truck, you limit it's cargo capacity to the point that you have to make two trips INCREASING the chance of losing the cargo. There IS such a thing as too much security.
|
|
|
|
Fatman3001
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1013
Make Bitcoin glow with ENIAC
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:42:01 PM |
|
Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrong Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support. The wrong bit was you keeping that monkey in a cage forcing it to watch Bitccoin charts.
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:46:57 PM |
|
Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrong Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support. The wrong bit was you keeping that monkey in a cage forcing it to watch Bitccoin charts. And giving it Rage Virus was probably against an international convention or two.
|
|
|
|
Meuh6879
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:48:43 PM |
|
they have tried ... they have fail.
|
|
|
|
nioc
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1008
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:49:41 PM |
|
Monkey vision: Drop towards 390 support intraday, rising trend to continue thereafter on a daily basis, and over the weekend.
You know this is wrong Monkey now sees at least one week downtrend, 362 support. That makes me feel better about my buy @ 427 Best wishes to you and Monkey
|
|
|
|
jbreher
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1660
lose: unfind ... loose: untight
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:53:32 PM |
|
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree. The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin network. I guess I would have thought that would have been self-evident for anybody that pondered the prospect with any seriousness.
|
|
|
|
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:55:59 PM |
|
...snip ... blah-de-blah bear rant ... snip
So Internet money, not the Internet of money. This is a mutiny. Imagine what would happen if the Federal Reserve Board of Directors staged a mutiny like that against Janet Yellen. How would the markets react?
so still short then?
|
|
|
|
TERA
|
|
December 21, 2015, 11:58:23 PM |
|
Release the Kraken!
|
|
|
|
Hyperjacked
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1610
Merit: 1119
It's all mathematics...!
|
|
December 22, 2015, 12:00:27 AM |
|
Absolute madness they don't know whether to panic buy or panic sell LOL No need for panic selling, it spiked up really fast, makes sense it would drop back into the high 90s. ...and it hasn't gone past the 2 month Vwap...only kissed it! zoom out... I doubt it goes much lower but maybe someone smarter can chime in...
|
|
|
|
ChartBuddy
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1802
1CBuddyxy4FerT3hzMmi1Jz48ESzRw1ZzZ
|
|
December 22, 2015, 12:00:36 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
Meuh6879
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
|
|
December 22, 2015, 12:03:52 AM |
|
Release the Kraken!
|
|
|
|
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
|
|
December 22, 2015, 12:04:48 AM |
|
So far in this discussion there's already a lot of housekeeping data required. It will be much easier if you can freely use all the space you need without worrying about paying fees for expensive space in Bitcoin's chain. - SN Space on the Bitcoin blockchain IS intended to be expensive. Anything else is an intention to undermine the security model.
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116
|
|
December 22, 2015, 12:10:24 AM |
|
@BJA Tim Swanson wrote a paper about how adding exogenous value onto a network that cannot detect and dynamically protect the exogenous value is a bad idea. It was hard to disagree. The metacoins and colored coin projects listed above unquestionably increase the social value of the chain, yet they do not proportionally incentivize security beyond the existing block reward (seigniorage) subsidy. This could lead to an economic incentive to attack the chain, a type of fat tail risk that could dramatically impact any layer residing on top of the Bitcoin network. I guess I would have thought that would have been self-evident for anybody that pondered the prospect with any seriousness. So racist.
|
|
|
|
|