Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 08:00:36 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 [535] 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1803804 times)
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 814


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 06:56:21 PM
 #10681


Nxt did not fork and bter has gotten most of the nxt back. I am now more bullish then ever! With the release of the instantdex around the corner (near instant trading on the asset exchange and decentralized crypto to crypto, nxt is preparing to be a force to be reckoned with.

I was quite impressed with nxt.  The developers released a version of the client that would reverse the stolen transaction only but the forgers did not accept the change.  This demonstrates the power of distributed consensus and hopefully the world takes notice.  Obvious threat to central banks is obvious.  Maybe POS has merit after all.  

The rollback discussion did the opposite to me.  It proved the PoS achieves consensus by popular opinion rather than by objective truth.  With PoW, you must expend resources to "vote" on your chain, so you pick the single best chain based on a mathematically-defined selection criteria (mining two competing chains would be a waste).  Each new block added to the chain decreases the chance of a re-org exponentially, and all the participants realize this, so deep re-orgs are out of the question.  

With PoS, there is no tether to the physical world.  Since there are no resources spent to "vote," stakers can vote on many different chains for very little cost.  Even today, it would be possible to roll back the 50M NXT theft as it costs nothing to change their blockchain.  PoS gives the economic majority the power to rewrite history.  Truth is defined by opinion.

There's a reason the first sentence of 1984 was used as the passphrase for the Nxt Genesis Account.  



I think what people are missing is that nxt is not actually a currency. It is a platform that contains a token that is required to use the different features the platform provides. Of course those tokens have value and therefore can be used as a currency but it is not the primary use. Bitcoins primary use is as a currency, which it does well. Nxt provides and asset exchange, a decentralized coin to coin exchange, a digital goods store and many other types of tools that are just not something that bitcoin is for, as a currency first.

I like to think that nxt is a platform built on top of bitcoin. Not in the same sense that http was built on top of tcp but they are connected. Without bitcoin nxt would not have been possible. Bitcoin is layer 1, it provides that connection to the real world as you said.  Then nxt was made possible and it still only possible to get to it through bitcoin. Hence nxt is connected to the real world through bitcoin, which is the gold standard of crypto. Nxt provides extra features on top of bitcoin that bitcoin cannot provide for itself. They are very much intertwined and will feed off of each other's strengths. They are not competitors. Crypto is a brand new thing and perhaps that means that the concept of something being built on top of something is also in a brand new paradigm.
1480795236
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480795236

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480795236
Reply with quote  #2

1480795236
Report to moderator
1480795236
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480795236

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480795236
Reply with quote  #2

1480795236
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480795236
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480795236

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480795236
Reply with quote  #2

1480795236
Report to moderator
1480795236
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480795236

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480795236
Reply with quote  #2

1480795236
Report to moderator
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
August 17, 2014, 06:58:05 PM
 #10682

it has to do with the fact that regardless of your opinion on whether it can achieve consensus
I issued no opinion whatsoever about whether or not PoS can achieve consensus.

sorry.. thought you were the other guy that posted.. my bad..
I did post a link to a proof that PoS can not achieve distributed consensus, which has an entirely different set of constraints than achieving any kind consensus.
kodtycoon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:01:22 PM
 #10683

it has to do with the fact that regardless of your opinion on whether it can achieve consensus
I issued no opinion whatsoever about whether or not PoS can achieve consensus.

sorry.. thought you were the other guy that posted.. my bad..
I did post a link to a proof that PoS can not achieve distributed consensus, which has an entirely different set of constraints than achieving any kind consensus.

so you suggest that nxt and other pos systems are not distributed? and instead centralised?

"Pioneering a revolutionary novel consensus mechanism called proof of importance."
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:05:41 PM
 #10684

it has to do with the fact that regardless of your opinion on whether it can achieve consensus
I issued no opinion whatsoever about whether or not PoS can achieve consensus.

sorry.. thought you were the other guy that posted.. my bad..


I suppose I'm the "other guy."  I agree that PoS can achieve consensus.  That was sort of the point of my post.  But the consensus represents the popular opinion of the stakeholders, which is not necessarily the objective truth.  PoS gives the economic majority the power to rewrite history.  Truth is defined by opinion.

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 814


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:20:07 PM
 #10685

it has to do with the fact that regardless of your opinion on whether it can achieve consensus
I issued no opinion whatsoever about whether or not PoS can achieve consensus.

sorry.. thought you were the other guy that posted.. my bad..


I suppose I'm the "other guy."  I agree that PoS can achieve consensus.  That was sort of the point of my post.  But the consensus represents the popular opinion of the stakeholders, which is not necessarily the objective truth.  PoS gives the economic majority the power to rewrite history.  Truth is defined by opinion.

What exactly does this "objective truth" mean? In bitcoin the economic majority can just buy more hash power. Either you buy hash power or you buy stake. The main difference being buying stake can be way harder and more expensive while leaving you with more incentive to see your holdings  grow in value rather then depreciate. Just like with bitcoin you can't just create a fork without convincing everyone to use it!
kodtycoon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:21:44 PM
 #10686

it has to do with the fact that regardless of your opinion on whether it can achieve consensus
I issued no opinion whatsoever about whether or not PoS can achieve consensus.

sorry.. thought you were the other guy that posted.. my bad..


I suppose I'm the "other guy."  I agree that PoS can achieve consensus.  That was sort of the point of my post.  But the consensus represents the popular opinion of the stakeholders, which is not necessarily the objective truth.  PoS gives the economic majority the power to rewrite history.  Truth is defined by opinion.

What exactly does this "objective truth" mean? In bitcoin the economic majority can just buy more hash power. Either you buy hash power or you buy stake. The main difference being buying stake can be way harder and more expensive while leaving you with more incentive to see your holdings  grow in value rather then depreciate

i was going to say what Mr.e just said... Roll Eyes

"Pioneering a revolutionary novel consensus mechanism called proof of importance."
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:34:30 PM
 #10687

What exactly does this "objective truth" mean?

This reminds me of conversations with my mother.  She believes that her belief system creates reality.  I believe that reality exists independently of myself (although I concede that my belief system influences my perception of reality). 

Here's an example of the objective truth:

Alice and Bob each throw a rock into the lake.  Alice throws hers in first, it makes a splash, and then Bob throws his in.  If this event occurred, then it is objectively true that Alice threw her rock into the lake first.  Even if Bob convinces the world that the opposite happened (because Bob is popular and wealthy), and even if everyone calls Alice a liar, it doesn't change what was objectively true:  Alice threw the rock into the lake first.   

PoW is a system that achieves distributed consensus on what is objectively true.  PoS is a system that allows history to be rewritten based on popular opinion. 

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 808


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:38:46 PM
 #10688

it has to do with the fact that regardless of your opinion on whether it can achieve consensus
I issued no opinion whatsoever about whether or not PoS can achieve consensus.

sorry.. thought you were the other guy that posted.. my bad..


I suppose I'm the "other guy."  I agree that PoS can achieve consensus.  That was sort of the point of my post.  But the consensus represents the popular opinion of the stakeholders, which is not necessarily the objective truth.  PoS gives the economic majority the power to rewrite history.  Truth is defined by opinion.
So you think miners' opinion is the objective truth?
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:39:31 PM
 #10689

So you think miners' opinion is the objective truth?

https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 808


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:40:20 PM
 #10690

PoW is a system that achieves distributed consensus on what is objectively true.  PoS is a system that allows history to be rewritten based on popular opinion. 
You are aware that miners can rewrite history too, right?

_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 814


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:41:02 PM
 #10691

What exactly does this "objective truth" mean?

This reminds me of conversations with my mother.  She believes that her belief system creates reality.  I believe that reality exists independently of myself (although I concede that my belief system influences my perception of reality). 

Here's an example of the objective truth:

Alice and Bob each throw a rock into the lake.  Alice throws hers in first, it makes a splash, and then Bob throws his in.  If this event occurred, then it is objectively true that Alice threw her rock into the lake first.  Even if Bob convinces the world that the opposite happened (because Bob is popular and wealthy), and even if everyone calls Alice a liar, it doesn't change what was objectively true:  Alice threw the rock into the lake first.   

PoW is a system that achieves distributed consensus on what is objectively true.  PoS is a system that allows history to be rewritten based on popular opinion. 

In both systems consensus is the objective truth... I don't see the difference.
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:45:26 PM
 #10692

In both systems consensus is the objective truth... I don't see the difference.

A bat and a ball costs $1.10.
A bat costs a dollar more than a ball. 
How much does a ball cost?

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 808


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:46:39 PM
 #10693

Maybe this paper prove the point, I don't know, I will read it. But what I know for sure is that what you are saying doesn't prove anything.

You are saying that somehow a miner is ontologically different than a holder, that a miner's opinion is the truth whereas a holder's opinion is an opinion. It's a very brittle argument.
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 814


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:52:46 PM
 #10694

In both systems consensus is the objective truth... I don't see the difference.

A bat and a ball costs $1.10.
A bat costs a dollar more than a ball. 
How much does a ball cost?

Not following how hardware mining vs stake mining answers that any differently.
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:53:58 PM
 #10695

In both systems consensus is the objective truth... I don't see the difference.

A bat and a ball costs $1.10.
A bat costs a dollar more than a ball. 
How much does a ball cost?

Not following how hardware mining vs stake mining answers that any differently.

If you get a certain type of people in a room, they'll come to consensus that a ball costs $0.10.  But it's objectively true that a ball costs $0.05, even if they all disagree.  The point is that what is objectively true is independent of our opinions.  

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 814


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:57:02 PM
 #10696

In both systems consensus is the objective truth... I don't see the difference.

A bat and a ball costs $1.10.
A bat costs a dollar more than a ball. 
How much does a ball cost?

If you get a certain type of people in a room, they'll come to consensus that a ball costs $0.10.  But it's objectively true that a ball costs $0.05, even if they all disagree.  

Sure but I don't get what that has to do with distributed consensus systems.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 17, 2014, 08:06:25 PM
 #10697

What exactly does this "objective truth" mean?

This reminds me of conversations with my mother.  She believes that her belief system creates reality.  I believe that reality exists independently of myself (although I concede that my belief system influences my perception of reality).  

Here's an example of the objective truth:

Alice and Bob each throw a rock into the lake.  Alice throws hers in first, it makes a splash, and then Bob throws his in.  If this event occurred, then it is objectively true that Alice threw her rock into the lake first.  Even if Bob convinces the world that the opposite happened (because Bob is popular and wealthy), and even if everyone calls Alice a liar, it doesn't change what was objectively true:  Alice threw the rock into the lake first.  

PoW is a system that achieves distributed consensus on what is objectively true.  PoS is a system that allows history to be rewritten based on popular opinion.  

In both systems consensus is the objective truth... I don't see the difference.

read the paper PeterR and Justus referenced.

the "truth" in a POW system is determined by the objective laws of thermodynamics which are fundamental laws that exist outside the POW system.  it cannot be gamed by the stakeholders.

the "truth" in a POS system is not determined by any such laws outside its own system.  it is self referencing, aka an echo chamber, of whatever the stakeholders "want" to be the truth, whether objective or not.  it can be gamed by the stakeholders, if they all agree.
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
August 17, 2014, 08:22:26 PM
 #10698

In both systems consensus is the objective truth... I don't see the difference.

A bat and a ball costs $1.10.
A bat costs a dollar more than a ball.  
How much does a ball cost?

Not following how hardware mining vs stake mining answers that any differently.

If you get a certain type of people in a room, they'll come to consensus that a ball costs $0.10.  But it's objectively true that a ball costs $0.05, even if they all disagree.  The point is that what is objectively true is independent of our opinions.  

Sure but I don't get what that has to do with distributed consensus systems.

In a PoS system, there's no tether to physical reality.  There's no one in the room screaming:

"A ball costs $0.05, a bat costs a dollar more ($1.05) so a bat and a ball costs $0.05 + $1.05 = $1.10 you idiots!  You all fell victim to your cognitive bias!!"

PoS is an echo chamber like Cypherdoc said, and although consensus might be achieved, it may have no bearing on reality.  PoW is the tether to the physical world.  PoW mining is the objective guy in the room "proving mathematically" with chalk and a blackboard that a ball costs $0.05 until everyone is forced to concede!

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
August 17, 2014, 08:26:13 PM
 #10699

the "truth" in a POW system is determined by the objective laws of thermodynamics which are fundamental laws that exist outside the POW system.  it cannot be gamed by the stakeholders.

the "truth" in a POS system is not determined by any such laws outside its own system.  it is self referencing, aka an echo chamber, of whatever the stakeholders "want" to be the truth, whether objective or not.  it can be gamed by the stakeholders, if they all agree.
I'd add the clarification that PoW only promises that defeating the consensus process is uneconomical, not impossible.

The paper shows that PoS can't even make that promise.
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 814


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 08:33:25 PM
 #10700

What exactly does this "objective truth" mean?

This reminds me of conversations with my mother.  She believes that her belief system creates reality.  I believe that reality exists independently of myself (although I concede that my belief system influences my perception of reality).  

Here's an example of the objective truth:

Alice and Bob each throw a rock into the lake.  Alice throws hers in first, it makes a splash, and then Bob throws his in.  If this event occurred, then it is objectively true that Alice threw her rock into the lake first.  Even if Bob convinces the world that the opposite happened (because Bob is popular and wealthy), and even if everyone calls Alice a liar, it doesn't change what was objectively true:  Alice threw the rock into the lake first.  

PoW is a system that achieves distributed consensus on what is objectively true.  PoS is a system that allows history to be rewritten based on popular opinion.  

In both systems consensus is the objective truth... I don't see the difference.

read the paper PeterR and Justus referenced.

the "truth" in a POW system is determined by the objective laws of thermodynamics which are fundamental laws that exist outside the POW system.  it cannot be gamed by the stakeholders.

the "truth" in a POS system is not determined by any such laws outside its own system.  it is self referencing, aka an echo chamber, of whatever the stakeholders "want" to be the truth, whether objective or not.  it can be gamed by the stakeholders, if they all agree.

But why would they all agree when doing so would destroy the integrity of their stake? As we saw recently  getting them to agree on such a change is near impossible and will only get more difficult as the system gets bigger any many forgers are companies that have their businesses built on top of the system. History can be rewritten with pow too, it happened before.

Are you saying that AI will never be possible? Because that is a self referencing system.
Pages: « 1 ... 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 [535] 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 ... 1560 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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!