Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 05:13:07 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   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 ... 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] 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1807532 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 01:32:08 AM
 #10741

Bitfinex BTC swaps at intermediate term highs (shorts). 

Time for a short squeeze:

1481346787
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346787

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346787
Reply with quote  #2

1481346787
Report to moderator
1481346787
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481346787

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481346787
Reply with quote  #2

1481346787
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
HeliKopterBen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 622



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 02:17:12 AM
 #10742

In PoW, that consensus is tethered to physical reality because resources are consumed when voting for a chain; in PoS, that consensus is tethered only to popular opinion.  In my mind, PoW cryptos are like gold coins--they take energy and effort to create, and only physical methods can be used to steal them.  PoS cryptos are like share certificates--they can be created for zero cost only based on the desires of stake holders, and they can be voided just as easily (voided by social methods as opposed to stolen by physical methods).  

I get what you are saying.  I am just not completely convinced that work is required to function as money.  I understand that gold and silver required work to introduce new supply but there was no way around that and bitcoin is more or less modeled after gold and silver.  A finite supply is most important imho.  Also, something tells me that Satoshi et al. put some serious thought into whether or not work should be required so I definitely could be wrong.



Bitcoin's "rollbacks" in the past were from code bugs

Good point.  I should have thought about that.



edit:  and the NXT devs have the greatest at stake and thus the most to lose thus making their actions entirely self serving.

Then why did the rollback not happen?

Counterfeit:  made in imitation of something else with intent to deceive:  merriam-webster
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 02:31:06 AM
 #10743

Then why did the rollback not happen?

b/c the community disagreed with them, i suppose, out of apathy, disdain, or confusion.  who knows.

the important thing, imo, is that the devs were irresponsible in not gaining a consensus before throwing a patch out there this serious.  simply to reverse a hack, mind you.  to my mind, this introduces considerable uncertainty into the NXT protocol when their main devs are willing to make a questionable decision like this to support/save a vested partner Bter for either political or financial reasons.  you'll never know what they'll be willing to do NXT  Wink
solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
August 18, 2014, 02:45:40 AM
 #10744

A finite supply is most important imho.  Also, something tells me that Satoshi et al. put some serious thought into whether or not work should be required so I definitely could be wrong.

This is the main consideration. While Bitcoin is finite, cryptocurrency is infinite. So why should the world be interested in a new "infinite" form of money. At least fiat has *some* control on its issuance by using central banks. How could it be any better to have a currency controlled by the people behind a bunch of colorful avatars on the internet?

So PoW puts the scarcity into cryptocurrency.

justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
August 18, 2014, 03:01:56 AM
 #10745

A finite supply is most important imho.  Also, something tells me that Satoshi et al. put some serious thought into whether or not work should be required so I definitely could be wrong.

This is the main consideration. While Bitcoin is finite, cryptocurrency is infinite. So why should the world be interested in a new "infinite" form of money. At least fiat has *some* control on its issuance by using central banks. How could it be any better to have a currency controlled by the people behind a bunch of colorful avatars on the internet?
Money is a ledger that we use to allocate scarce(*) resources.

In order for the ledger to function, the units must be scarce because the real goods and services they represent are scarce.



(*)In economics, "scarce" means "not infinite."
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 03:11:26 AM
 #10746

Then why did the rollback not happen?

b/c the community disagreed with them, i suppose, out of apathy, disdain, or confusion.  who knows.

the important thing, imo, is that the devs were irresponsible in not gaining a consensus before throwing a patch out there this serious.  simply to reverse a hack, mind you.  to my mind, this introduces considerable uncertainty into the NXT protocol when their main devs are willing to make a questionable decision like this to support/save a vested partner Bter for either political or financial reasons.  you'll never know what they'll be willing to do NXT  Wink

It wasn't really a rollback. There was a bug, the code was fixed, and the current chain consisted of illegal blocks. The correct chain would have won eventually, but miners were in agreement that everybody should upgrade quickly, to minimize confusion amongst users.

Edit: The blocks were illegal according to the whitepaper. There is not really a well defined rule definition outside the source code itself, but this was obviously a bug.
User705
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 03:19:08 AM
 #10747

Then why did the rollback not happen?

b/c the community disagreed with them, i suppose, out of apathy, disdain, or confusion.  who knows.

the important thing, imo, is that the devs were irresponsible in not gaining a consensus before throwing a patch out there this serious.  simply to reverse a hack, mind you.  to my mind, this introduces considerable uncertainty into the NXT protocol when their main devs are willing to make a questionable decision like this to support/save a vested partner Bter for either political or financial reasons.  you'll never know what they'll be willing to do NXT  Wink
and of course there's no chance of that ever happening to bitcoin.  LOL
Wasn't it discussed to not have previous halving done?  The asics saved it that time.  What will save that discussion at next halving?  Currently theoretically it would cost only about 2% of bitcoins total valuation to 51% attack it.  And it's not going to get better because holders of bitcoin and miners have opposing monetary interests.  Mining currently is like a bitcoin annuity since fees are negligible compared to block reward.  The hope is when that transition to mining mainly for fees rolls around it will be enough.  There are no guarantees it will be.  It's interesting that this thread makes fun of gold needing to be dug up, transported and etc... and how bitcoin is so much better but it's ok to have bitcoin mining when it can be considered wastefull.  Maybe in the future instead that big gold rock picture we'll be laughing at big bitcoin mining operations the same way.
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 03:20:07 AM
 #10748

Yikes:




That little "2" all the way to the left may not be there much longer.

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
User705
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 03:24:00 AM
 #10749

Yikes:




That little "2" all the way to the left may not be there much longer.
At least it will be good to watch what happens and learn lessons about ASIC endgame.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 03:27:38 AM
 #10750

Yikes:




That little "2" all the way to the left may not be there much longer.

yes, it's called the "flush":

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 03:32:13 AM
 #10751

Then why did the rollback not happen?

b/c the community disagreed with them, i suppose, out of apathy, disdain, or confusion.  who knows.

the important thing, imo, is that the devs were irresponsible in not gaining a consensus before throwing a patch out there this serious.  simply to reverse a hack, mind you.  to my mind, this introduces considerable uncertainty into the NXT protocol when their main devs are willing to make a questionable decision like this to support/save a vested partner Bter for either political or financial reasons.  you'll never know what they'll be willing to do NXT  Wink
and of course there's no chance of that ever happening to bitcoin.  LOL
Wasn't it discussed to not have previous halving done?  The asics saved it that time.  What will save that discussion at next halving?  Currently theoretically it would cost only about 2% of bitcoins total valuation to 51% attack it.  And it's not going to get better because holders of bitcoin and miners have opposing monetary interests.  Mining currently is like a bitcoin annuity since fees are negligible compared to block reward.  The hope is when that transition to mining mainly for fees rolls around it will be enough.  There are no guarantees it will be.  It's interesting that this thread makes fun of gold needing to be dug up, transported and etc... and how bitcoin is so much better but it's ok to have bitcoin mining when it can be considered wastefull.  Maybe in the future instead that big gold rock picture we'll be laughing at big bitcoin mining operations the same way.

no it won't.  the Bitcoin core devs have never introduced a patch or rollback to save any of the multiple exchanges that have been hacked and most likely never will. all updates are thoroughly vetted while gaining a consensus from the community before introduction.  what's your point?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 03:45:52 AM
 #10752

Then why did the rollback not happen?

b/c the community disagreed with them, i suppose, out of apathy, disdain, or confusion.  who knows.

the important thing, imo, is that the devs were irresponsible in not gaining a consensus before throwing a patch out there this serious.  simply to reverse a hack, mind you.  to my mind, this introduces considerable uncertainty into the NXT protocol when their main devs are willing to make a questionable decision like this to support/save a vested partner Bter for either political or financial reasons.  you'll never know what they'll be willing to do NXT  Wink
and of course there's no chance of that ever happening to bitcoin.  LOL
Wasn't it discussed to not have previous halving done?  The asics saved it that time.  What will save that discussion at next halving?  Currently theoretically it would cost only about 2% of bitcoins total valuation to 51% attack it.  And it's not going to get better because holders of bitcoin and miners have opposing monetary interests.  Mining currently is like a bitcoin annuity since fees are negligible compared to block reward.  The hope is when that transition to mining mainly for fees rolls around it will be enough.  There are no guarantees it will be.  It's interesting that this thread makes fun of gold needing to be dug up, transported and etc... and how bitcoin is so much better but it's ok to have bitcoin mining when it can be considered wastefull.  Maybe in the future instead that big gold rock picture we'll be laughing at big bitcoin mining operations the same way.

gimme a break.  ppl die gold mining, let alone get seriously physically abused.

what about the Oxford PhD's study do you not agree with?
dillpicklechips
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 438


View Profile
August 18, 2014, 03:55:47 AM
 #10753

The fact is nxt worked as advertised.  The developers released a patch to roll back the transaction but it was unsuccessful, proving that they did not have complete control over the network and the integrity of the currency remained intact. 

I don't disagree.  A PoS network comes to some sort of a consensus.  

In PoW, that consensus is tethered to physical reality because resources are consumed when voting for a chain; in PoS, that consensus is tethered only to popular opinion.  In my mind, PoW cryptos are like gold coins--they take energy and effort to create, and only physical methods can be used to steal them.  PoS cryptos are like share certificates--they can be created for zero cost only based on the desires of stake holders, and they can be voided just as easily (voided by social methods as opposed to stolen by physical methods).  

Quote
POS is subject to similar game theory type stuff as POW.  Why would someone who has a large stake in the system attempt to compromise it?

They can attack with "nothing at stake" by using coins they once held but have since sold.  To attack a PoW system, one must expend resources in this reality.  The game theory is completely different.  
Another advantage of "tethering to reality" is there is free market competition for entry into the crypto world through mining. You can compete with other miners OR just trade for them.
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
August 18, 2014, 04:10:56 AM
 #10754

Yikes:




That little "2" all the way to the left may not be there much longer.

yes, it's called the "flush":



Looks like cheap coins to me!

I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.  Grin Grin Grin

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

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████æ   
  ,████²█████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       Ñ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████Ñ         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ²██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                   ²²²                 
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.        SMOOTHIE'S HEALTH AND FITNESS JOURNAL          History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
User705
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 04:12:26 AM
 #10755

Oxford study?
 Huh
no it won't.  the Bitcoin core devs have never introduced a patch or rollback to save any of the multiple exchanges that have been hacked and most likely never will. all updates are thoroughly vetted while gaining a consensus from the community before introduction.  what's your point?
Most likely?  What Consensus?  Vetted by whom?  What community?  Aren't many people running older qt versions even now?
The point is that holding and mining are two separate activities and can even sometimes be opposed to each other.  But unlike gold for example, mining and using are very much interdependent in bitcoin.
thefunkybits
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 04:18:19 AM
 #10756

I hope it goes lower...nom nom nom.  Grin Grin Grin

Me too! I'm aiming for a final bottom around 0.006

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 04:23:31 AM
 #10757

Oxford study?
 Huh
no it won't.  the Bitcoin core devs have never introduced a patch or rollback to save any of the multiple exchanges that have been hacked and most likely never will. all updates are thoroughly vetted while gaining a consensus from the community before introduction.  what's your point?
Most likely?  What Consensus?  Vetted by whom?  What community?  Aren't many people running older qt versions even now?
The point is that holding and mining are two separate activities and can even sometimes be opposed to each other.  But unlike gold for example, mining and using are very much interdependent in bitcoin.

http://www.coindesk.com/microscope-true-costs-gold-production/

yes, there is a clear pathway to submitting patches and/or updates that goes thru the core devs.  all changes get discussed ad nauseum ahead of time and consensus is formed before they're introduced into new versions of the core protocol.  the community is free to chime in and express opinions.  the point is that there is a process, not some off the cuff patch to rollback a hack as was just done by the NXT core devs.

i'm not sure what you mean by there being opposed interests btwn hodlers and miners.  i'm both and there's no inconsistency btwn both of my activities.

most ppl don't update their versions out of laziness or a reluctance to create unforeseen problems in their current operations that the updates might introduce.  it's not b/c they fundamentally disagree with the changes.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 06:24:57 AM
 #10758

Just so we don't forget:

“$29,000,000,000,000: A Detailed Look at the Fed’s Bail-out by Funding Facility and Recipient” by James Felkerson."

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/12/bailout-total-29-616-trillion-dollars/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheBigPicture+(The+Big+Picture)
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 816



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 12:06:00 PM
 #10759

Oxford study?
 Huh
no it won't.  the Bitcoin core devs have never introduced a patch or rollback to save any of the multiple exchanges that have been hacked and most likely never will. all updates are thoroughly vetted while gaining a consensus from the community before introduction.  what's your point?
Most likely?  What Consensus?  Vetted by whom?  What community?  Aren't many people running older qt versions even now?
The point is that holding and mining are two separate activities and can even sometimes be opposed to each other.  But unlike gold for example, mining and using are very much interdependent in bitcoin.

http://www.coindesk.com/microscope-true-costs-gold-production/

yes, there is a clear pathway to submitting patches and/or updates that goes thru the core devs.  all changes get discussed ad nauseum ahead of time and consensus is formed before they're introduced into new versions of the core protocol.  the community is free to chime in and express opinions.  the point is that there is a process, not some off the cuff patch to rollback a hack as was just done by the NXT core devs.

i'm not sure what you mean by there being opposed interests btwn hodlers and miners.  i'm both and there's no inconsistency btwn both of my activities.

most ppl don't update their versions out of laziness or a reluctance to create unforeseen problems in their current operations that the updates might introduce.  it's not b/c they fundamentally disagree with the changes.

I think you're forgetting that  nxt is still a relatively new coin and it takes time for those kind of policies to be put it place... bitcoin has a much larger market cap and if nxt keeps growing it will get there to.
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 816



View Profile
August 18, 2014, 01:10:31 PM
 #10760

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bitcoin-made-anonymous-bitcoindark-unprecedented-033200415.html

All of this is being made possible by being built on top of the NXT network. jl777 calls it the "nxt inside" campaign... analogous to "Intel inside"
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 ... 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!