Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 10:31:50 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 ... 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 [710] 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1804984 times)
solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
October 22, 2014, 12:55:34 AM
 #14181

I mean the ability for a company to raise funds by selling equity as bearer shares is one that only companies in the informal economy will benefit from.

Isn't this a near tautology? A company issuing bearer shares is very likely not compliant with securities laws and has therefore entered the informal economy if it wasn't there already.

The more interesting question is whether this will cause the informal economy to expand, or the definition to shift.


Economies used to be mostly informal (free), before recent decades when computer technology has enabled governments to implement ever greater surveillance and micro-management of the financial sector, turning Orwell's 1984 from a warning into a road-map. Paper share certificates were similar to cash. Corporate share registers were intended to ensure that that people's holdings were secure, not provide a vector for state spying/control/censorship(AML) into people's financial affairs.

The definition of "informal" economy needs to shift back to the "free" economy it used to be.

1481020310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020310
Reply with quote  #2

1481020310
Report to moderator
1481020310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020310
Reply with quote  #2

1481020310
Report to moderator
1481020310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020310
Reply with quote  #2

1481020310
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481020310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020310
Reply with quote  #2

1481020310
Report to moderator
1481020310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020310
Reply with quote  #2

1481020310
Report to moderator
1481020310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481020310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481020310
Reply with quote  #2

1481020310
Report to moderator
solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
October 22, 2014, 06:50:01 AM
 #14182



How Japanese Hyperinflation Starts (In 1 Chart)

That new bitcoin exchange in Japan may be an example of perfect market timing.

dEBRUYNE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
October 22, 2014, 01:11:38 PM
 #14183

http://www.bnr.nl/nieuws/beurs/370560-1410/elf-banken-zakken-voor-stresstest-ecb

(Eleven banks fail ECB's stress test)

Unfortunately I can't find an english article yet.

EDIT: Found it: http://www.businessinsider.com/report-11-banks-are-about-to-fail-europes-biggest-ever-stress-tests-2014-10

Privacy matters, use Monero - A true untraceable cryptocurrency
Why Monero matters? http://weuse.cash/2016/03/05/bitcoiners-hedge-your-position/
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 01:57:31 PM
 #14184

silver may be making a premature break for it:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 01:58:31 PM
 #14185

GDX & GDXJ have been hinting.  it feels too soon...
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 02:00:24 PM
 #14186

just over the first resistance line on the intermed term:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 02:07:29 PM
 #14187

https://twitter.com/cypherdoc2/status/524924892077379586
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 02:15:50 PM
 #14188

buying bitcoin...

time is running out.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 04:55:36 PM
 #14189

going thru the paper now but this seems to be a problematic assumption:

"the core observation is that “Bitcoin” the blockchain is conceptually independent from “bitcoin” the asset: if we had technology
to support the movement of assets between blockchains, new systems could be developed which
users could adopt by simply reusing the existing bitcoin currency"


http://www.blockstream.com/sidechains.pdf
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 22, 2014, 05:30:32 PM
 #14190

going thru the paper now but this seems to be a problematic assumption:

"the core observation is that “Bitcoin” the blockchain is conceptually independent from “bitcoin” the asset: if we had technology
to support the movement of assets between blockchains, new systems could be developed which
users could adopt by simply reusing the existing bitcoin currency"


http://www.blockstream.com/sidechains.pdf
Also:

"Centralization risk" is never defined, nor is the mechanism via which it occurs is is explained.

(already know that answer to that one - it's Peter Todd's repackaging the natural monopoly fallacy)

"No safe upgrade path" is a software engineering deficiency, not an inherent feature of the problem space.

Moving transactions off the "main" blockchain deprives it of the tx fee revenue the parent blockchain requires to pay for hashing.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 06:00:11 PM
 #14191

http://www.blockstream.com/

would be interested in hearing what Gavin thinks of sidechains specifically:

https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/524975947356061697
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 06:23:28 PM
 #14192

http://www.blockstream.com/

would be interested in hearing what Gavin thinks of sidechains specifically:

https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/524975947356061697

I guess given your and justusranvier points and the fact Gavin wants to lift the block size limit, he would be in the opposing sidechains camp.
having a limit in size to the blocks in the bitcoin blockchain, would legitimize the need for sidechains.

so I see a political standoff approaching, soon, where those secretly invested in sidechains seek to limit block size.   

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 06:28:17 PM
 #14193

Peter Todd:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2k01du/peter_todd_on_twitter_the_sidechains_paper_is/
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 06:29:34 PM
 #14194

http://www.blockstream.com/

would be interested in hearing what Gavin thinks of sidechains specifically:

https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/524975947356061697

I guess given your and justusranvier points and the fact Gavin wants to lift the block size limit, he would be in the opposing sidechains camp.
having a limit in size to the blocks in the bitcoin blockchain, would legitimize the need for sidechains.

so I see a political standoff approaching, soon, where those secretly invested in sidechains seek to limit block size.   


Gavin doesn't want to completely remove the blocksize limit; he just wants to increase it in accordance with Moore's Law (roughly). So, space will still be scarce.

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
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 22, 2014, 06:41:13 PM
 #14195

http://www.blockstream.com/

would be interested in hearing what Gavin thinks of sidechains specifically:

https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/524975947356061697

I guess given your and justusranvier points and the fact Gavin wants to lift the block size limit, he would be in the opposing sidechains camp.
having a limit in size to the blocks in the bitcoin blockchain, would legitimize the need for sidechains.

so I see a political standoff approaching, soon, where those secretly invested in sidechains seek to limit block size.   


Gavin doesn't want to completely remove the blocksize limit; he just wants to increase it in accordance with Moore's Law (roughly). So, space will still be scarce.
The political standoff has been going on since at least 2012, since the altcoiners insisted that it would be too dangerous for Bitcoin to remove the block size limit, while simultaneous courting investors by claiming that Bitcoin can't scale.

The situation isn't helped in any way by people using terms of art they clearly don't understand, like "scarce."

"Scarce" is a binary term. A resource is either scarce, or non-scarce. Space in a block is scarce regardless of whether or not the size of a block is limited by production quotas.

In economics, "scarce" just means "not infinite".

Until it's possible to transmit an infinite amount of data with zero time delay without consuming any energy or using hardware, space in a Bitcoin block will be scarce, even if the average block size is 1 TB.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974


View Profile
October 22, 2014, 06:41:21 PM
 #14196

http://www.blockstream.com/

would be interested in hearing what Gavin thinks of sidechains specifically:

https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/524975947356061697

I guess given your and justusranvier points and the fact Gavin wants to lift the block size limit, he would be in the opposing sidechains camp.
having a limit in size to the blocks in the bitcoin blockchain, would legitimize the need for sidechains.

so I see a political standoff approaching, soon, where those secretly invested in sidechains seek to limit block size.   

The proposed transaction rate increase that Gavin seems to favor is both useless for fostering a 'one currency solution' for all economic activity because of the extremely modest increase, and ensures that Bitcoin will eventually mutate beyond recognition due to the exponential nature.  It makes little sense to me, but I like it anyway because it's predictable and would seem to align with my operations out over the course of my lifetime (as a late-40's aged dude.)

Or does it foster predictability?  One of my hypothesis is that this action is just a way to get people used to hard forks and thinking of them as no real big deal.  Most of the userbase (by body-count) at this point won't have much of a clue about what a 'fork' means anyway.  Just a software upgrade at most, and for those using many of the client solutions it won't even require that.  Being able to fork at will (or on demand of the authorities) makes it possible for pretty much anything to happen going forward.  Hell, it might even be possible to re-issue 'lost' (aka, unregistered) coins, or even bump up the 21x10^6 limit if need be.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 06:53:59 PM
 #14197

The situation isn't helped in any way by people using terms of art they clearly don't understand, like "scarce."

i hate that term with a passion. it validates Bitcoin skeptics impression that there aren't enough bitcoins.  Voorhees uses that term very loosely.  that's why you'll hear me use the descriptor "fixed supply" all the time when i describe Bitcoin.

it turns out that there is plenty of gold to go around in the world when it was more useful as a reserve money.  as a matter of fact, if you include gold derivative trading on the Comex or LBMA, the dollar value of all gold trading is greater than most currencies.

fixed supply is what is most important when talking about a store of value.
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
October 22, 2014, 07:05:16 PM
 #14198

http://www.blockstream.com/

would be interested in hearing what Gavin thinks of sidechains specifically:

https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/524975947356061697

I guess given your and justusranvier points and the fact Gavin wants to lift the block size limit, he would be in the opposing sidechains camp.
having a limit in size to the blocks in the bitcoin blockchain, would legitimize the need for sidechains.

so I see a political standoff approaching, soon, where those secretly invested in sidechains seek to limit block size.  

The proposed transaction rate increase that Gavin seems to favor is both useless for fostering a 'one currency solution' for all economic activity because of the extremely modest increase, and ensures that Bitcoin will eventually mutate beyond recognition due to the exponential nature.  It makes little sense to me, but I like it anyway because it's predictable and would seem to align with my operations out over the course of my lifetime (as a late-40's aged dude.)

Or does it foster predictability?  One of my hypothesis is that this action is just a way to get people used to hard forks and thinking of them as no real big deal.  Most of the userbase (by body-count) at this point won't have much of a clue about what a 'fork' means anyway.  Just a software upgrade at most, and for those using many of the client solutions it won't even require that.  Being able to fork at will (or on demand of the authorities) makes it possible for pretty much anything to happen going forward.  Hell, it might even be possible to re-issue 'lost' (aka, unregistered) coins, or even bump up the 21x10^6 limit if need be.



isnt there supposed to be a consensus amongst the network before any fork to be effective?
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974


View Profile
October 22, 2014, 07:15:45 PM
 #14199


isnt there supposed to be a consensus amongst the network before any fork to be effective?


Ya, but 'the network' is, unhappily, implemented as an increasingly small and centralized group of miners by my read.  'Consensus' for someone looking at a multi-million dollar mining facility being appropriated is basically 'do what the fuck the host tells you to do.'  If that means run the 'official' protocol issued by the 'official' bitcoin.org governing body, that's what most miners will likely do.

One of the practical advantages of gold is that it is fairly immune from 'good ideas' necessary to scale up.  In physical form at least.


FNG
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


View Profile
October 22, 2014, 07:23:21 PM
 #14200

One of the practical advantages of gold is that it is fairly immune from 'good ideas' necessary to scale up.  In physical form at least.


Gold is a great hedge for bitcoin either not panning out the way we think it will or Governments around the world with large holdings disagreeing with the U.S and bidding the price up to clear debts.

Bitcoin + Gold = freedom from monetray bs
Pages: « 1 ... 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 [710] 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 ... 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!