Bitcoin Forum
November 20, 2017, 09:26:14 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [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 ... 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] 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2010368 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 04:42:34 AM
 #14201

I am quite surprised the altcoin market isnt dumping in droves since the announcement of blockstream. What was once an iffy conceptual idea is now nearly an inevitability.

The alt-coin market has never been rational. Wink

SC's are still just an idea.  just like TC's and Ethereum.  until they get a working implementation going, alts are gonna hang around.

and it's still not clear whether SC's get off the ground.  there are alot of unhappy ppl cuz of the for-profit company these guys represent and the power to push code of their choice to maximize that profit.
Join ICO Now Coinlancer is Disrupting the Freelance marketplace!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511213174
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511213174

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511213174
Reply with quote  #2

1511213174
Report to moderator
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 04:45:33 AM
 #14202

I am quite surprised the altcoin market isnt dumping in droves since the announcement of blockstream. What was once an iffy conceptual idea is now nearly an inevitability.

http://blog.pebble.io/post/100702644738/on-sidechains-bitcoin-maximalism-and-freedom

the altcoin market is clinging to the fundamental misunderstanding of wanting to have "competing" protocols for money

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 04:47:26 AM
 #14203

I am quite surprised the altcoin market isnt dumping in droves since the announcement of blockstream. What was once an iffy conceptual idea is now nearly an inevitability.

Perhaps your notion of why altcoins have value is incorrect.

For example, one reason Litecoin has been described as having value is as a hedge against something going very wrong with Bitcoin (both technology-wise and economic/ecosystem-wise). Given that side chains are totally unproven, with uncertain effects, it is entirely possible that Litecoin could go rationally go up in value due to side chains.

Also, I'm not convinced that the true version of side chains (that requires a hard fork) is inevitable. More likely than yesterday I would agree.

Also, let's not forget that this for-profit company has scooped up several of the top Bitcoin developers. That could be good or bad for the rest of Bitcoin. I'm sure they would argue (both individually as a business) it will only be good. I'm not entirely sold on that premise.

Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:06:34 AM
 #14204

Also, I'm not convinced that the true version of side chains (that requires a hard fork) is inevitable. More likely than yesterday I would agree.

If it was your choice smooth, would you fork bitcoin to permit (true) sidechains? 

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

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:08:28 AM
 #14205

I am quite surprised the altcoin market isnt dumping in droves since the announcement of blockstream. What was once an iffy conceptual idea is now nearly an inevitability.

Perhaps your notion of why altcoins have value is incorrect.

For example, one reason Litecoin has been described as having value is as a hedge against something going very wrong with Bitcoin (both technology-wise and economic/ecosystem-wise). Given that side chains are totally unproven, with uncertain effects, it is entirely possible that Litecoin could go rationally go up in value due to side chains.

Also, I'm not convinced that the true version of side chains (that requires a hard fork) is inevitable. More likely than yesterday I would agree.

Also, let's not forget that this for-profit company has scooped up several of the top Bitcoin developers. That could be good or bad for the rest of Bitcoin. I'm sure they would argue (both individually as a business) it will only be good. I'm not entirely sold on that premise.



Yes, lots of linear thinking going on over in the sidechain camp. I keep bringing up the possible negative effects of a sidechain losing 20 to 30% of all btc and all they can say is "that will just make my coin worth more!".
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:13:19 AM
 #14206

https://twitter.com/austinhill/status/525032498049593346
lebing
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288

Enabling the maximal migration


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:26:13 AM
 #14207

I am quite surprised the altcoin market isnt dumping in droves since the announcement of blockstream. What was once an iffy conceptual idea is now nearly an inevitability.

Perhaps your notion of why altcoins have value is incorrect.

For example, one reason Litecoin has been described as having value is as a hedge against something going very wrong with Bitcoin (both technology-wise and economic/ecosystem-wise). Given that side chains are totally unproven, with uncertain effects, it is entirely possible that Litecoin could go rationally go up in value due to side chains.

Also, I'm not convinced that the true version of side chains (that requires a hard fork) is inevitable. More likely than yesterday I would agree.

Also, let's not forget that this for-profit company has scooped up several of the top Bitcoin developers. That could be good or bad for the rest of Bitcoin. I'm sure they would argue (both individually as a business) it will only be good. I'm not entirely sold on that premise.



one reason Litecoin has been described as having value is as a hedge against something going very wrong with Bitcoin

-- I never understood the hedge argument for litecoin. If something goes wrong with bitcoin, why wouldn't it also go wrong with litecoin? After all they share the majority of their code.

let's not forget that this for-profit company has scooped up several of the top Bitcoin developers.

-- We don't know who scooped up who - though I guess we could ask in the AMA tomorrow. The point I was making is that they are a part of this project, which to me is a major indicator of the probability of the success of this project getting incorporated into the code.

Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
lebing
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288

Enabling the maximal migration


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:30:09 AM
 #14208

I am quite surprised the altcoin market isnt dumping in droves since the announcement of blockstream. What was once an iffy conceptual idea is now nearly an inevitability.

Perhaps your notion of why altcoins have value is incorrect.

For example, one reason Litecoin has been described as having value is as a hedge against something going very wrong with Bitcoin (both technology-wise and economic/ecosystem-wise). Given that side chains are totally unproven, with uncertain effects, it is entirely possible that Litecoin could go rationally go up in value due to side chains.

Also, I'm not convinced that the true version of side chains (that requires a hard fork) is inevitable. More likely than yesterday I would agree.

Also, let's not forget that this for-profit company has scooped up several of the top Bitcoin developers. That could be good or bad for the rest of Bitcoin. I'm sure they would argue (both individually as a business) it will only be good. I'm not entirely sold on that premise.



Yes, lots of linear thinking going on over in the sidechain camp. I keep bringing up the possible negative effects of a sidechain losing 20 to 30% of all btc and all they can say is "that will just make my coin worth more!".

20-30% of all of the bitcoins? Worst case it should be far lower, somewhere closer to 2% if one of the side chains fail. Its the same concept at play now - the larger the cap, the larger the target. If there is an exploit, someone will find it given a sufficient motivation to do so and that will be far less than a billion dollars.

Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:41:04 AM
 #14209

-- I never understood the hedge argument for litecoin. If something goes wrong with bitcoin, why wouldn't it also go wrong with litecoin? After all they share the majority of their code.

1. You ignored this part: "both technology-wise and economic/ecosystem-wise." That could include all manner of things that have little to nothing to do with existing code, including mining centralization, bad decisions by core developers, bad influences by existing or new commercial interests, too cozy with regulators, too hostile to regulators, being the target of a deliberate attack simply because it is bigger, etc.

2. Let's not forget that Bitcoin is vastly more valuable than Litecoin or anything else. Thus a market-impled hedge suggests that such a result is very unlikely, but not zero. Overall I think Bitcoin is around 90% of the total cryptocoin market cap (LTC is <10%). We are arguing about an edge case, but all this "sidechains/altchains are better than altcoins" argument is trying to do after all is drive down that 10%, which is pretty small to begin with. Can you really, with 90%+ confidence, say that nothing could go seriously wrong with Bitcoin that wouldn't somehow benefit some other coin? I think the answer is no, with or without side chains, but perhaps you disagree.

Quote
-- We don't know who scooped up who - though I guess we could ask in the AMA tomorrow. The point I was making is that they are a part of this project, which to me is a major indicator of the probability of the success of this project getting incorporated into the code.

I agree with you that this milestone has increased the probability of side chains being developed and deployed. It is a conceptual leap go from that fairly obvious fact to what the eventual outcome might be.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:43:15 AM
 #14210



The technology can't be effectively evaluated or understood when separated from the economic and business considerations any more than a coherent analysis of Bitcoin can occur without consideration of its economics. The are inseparable. His position is unsound.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:48:23 AM
 #14211

Also, I'm not convinced that the true version of side chains (that requires a hard fork) is inevitable. More likely than yesterday I would agree.

If it was your choice smooth, would you fork bitcoin to permit (true) sidechains? 

Not without better vetting of the cryptography, which would likely take years.

Correction: I didn't realize they are proposing the SPV-proof method for coin return rather than the zkSNARK method.

Given that, cryptography is a lesser concern, though I would be still be concerned about mining incentives (which aren't that well understood for even Bitcoin itself).

The summary is that I really don't know if this is a good idea. I'd want to see much more careful analysis first.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:50:02 AM
 #14212


I could see them making money doing consulting and development for people who want a sidechain for some particular purpose.

I personally have a good deal of confidence in some of the folks involved in this effort.  Though I rarely risk much on software I cannot compile myself, I would probably used binaries released by this group as long as I felt that they had visibility.  (I use radio code blobs developed by Sam Leffler as a fr'instance.)  So their stamp in that respect could be worth something as well.  I'm thinking simply of specific sidechains which those who commissioned the work did not want opensource.  Naturally I would be highly disappointed (and very surprised) if their core work were not opensourced.


stellar69
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:51:22 AM
 #14213

Gold collapsing? Gold is at the same rate as i saw it year ago.
BTC came down to 400$ from 1200$
lebing
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288

Enabling the maximal migration


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:56:34 AM
 #14214


1. You ignored this part: "both technology-wise and economic/ecosystem-wise." That could include all manner of things that have little to nothing to do with existing code, including mining centralization, bad decisions by core developers, bad influences by existing or new commercial interests, too cozy with regulators, too hostile to regulators, being the target of a deliberate attack simply because it is bigger, etc.


Originally I wrote a much longer response but my browser froze and I got lazy re-writing it. Anyway, I still fail to see why litecoin, Monero or any other coin would be considered a hedge in the event of an issue with bitcoin. If anything a failure in bitcoin would be catastrophic for cryptocurrencies in general and would set the community back years before something else might catch on. The confidence would simply be gone. I have a hard time believing that people spent so much money investing in Litecoin because there might be a failure with bitcoin at some point down the road. That being said, maybe I need to just have less faith in humanity.  Undecided

Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
lebing
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288

Enabling the maximal migration


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:57:17 AM
 #14215



The technology can't be effectively separated from the economic and business considerations any more than a coherent analysis of Bitcoin occur without consideration of its economics. The are inseparable. His position is unsound.


Yes, I agree. This is a bullshit answer.

Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
dropt
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 06:10:43 AM
 #14216

Gold collapsing? Gold is at the same rate as i saw it year ago.
BTC came down to 400$ from 1200$

This thread was started in Mar of 2012.
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1638



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 06:23:05 AM
 #14217

I am quite surprised the altcoin market isnt dumping in droves since the announcement of blockstream. What was once an iffy conceptual idea is now nearly an inevitability.

http://blog.pebble.io/post/100702644738/on-sidechains-bitcoin-maximalism-and-freedom

the altcoin market is clinging to the fundamental misunderstanding of wanting to have "competing" protocols for money


Ugh, I stopped reading here:

Quote from: pebble
The idea that any cryptocurrency can be the “Internet of Money” is false. Bitcoin is not comparable to TCP/IP and the Internet in any way whatsoever.


If that statement is true, we're all done here; no cryptocurrency can ever have much value. This is fundamentally what many are not understanding; specifically the startup/tech-only focused people. They get all wide-eyed about the tech without considering the economics. They fail to realize that people need to have confidence that the dominant coin will remain dominant for a long time, or else it'll be unlikely that people will be willing to store much value in *any* coin.....and without value, the tech they're so fascinated with isn't useful.

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
Cryptoasset rankings and metrics for investors: http://onchainfx.com
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 10:30:45 AM
 #14218

Yes, I'm if the belief that if Bitcoin fails, they all fail: alts and SC's.

In fact. I believe the price drop we've seen in the last 24h since the SC announcement is a direct vote of non confidence in what they're  doing. I've been very vocal since I heard about them doing this project with a for profit company. The dangers of this are so obvious, Austin Hill's  response to me on Twitter giving a  hint. Can you imagine him saying that to me after SC's have been established and I inquire about some major change they want to implement that might profit  their  company? I think the market is worried  about this very thing.

Initially I thought the whole idea was coming from Back but according  to nullc, he was the one to spear head this. I've had many public disagreements with nullc for a long time around the economics of Bitcoin and what I've perceived to be a dismissive attitude toward non dev opinion and a misunderstanding of economics and game theory.  The bitcoin.org press centre debacle with Andreas is a  great example. I've always wondered why he and Luke were never hired by a Bitcoin company. He claims he's had lots of offers so I have to accept that. But if you watch the Princeton University video on Bitcoin with Ed Felton, you'll see he's kinda different and he admits it . Otoh, I give him major props for contributing so much to bitcoin and our technical understanding of it.  He's helped me in that regard and clearly he is respected by the other core devs.

That's what makes this play so interesting. nullc despite his own political deficiencies has managed to apparently recruit Pieter and Matt, both of whom I have the utmost respect for. Mark, I have no clue but he seems to be more emotional about this whole project and has tried to shout me down  on  reddit several times.

Personally, I think Bitcoin should be left alone to do its thing. It's too early to be monkeying with the code especially by a for profit company despite its members. But i could be wrong too. What they're proposing introduces complexity on a major scale and the effects  on mining is unclear and have the potential to disrupt Bitcoin. Despite what they've said, I doubt any of them have significant amounts invested in Bitcoin. Nullc has been surprisingly skeptical of bitcoin and we know Back has publicly admitted he missed it. The others i really wouldn't know. The point is, why let a for profit bunch of guys make changes to the code?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 10:51:24 AM
 #14219

Maybe the real Tragedy of the Commons is 'devs gotta dev'.

We have this great open source project so why not tinker with it?  I've always said that "the geeks fail to understand that which they hath created". Bitcoin has so much potential to change the world simply as it is: a new form of money. Why so much emphasis on other asset uses I'll never understand.
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 10:59:26 AM
 #14220

Maybe the real Tragedy of the Commons is 'devs gotta dev'.

We have this great open source project so why not tinker with it?  I've always said that "the geeks fail to understand that which they hath created". Bitcoin has so much potential to change the world simply as it is: a new form of money. Why so much emphasis on other asset uses I'll never understand.


This is exactly how its all going to unfold imho. Bitcoin is perfect.
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 ... 1558 »
  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!