Bitcoin Forum
November 18, 2017, 12:52:46 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 ... 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] 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2008907 times)
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1638



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:56:19 PM
 #14281

I liked this response from Greg:

Quote from: nullc
I'd like to see more of that too... Some people in the Bitcoin ecosystem push on ideas like red-listing which I think are very fundamentally anti-bitcoin, and every time that kind of stuff comes up I become ill thinking about all the political work that goes into protecting bitcoin as an autonomous trustless system.
Part of what I want (pegged) sidechains to exist and be successful is so that I can spend less time telling people NO and more time telling them "Good Luck with that", without having to also be telling them to create something that competes with the bitcoin currency.
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2k3u97/we_are_bitcoin_sidechain_paper_authors_adam_back/clhphi2

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
Cryptoasset rankings and metrics for investors: http://onchainfx.com
1511009566
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511009566

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511009566
Reply with quote  #2

1511009566
Report to moderator
1511009566
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511009566

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511009566
Reply with quote  #2

1511009566
Report to moderator
A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511009566
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511009566

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511009566
Reply with quote  #2

1511009566
Report to moderator
1511009566
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511009566

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511009566
Reply with quote  #2

1511009566
Report to moderator
1511009566
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511009566

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511009566
Reply with quote  #2

1511009566
Report to moderator
thezerg
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 05:58:20 PM
 #14282

... a lot of good stuff...

You know, when BTC is exploding in adoption I tend to agree with you and see that perhaps BTC will survive in a role almost solely as the world reserve and international value transmission currency.

But when adoption metrics like # wallets, # txns, etc are just barely breaking levels set a year ago, when price is in a persistent downtrend and has supposedly hit the bottom (really this time it really has) several times, when at a guess 99.9% of merchants use a trusted centralized 3rd party payment processor -- no different from paypal or VISA in their ability to freeze your funds... this is when I say it is still very premature to eliminate markets that Bitcoin could optimize or enable.

notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 06:05:32 PM
 #14283

- private sidechains
- sidechain what lives only 1 working day(any duation) - no need to store full transaction history because bitcoins are transfered back to main chain

So essentially, they want to move towards using the bitcoin blockchain as a timestamping service?  You publish block header hashes and bitcoin timestamps them.  If a court ever needs the records, they can prove that they are unaltered.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 23, 2014, 06:07:15 PM
 #14284

I liked this response from Greg:

Quote from: nullc
I'd like to see more of that too... Some people in the Bitcoin ecosystem push on ideas like red-listing which I think are very fundamentally anti-bitcoin, and every time that kind of stuff comes up I become ill thinking about all the political work that goes into protecting bitcoin as an autonomous trustless system.
Part of what I want (pegged) sidechains to exist and be successful is so that I can spend less time telling people NO and more time telling them "Good Luck with that", without having to also be telling them to create something that competes with the bitcoin currency.
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2k3u97/we_are_bitcoin_sidechain_paper_authors_adam_back/clhphi2
I also like his responds and Adam Back's.

Now I can consider my original question, "provisionally answered."
HeliKopterBen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 622



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 06:12:15 PM
 #14285

Bottom line:  Miners will collectively choose whether or not to enforce these changes.  If you don't like it then you can garner enough processing power to influence the change.  I believe bitcoin needs to scale one way or the other.  This is just about as practical as any other solution including TCs and increasing the block size limit.  I will support whatever consensus decision is made.  Thankfully these decisions are made by people who have a vested interest in the system:  miners.

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

Activity: 1288

Enabling the maximal migration


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 06:23:26 PM
 #14286

- private sidechains
- sidechain what lives only 1 working day(any duation) - no need to store full transaction history because bitcoins are transfered back to main chain

So essentially, they want to move towards using the bitcoin blockchain as a timestamping service?  You publish block header hashes and bitcoin timestamps them.  If a court ever needs the records, they can prove that they are unaltered.

Thats just one of potentially thousands of use cases, yes.

Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 06:35:40 PM
 #14287

So far, no good answers to the question of mismatched incentives:

https://twitter.com/JustusRanvier/status/525323754709458944

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2k3u97/we_are_bitcoin_sidechain_paper_authors_adam_back/clhoo7d

We think there is a tremendous business potential in building and supporting infrastructure in this space, some connected to Bitcoin and some not. E.g. by acting as a technology and services provider for other businesses in helping them migrate to a more Bitcoin-like way of doing business.

I got chills reading this. I have been thinking about this idea for awhile but didn't have a clear idea for how to implement. I am so excited to see such a solid team working on this.

At Coinsummit, Marc Andreesen & Balaji Srinivasan were discussing the idea of creating a Red Hat for Bitcoin, I think Blockstream could achieve this.

"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
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 23, 2014, 06:37:26 PM
 #14288

At Coinsummit, Marc Andreesen & Balaji Srinivasan were discussing the idea of creating a Red Hat for Bitcoin, I think Blockstream could achieve this.
A "Red Hat for Bitcoin" headquartered in the US would be a disaster.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 06:40:58 PM
 #14289

At Coinsummit, Marc Andreesen & Balaji Srinivasan were discussing the idea of creating a Red Hat for Bitcoin, I think Blockstream could achieve this.
A "Red Hat for Bitcoin" headquartered in the US would be a disaster.

FWIW, I think they mention in the AMA they'll be based in SF, Montreal & Malta.

Will be interesting to see where they decided to incorporate and have their headquarter

edit :

actually they confirm here they are incorporated in Canada and Malta, not in the US

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2k3u97/we_are_bitcoin_sidechain_paper_authors_adam_back/clhocei

"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
HorseRider
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1369


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 06:46:06 PM
 #14290

If the conflict of interest can be addressed clearly, the sidechains will be good for Bitcoin ecosystem and the exchange rate of it. Cryptocurrency like Bitcoin will need its own infrastructure for trading and debt proof and share proof to circumvent the legal restriction from government without trusting too many 3rd exchange service.  The better infrastructure will make Bitcoin more usefully money, which is a better money.

16SvwJtQET7mkHZFFbJpgPaDA1Pxtmbm5P
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1638



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 07:03:49 PM
 #14291

Ok, so I get that the exchange rate between any side-chain unit and bitcoin can be "any deterministic function" with the obvious constraint that no more bitcoin can come back to the bitcoin-blockchain than left it in the first place.

Additionally, as I noted above, Greg said:
Quote from: nullc
Part of what I want (pegged) sidechains to exist and be successful is so that I can spend less time telling people NO and more time telling them "Good Luck with that", without having to also be telling them to create something that competes with the bitcoin currency.

But I'm not sure that final clause is always true. What happens if a sidechain is issued with some fixed supply and some fixed exchange rate. Many of the IPO "2.0" coins use this sort of a model, roughly. Then if the side-coin becomes successful, BTC will move over up to the max supply issuance of the new coin. That part *does* boost bitcoin's purchasing power. But after that point, any further success of the side-coin in terms of purchasing power will not boost bitcoin, as far as I can tell. People would want the side-coin, but there's no built-in way to get it via bitcoin anymore, so at this point, it becomes the same as any other alt.

That's indeed only one scenario, but it seems to me that much of what sidechains boil down to is just optionally providing a built-in means of exchange that's not really all that different, economically, than existing alt-coin exchanges? What am I missing?

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

Activity: 1162


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 07:09:57 PM
 #14292

Ok, so I get that the exchange rate between any side-chain unit and bitcoin can be "any deterministic function" with the obvious constraint that no more bitcoin can come back to the bitcoin-blockchain than left it in the first place.

Additionally, as I noted above, Greg said:
Quote from: nullc
Part of what I want (pegged) sidechains to exist and be successful is so that I can spend less time telling people NO and more time telling them "Good Luck with that", without having to also be telling them to create something that competes with the bitcoin currency.

But I'm not sure that final clause is always true. What happens if a sidechain is issued with some fixed supply and some fixed exchange rate. Many of the IPO "2.0" coins use this sort of a model, roughly. Then if the side-coin becomes successful, BTC will move over up to the max supply issuance of the new coin. That part *does* boost bitcoin's purchasing power. But after that point, any further success of the side-coin in terms of purchasing power will not boost bitcoin, as far as I can tell. People would want the side-coin, but there's no built-in way to get it via bitcoin anymore, so at this point, it becomes the same as any other alt.

That's indeed only one scenario, but it seems to me that much of what sidechains boil down to is just optionally providing a built-in means of exchange that's not really all that different, economically, than existing alt-coin exchanges? What am I missing?


Emboldened is what I was getting at earlier.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 23, 2014, 07:12:48 PM
 #14293

Then if the side-coin becomes successful, BTC will move over up to the max supply issuance of the new coin. That part *does* boost bitcoin's purchasing power. But after that point, any further success of the side-coin in terms of purchasing power will not boost bitcoin, as far as I can tell. People would want the side-coin, but there's no built-in way to get it via bitcoin anymore, so at this point, it becomes the same as any other alt.

That's indeed only one scenario, but it seems to me that much of what sidechains boil down to is just optionally providing a built-in means of exchange that's not really all that different, economically, than existing alt-coin exchanges? What am I missing?
Ideally at this point whatever feature made the sidechain successful would get incorporated into the Bitcoin protocol.

But the issuers and holders of the sidechain might complain and try to stop that from happening.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 07:30:09 PM
 #14294

lol, none of them wanted to tackle 3 of my questions and they got downvoted.  granted the last one was speculative but still:

[–]cypherdoc2 -1 points 2 hours ago

is there such a thing as overdevelopment?

Bitcoin has so much potential to change the world simply as it is: a new form of money.

    permalink
    save
    edit
    delete
    reply

[–]cypherdoc2 -2 points 2 hours ago

let's say one SC gets popular, say from faster tx times. it becomes apparent that you should move to the SC. now all the ppl who have cold wallets scattered round the globe have to go dig them out and make a special tx to transfer them to the SC. this is not only a hassle but a potential anonymity risk. after doing so, a non economic actor decides to take advantage of the fact that this merge mined chain is worth destroying. they might be successful especially if there's a transition in hashing protection going on simultaneously.

how would you address this concern?

    permalink
    save
    edit
    delete
    reply

[–]cypherdoc2 -4 points 2 hours ago

i keep saying this but i don't think the market will like a constant loss of BTC over time from Sidescams. we already have a perception of not having enough coins from mainstream economists. just heard one say this last weekend at Hasher's United.

it could cause a paradox in price action; down. is this what we're seeing right now?

    permalink
    save
    edit
    delete
    reply
pa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 516


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 07:31:04 PM
 #14295

Then if the side-coin becomes successful, BTC will move over up to the max supply issuance of the new coin. That part *does* boost bitcoin's purchasing power. But after that point, any further success of the side-coin in terms of purchasing power will not boost bitcoin, as far as I can tell. People would want the side-coin, but there's no built-in way to get it via bitcoin anymore, so at this point, it becomes the same as any other alt.

That's indeed only one scenario, but it seems to me that much of what sidechains boil down to is just optionally providing a built-in means of exchange that's not really all that different, economically, than existing alt-coin exchanges? What am I missing?
Ideally at this point whatever feature made the sidechain successful would get incorporated into the Bitcoin protocol.

But the issuers and holders of the sidechain might complain and try to stop that from happening.

Are the pegs between chains irrevocable? If not, what's to stop a side-chain dev from pumping the side-chain and then "trapping" bitcoins by revoking the outgoing peg?
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 07:33:26 PM
 #14296

i do find it interesting that the price tanked right after their announcement.  the market doesn't like
confusion which will only get worse if we get a bunch of SC's with different economic assumptions
that could siphon off BTC to itself to the detriment of the main chain.

Unfortunately we can't know for sure the reason why the recent price tank. 

No but individual actors know, look at the DOW, and Bitcoin, I'll switch back to BTC when SC develop along the same risk model as NXT. Untill then SC sounds like Scam Colin and let's leave that domain to the risky investments in Alts, don't mess with Bitcoin core.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 07:33:45 PM
 #14297

Then if the side-coin becomes successful, BTC will move over up to the max supply issuance of the new coin. That part *does* boost bitcoin's purchasing power. But after that point, any further success of the side-coin in terms of purchasing power will not boost bitcoin, as far as I can tell. People would want the side-coin, but there's no built-in way to get it via bitcoin anymore, so at this point, it becomes the same as any other alt.

That's indeed only one scenario, but it seems to me that much of what sidechains boil down to is just optionally providing a built-in means of exchange that's not really all that different, economically, than existing alt-coin exchanges? What am I missing?
Ideally at this point whatever feature made the sidechain successful would get incorporated into the Bitcoin protocol.

But the issuers and holders of the sidechain might complain and try to stop that from happening.

Possible scenario
 -> quantum computer was built.
 -> there is quantum computer resistant sidechain
 -> panic :-)
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 23, 2014, 07:39:36 PM
 #14298

lol, none of them wanted to tackle 3 of my questions and they got downvoted.  granted the last one was speculative but still:

[–]cypherdoc2 -1 points 2 hours ago

is there such a thing as overdevelopment?

Bitcoin has so much potential to change the world simply as it is: a new form of money.

    permalink
    save
    edit
    delete
    reply

[–]cypherdoc2 -2 points 2 hours ago

let's say one SC gets popular, say from faster tx times. it becomes apparent that you should move to the SC. now all the ppl who have cold wallets scattered round the globe have to go dig them out and make a special tx to transfer them to the SC. this is not only a hassle but a potential anonymity risk. after doing so, a non economic actor decides to take advantage of the fact that this merge mined chain is worth destroying. they might be successful especially if there's a transition in hashing protection going on simultaneously.

how would you address this concern?

    permalink
    save
    edit
    delete
    reply

[–]cypherdoc2 -4 points 2 hours ago

i keep saying this but i don't think the market will like a constant loss of BTC over time from Sidescams. we already have a perception of not having enough coins from mainstream economists. just heard one say this last weekend at Hasher's United.

it could cause a paradox in price action; down. is this what we're seeing right now?

    permalink
    save
    edit
    delete
    reply

not sure where you're going with this.

if the faster tx is made more useful for certain type of transactions, people will be transferring an according amount of BTC they want to use for this purpose from their hot wallet.

if related SC offers faster tx without compromising security why then would the feature not be integrated to BTC core?

your first question seem contradictory with the second. assuming the value proposition of Bitcoin is fine as is right now, why then would "people from all over the world" want to transfer all the BTC from their cold wallet to a faster TX SC.

I generally appreciate your contribution to BTC related matter but I can't shake off this strange feeling of dishonesty that I get from reading some of your comments since yesterday. It seems as if you're trying too hard to attach ill intentions to a group of people that have generally served us well in the past.

"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
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile
October 23, 2014, 07:47:35 PM
 #14299

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

Quote
The federated peg approach necessarily compromises on trust, but requires no changes to
Bitcoin — only the participants need to agree to use it and only the participants take the costs
or risks of using it. Further, if someone wanted to prevent other people from using a sidechain they
could not do so: if the federated peg is used privately in a closed community, its use can be made
undetectable and uncensorable. This approach allows rapid deployment and experimentation and
550
will allow the community to gain confidence in pegged sidechains before adopting any changes to
the Bitcoin protocol.

justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 23, 2014, 07:48:26 PM
 #14300

trying too hard to attach ill intentions to a group of people that have generally served us well in the past.
I hear alarm bells whenever people start talking like this.

The people who communities blindly trust because "they've always served us in the past" are exactly the kind of people who become prime targets for blackmail, extortion, etc.

Giving people a blank check because we like them or because they've done good work previously is precisely the wrong thing to do.

Making sure that Blockstream is set up in a way that doesn't create perverse incentives is as much for their protection as ours.
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 ... 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!