Bitcoin Forum
November 18, 2017, 11:49:04 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 ... 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] 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2009059 times)
HeliKopterBen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 622



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:02:41 AM
 #14881

A Side Chain must be 1:1 otherwise it's a merge mined (or not merge mined) altcoin.

From the whitepaper:

Quote
However, it is possible for sidechains to produce their own tokens, or issued
assets, which carry their own semantics.

Counterfeit:  made in imitation of something else with intent to deceive:  merriam-webster
1511048944
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511048944

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511048944
Reply with quote  #2

1511048944
Report to moderator
1511048944
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511048944

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511048944
Reply with quote  #2

1511048944
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:07:31 AM
 #14882

A Side Chain must be 1:1 otherwise it's a merge mined (or not merge mined) altcoin.

From the whitepaper:

Quote
However, it is possible for sidechains to produce their own tokens, or issued
assets, which carry their own semantics.
It's A White Paper, not The White Paper. I don't agree with the notion of independently traded tokens. The idea of a SC is to decentralize mining (whatever that means) and allow it to scale using present technology.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:07:54 AM
 #14883

A Side Chain must be 1:1 otherwise it's a merge mined (or not merge mined) altcoin.

From the whitepaper:

Quote
However, it is possible for sidechains to produce their own tokens, or issued
assets, which carry their own semantics.

As a Bitcoin holder I fail to see why I wouldn't prefer such a sidechain to one that is relying on transaction fees for mining, other than possibly ideological reasons, which I doubt will have much practical effect. Fees plus token should be more secure than fees alone, assuming any value for the token.



HeliKopterBen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 622



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:19:48 AM
 #14884

A Side Chain must be 1:1 otherwise it's a merge mined (or not merge mined) altcoin.

From the whitepaper:

Quote
However, it is possible for sidechains to produce their own tokens, or issued
assets, which carry their own semantics.

As a Bitcoin holder I fail to see why I wouldn't prefer such a sidechain to one that is relying on transaction fees for mining, other than possibly ideological reasons, which I doubt will have much practical effect. Fees plus token should be more secure than fees alone, assuming any value for the token.

The additional token may divert mining resources away from MC, causing MC to be less secure.  Of course the additional token could bring additional mining resources into the network.

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

Activity: 1596



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:29:39 AM
 #14885

A Side Chain must be 1:1 otherwise it's a merge mined (or not merge mined) altcoin.

From the whitepaper:

Quote
However, it is possible for sidechains to produce their own tokens, or issued
assets, which carry their own semantics.

As a Bitcoin holder I fail to see why I wouldn't prefer such a sidechain to one that is relying on transaction fees for mining, other than possibly ideological reasons, which I doubt will have much practical effect. Fees plus token should be more secure than fees alone, assuming any value for the token.

The additional token may divert mining resources away from MC, causing MC to be less secure.  Of course the additional token could bring additional mining resources into the network.

My message was a bit unclear. I meant to say as a Bitcoin holder considering exchanging my coins to a side chain (and choosing between these two side chains). Granted the effect you describe could still matter if I were exchanging a small portion of my coins, although I'm not sure my decision whether to exchange would matter here to whether resources are diverted. If not then I would strictly prefer the token version.



cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:32:27 AM
 #14886

A Side Chain must be 1:1 otherwise it's a merge mined (or not merge mined) altcoin.

From the whitepaper:

Quote
However, it is possible for sidechains to produce their own tokens, or issued
assets, which carry their own semantics.

As a Bitcoin holder I fail to see why I wouldn't prefer such a sidechain to one that is relying on transaction fees for mining, other than possibly ideological reasons, which I doubt will have much practical effect. Fees plus token should be more secure than fees alone, assuming any value for the token.

The additional token may divert mining resources away from MC, causing MC to be less secure.  Of course the additional token could bring additional mining resources into the network.
A Side Chain may be an instance where an additional demurrage token may be desirable. The Bitcoin investment has an expiration date so people won't leave it in, but will have some incentive to use the SC.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:33:07 AM
 #14887

A Side Chain must be 1:1 otherwise it's a merge mined (or not merge mined) altcoin.

From the whitepaper:

Quote
However, it is possible for sidechains to produce their own tokens, or issued
assets, which carry their own semantics.

As a Bitcoin holder I fail to see why I wouldn't prefer such a sidechain to one that is relying on transaction fees for mining, other than possibly ideological reasons, which I doubt will have much practical effect. Fees plus token should be more secure than fees alone, assuming any value for the token.

The additional token may divert mining resources away from MC, causing MC to be less secure.  Of course the additional token could bring additional mining resources into the network.

if you're a small miner now on the Bitcoin MC, and a SC with all the properties of my base case (with a significant innovation such as perfect anonymity) came along (now includes a sidecoin) would you stay put or jump to the SC?
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:37:41 AM
 #14888

A Side Chain must be 1:1 otherwise it's a merge mined (or not merge mined) altcoin.

From the whitepaper:

Quote
However, it is possible for sidechains to produce their own tokens, or issued
assets, which carry their own semantics.

As a Bitcoin holder I fail to see why I wouldn't prefer such a sidechain to one that is relying on transaction fees for mining, other than possibly ideological reasons, which I doubt will have much practical effect. Fees plus token should be more secure than fees alone, assuming any value for the token.

The additional token may divert mining resources away from MC, causing MC to be less secure.  Of course the additional token could bring additional mining resources into the network.

if you're a small miner now on the Bitcoin MC, and a SC with all the properties of my base case (with a significant innovation such as perfect anonymity) came along (now includes a sidecoin) would you stay put or jump to the SC?

in your base case, a 1:1 peg, there is no coin issuance, no block subsidy, so no incentive to jump boat

"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
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:39:20 AM
 #14889

you know, it just occurred to me that when Austin Hill goes around to all the mining pools and mines and tries to convince them to MM all his SC's, he's introducing a market distortion.

in other words, he's attempting to get something for nothing.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:41:08 AM
 #14890

A Side Chain must be 1:1 otherwise it's a merge mined (or not merge mined) altcoin.

From the whitepaper:

Quote
However, it is possible for sidechains to produce their own tokens, or issued
assets, which carry their own semantics.

As a Bitcoin holder I fail to see why I wouldn't prefer such a sidechain to one that is relying on transaction fees for mining, other than possibly ideological reasons, which I doubt will have much practical effect. Fees plus token should be more secure than fees alone, assuming any value for the token.

The additional token may divert mining resources away from MC, causing MC to be less secure.  Of course the additional token could bring additional mining resources into the network.

if you're a small miner now on the Bitcoin MC, and a SC with all the properties of my base case (with a significant innovation such as perfect anonymity) came along (now includes a sidecoin) would you stay put or jump to the SC?

in your base case, a 1:1 peg, there is no coin issuance, no block subsidy, so no incentive to jump boat

i just changed my base case according to a helpful comment from HB.  so what?  it doesn't invalidate the rest of my arguments.
dillpicklechips
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:44:06 AM
 #14891

in your base case, a 1:1 peg, there is no coin issuance, no block subsidy, so no incentive to jump boat
Transactions will happen on the sidechain and can charge tx fees, all of which are able to be converted right back to BTC if wanted. The only incentive to jump boat would be to use a feature.

   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    
   ████████████████████████████████   
     ▀██████████████████████████▀     
        ▀████████████████████▀        
          ████████████████▀          
            █████████████            
            ▀████████████▀            
             ▀██████████▀             
              ██████████              
               ████████               
               ▀██████▀               
                ██████                
                  ▀                  
.
.trade.io.
██████
██████
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
██████
██████

▄██████████████████▄
███       ▀███████
███       █████████
███       █████████
███       █████████
███              ██
███   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ███
███   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ███
███              ███
███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███
██████████████████▀

▄██████████████████▄
███████████▀ ███████
█████████▀   ███████
███████▀     ██▀ ███
███ ▀▀       █▄▄████
███          █▀▀▀▀██
███ ▄▄       ███████
██████▄     █▄ ▀███
█████████▄   ███▄███
███████████▄ ███████
▀██████████████████▀

▄██████████████████▄
████████████████████
███████████████▀▀ ██
█████████▀▀    ███
████▀▀     ▄█▀   ███
███▄    ▄██      ███
█████████▀      ▄██
█████████▄     ████
█████████████▄ ▄████
████████████████████
▀██████████████████▀
██████
██████
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
██████
██████
.
.Join the Trading Revolution.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:46:06 AM
 #14892

in your base case, a 1:1 peg, there is no coin issuance, no block subsidy, so no incentive to jump boat
Transactions will happen on the sidechain and can charge tx fees, all of which are able to be converted right back to BTC if wanted. The only incentive to jump boat would be to use a feature.

go back and read my comments from today about this.  there seems to be several reasons for a BTC holder to jump to scBTC immediately once a whale starts pumping thru the peg and the price starts rising. 

don't forget other speculators who just want to use their fiat on an exchange to buy (pile on) a rising asset (scBTC) with significant growth potential.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:47:02 AM
 #14893

i just changed my base case according to a helpful comment from HB.  so what?  it doesn't invalidate the rest of my arguments.

oh nothing, just pointing you moving goal post again. i'm impressed how your imagination can strech to such length to try and poke hole into sidechains.

it reminds of reading logs of the forum thread where satoshi first posted the paper.

"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
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:51:14 AM
 #14894

i just changed my base case according to a helpful comment from HB.  so what?  it doesn't invalidate the rest of my arguments.

oh nothing, just pointing you moving goal post again. i'm impressed how your imagination can strech to such length to try and poke hole into sidechains.

it reminds of reading logs of the forum thread where satoshi first posted the paper.

and i'm impressed at what an idiot you are continuing to shill for SC's and your willingness to bury your head in the sand.  

and why and how did you just happen to pop here on the day the SC paper was released specifically countering my every point and trying to denigrate my position by pointing to the Reddit AMA despite the clear and positive/upvote point count i got?  one might think you're associated with them in some way.  

in case you hadn't noticed, all of us here are trying to seek the truth despite your presence.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:51:28 AM
 #14895

go back and read my comments from today about this.  there seems to be several reasons for a BTC holder to jump to scBTC immediately once a whale starts pumping thru the peg and the price starts rising.

you do realise everyday the economy grows your whale scenario becomes less and less likely


"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
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:52:44 AM
 #14896


and i'm impressed at what an idiot you are continuing to shill for SC's and your willingness to bury your head in the sand.  

and why and how did you just happen to pop here on the day the SC paper was released specifically countering my every point and trying to denigrate my position by pointing to the Reddit AMA despite the clear and positive/upvote point count i got?  one might think you're associated with them in some way.  

in case you hadn't noticed, all of us here are trying to seek the truth despite your presence.

please don't start lieing through your teeths. I have read every single posts from that AMA and your posts were hanging in the sewers of most sub-topics and casually dismissed when engaged by the sidechain developers

you are a fear mongerer who tries to stand on arguments that hold no ground and scenarios from fairy tales.


"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
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:54:37 AM
 #14897

go back and read my comments from today about this.  there seems to be several reasons for a BTC holder to jump to scBTC immediately once a whale starts pumping thru the peg and the price starts rising.

you do realise everyday the economy grows your whale scenario becomes less and less likely



not at all.  the real key is that a SC will be a nascent currency plus an innovation with plenty of potential.  a whale could easily jerk the price upwards and then get follow on from other whales or speculators willing to be the new early adopters of a "better" currency.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:55:37 AM
 #14898


and i'm impressed at what an idiot you are continuing to shill for SC's and your willingness to bury your head in the sand.  

and why and how did you just happen to pop here on the day the SC paper was released specifically countering my every point and trying to denigrate my position by pointing to the Reddit AMA despite the clear and positive/upvote point count i got?  one might think you're associated with them in some way.  

in case you hadn't noticed, all of us here are trying to seek the truth despite your presence.

please don't start lieing through your teeths. I have read every single posts from that AMA and your posts were hanging in the sewers of most sub-topics and casually dismissed when engaged by the sidechain developers

you are a fear mongerer who tries to stand on arguments that hold no ground and scenarios from fairy tales.



you seem quite threatened.

i suppose one could say the same for me but i'm not the one trying to change the system for a new for profit company i'm participating in.
dillpicklechips
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:56:19 AM
 #14899

in your base case, a 1:1 peg, there is no coin issuance, no block subsidy, so no incentive to jump boat
Transactions will happen on the sidechain and can charge tx fees, all of which are able to be converted right back to BTC if wanted. The only incentive to jump boat would be to use a feature.

go back and read my comments from today about this.  there seems to be several reasons for a BTC holder to jump to scBTC immediately once a whale starts pumping thru the peg and the price starts rising. 

don't forget other speculators who just want to use their fiat on an exchange to buy (pile on) a rising asset (scBTC) with significant growth potential.
I tried but I don't why "whale starts pumping" means in the context of sidechains. The peg is built-in. If a sidechain was pegged 1:1 how would a whale cause the sidechain to change in value and why would people pay a premium as apposed to locking BTC themselves to use the sidechain?

   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    
   ████████████████████████████████   
     ▀██████████████████████████▀     
        ▀████████████████████▀        
          ████████████████▀          
            █████████████            
            ▀████████████▀            
             ▀██████████▀             
              ██████████              
               ████████               
               ▀██████▀               
                ██████                
                  ▀                  
.
.trade.io.
██████
██████
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
███
██████
██████

▄██████████████████▄
███       ▀███████
███       █████████
███       █████████
███       █████████
███              ██
███   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ███
███   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ███
███              ███
███▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███
██████████████████▀

▄██████████████████▄
███████████▀ ███████
█████████▀   ███████
███████▀     ██▀ ███
███ ▀▀       █▄▄████
███          █▀▀▀▀██
███ ▄▄       ███████
██████▄     █▄ ▀███
█████████▄   ███▄███
███████████▄ ███████
▀██████████████████▀

▄██████████████████▄
████████████████████
███████████████▀▀ ██
█████████▀▀    ███
████▀▀     ▄█▀   ███
███▄    ▄██      ███
█████████▀      ▄██
█████████▄     ████
█████████████▄ ▄████
████████████████████
▀██████████████████▀
██████
██████
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
   ███
██████
██████
.
.Join the Trading Revolution.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 03:58:20 AM
 #14900


and i'm impressed at what an idiot you are continuing to shill for SC's and your willingness to bury your head in the sand.  

and why and how did you just happen to pop here on the day the SC paper was released specifically countering my every point and trying to denigrate my position by pointing to the Reddit AMA despite the clear and positive/upvote point count i got?  one might think you're associated with them in some way.  

in case you hadn't noticed, all of us here are trying to seek the truth despite your presence.

please don't start lieing through your teeths. I have read every single posts from that AMA and your posts were hanging in the sewers of most sub-topics and casually dismissed when engaged by the sidechain developers

you are a fear mongerer who tries to stand on arguments that hold no ground and scenarios from fairy tales.



are you associated with their company in any way?
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 ... 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!