Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 07:25:37 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 ... 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] 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2022032 times)
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:02:11 AM
 #14901

Time out. This is all hypotheticals. Rather than butt heads, go in different directions and may the best ideas win. There's no limit to new ideas.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
1513020337
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513020337

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513020337
Reply with quote  #2

1513020337
Report to moderator
1513020337
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513020337

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513020337
Reply with quote  #2

1513020337
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513020337
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513020337

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513020337
Reply with quote  #2

1513020337
Report to moderator
1513020337
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513020337

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513020337
Reply with quote  #2

1513020337
Report to moderator
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:04:02 AM
 #14902

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.

Why have they not done it with an alt-coin then  Huh

Much like smooth has indicated, you worst case scenario is quite literally an alt-coin taking over.

Sidechain didn't create that problem. No your farfetched "risk-free put" is not a valid argument, it is full of holes.

The only risk-free position is on the BTC mainchain.

At this point the only risk we witness a migration of the kind you suggest is if the destination is considered by the market to be as secure as BTC and offering an innovation so important the value proposition is too large to ignore. It is terribly naive to believe a "whale" could ignite such a movement.

I don't think there is any predicament at all. If the side chain is objectively a better chain as determined by stakeholders, then it is simply time to move on. There is not necessarily any reason try to try to backport everything to the original chain. BTC will have fulfilled its useful purpose of giving birth to the improved scBTC/BTC2.

you know what, it turns out I agree with this 100% and this is another reality for which cypherdoc has no answer

"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
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:05:15 AM
 #14903

If you offer a demurrage coin as an added incentive for an SC, you won't be perceived as a pump and dump altcoin. Businesses would like the idea of moving currency.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:08:51 AM
 #14904

are you associated with their company in any way?

the only association I have with them is that I recognize the potential added value of sidechains and would like to give the runner a chance considering its potential upside could far exceed the doomsday scenario you propose.


"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, 04:12:39 AM
 #14905

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?

he's scared whales are gonna pump the better coin  Shocked

"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, 04:13:03 AM
 #14906

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.

Why have they not done it with an alt-coin then  Huh

b/c they want free merge mining from Bitcoin miners to get started.

Quote
Much like smooth has indicated, you worst case scenario is quite literally an alt-coin taking over.

Sidechain didn't create that problem. No you farfetched "risk-free put" is not a valid argument, it is full of holes.

feel free to point them out then with logical arguments instead of crying FUD.
Quote
The only risk-free position is on the BTC mainchain.

At this point the only risk we witness a migration of the kind you suggest is if the destination is considered by the market to be as secure as BTC and offering an innovation so important the value proposition is too large to ignore. It is terribly naive to believe a "whale" could ignite such a movement.

if Blockstream is successful at convincing mining pools to freely merge mining from the beginning, the SC can function securely while cultivating the innovation.  once proven stable, if i were a whale, i'd go for the pump knowing i have a risk free put.
Quote
I don't think there is any predicament at all. If the side chain is objectively a better chain as determined by stakeholders, then it is simply time to move on. There is not necessarily any reason try to try to backport everything to the original chain. BTC will have fulfilled its useful purpose of giving birth to the improved scBTC/BTC2.

you know what, it turns out I agree with this 100% and this is another reality for which cypherdoc has no answer

lol.  what?  smooth just verified my point.  if a SC proves superior, everyone will indeed move over to it.  now, i for one, think that will be quite disruptive if we have to break out our cold storage wallet everytime a new innovation comes along forcing us to move to a new SC.  that will introduce all sorts of security and identity risks, not to mention volatility.

btw, you're the one who concluded that an appearance of scBTC on a SC would cause a price rise and be indicative of a successful innovation.

and you didn't answer my question; are you associated with Blockstream in any way?
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:18:17 AM
 #14907

if Blockstream is successful at convincing mining pools to freely merge mining from the beginning, the SC can function securely while cultivating the innovation.  once proven stable, if i were a whale, i'd go for the pump knowing i have a risk free put.

Are you confused  Huh

I'm tired of going in circles with you  Undecided

Remember your "new" base case is one where there is now a sidechain block subsidy with issuance of new assets. these are not secured by the proposed merged mining.

The other problem with this new twist to your "base case" is it brings a very concerning security risk. Do not fool yourself. Leaving the BTC main chain for a sidechain securing its own issued asset is NOT a "risk free put"

"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, 04:21:44 AM
 #14908

if Blockstream is successful at convincing mining pools to freely merge mining from the beginning, the SC can function securely while cultivating the innovation.  once proven stable, if i were a whale, i'd go for the pump knowing i have a risk free put.

Are you confused  Huh

I'm tired of going in circles with you  Undecided

Remember your "new" base case is one where there is now a sidechain block subsidy with issuance of new assets. these are not secured by the proposed merged mining.


do you even understand merge mining?  it can be used to secure a chain with or w/o the creation of new sidecoins.  look at Namecoin generation: MM'd by Bitcoin miners.  look at Dogecoin generation:  MM'd by LTC miners.

Quote

The other problem with this new twist to your "base case" is it brings a very concerning security risk. Do not fool yourself. Leaving the BTC main chain for a sidechain securing its own issued asset is NOT a "risk free put"


the risk free put is only for BTC converted to scBTC, which is precisely what the whale will be pumping thru the peg.  that's what matters.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:23:08 AM
 #14909

and you didn't answer my question; are you associated with Blockstream in any way?

No, sir.

"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
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:23:49 AM
 #14910


The other problem with this new twist to your "base case" is it brings a very concerning security risk. Do not fool yourself. Leaving the BTC main chain for a sidechain securing its own issued asset is NOT a "risk free put"

Logical, you trade risk for benefit.

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

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:27:46 AM
 #14911


The other problem with this new twist to your "base case" is it brings a very concerning security risk. Do not fool yourself. Leaving the BTC main chain for a sidechain securing its own issued asset is NOT a "risk free put"

Logical, you trade risk for benefit.

but it's not even a risk once you've determined the SC is stable and not susceptible to a frank bug .  and that's b/c of the 2 way peg, ie, a risk free put ripe for exploitation.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:32:08 AM
 #14912


The other problem with this new twist to your "base case" is it brings a very concerning security risk. Do not fool yourself. Leaving the BTC main chain for a sidechain securing its own issued asset is NOT a "risk free put"

Logical, you trade risk for benefit.

but it's not even a risk once you've determined the SC is stable and not susceptible to a frank bug .  and that's b/c of the 2 way peg, ie, a risk free put ripe for exploitation.
1:1 can also include fees and penalties.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
HeliKopterBen
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 622



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:34:45 AM
 #14913

Remember your "new" base case is one where there is now a sidechain block subsidy with issuance of new assets. these are not secured by the proposed merged mining. 

Yes they are.  These secondary tokens will be an additional reward when SC blocks are mined.  These tokens will reside on the same chain as the pegged assets.

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

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:34:50 AM
 #14914

if Blockstream is successful at convincing mining pools to freely merge mining from the beginning, the SC can function securely while cultivating the innovation.  once proven stable, if i were a whale, i'd go for the pump knowing i have a risk free put.

Are you confused  Huh

I'm tired of going in circles with you  Undecided

Remember your "new" base case is one where there is now a sidechain block subsidy with issuance of new assets. these are not secured by the proposed merged mining.

The other problem with this new twist to your "base case" is it brings a very concerning security risk. Do not fool yourself. Leaving the BTC main chain for a sidechain securing its own issued asset is NOT a "risk free put"


i see what you're saying now.  the SC has to mine the sidecoin or the scBTC, not both at the same time?

good point.  but didn't the paper say that multiple assets could be secured on the same SC at the same time?  wtf?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:36:00 AM
 #14915

Remember your "new" base case is one where there is now a sidechain block subsidy with issuance of new assets. these are not secured by the proposed merged mining. 

Yes they are.  These secondary tokens will be an additional reward when SC blocks are mined.  These tokens will reside on the same chain as the pegged assets.

how does any blockchain do this?
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:37:52 AM
 #14916

This thread is awesome now.... I love FUD based in misunderstandings.  It is way cooler than global economics and the interplay between gold and bitcoin.  Roll Eyes

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

Activity: 1624



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:38:06 AM
 #14917

now, i for one, think that will be quite disruptive if we have to break out our cold storage wallet everytime a new innovation comes along forcing us to move to a new SC.  that will introduce all sorts of security and identity risks, not to mention volatility.

This would only be the case if the old chain utterly fails or such failure is expected (with sufficient confidence to justify the inconvenience you describe), otherwise you have no real incentive to move, since out retain the option to exchange at your convenience.

In any case, I'm a little confused by all these scenarios. It seems maybe we should talk about something other than sidechains on this thread? It's getting a bit old.

Or maybe not. I've recently seen the claim that risks introduced by the apparent progress toward side chains actually being implemented are behind the BTC price weakness. I don't buy it, but interesting theory.

Quote
how does any blockchain do this?

You can certainly have two or more different types of coins on one chain, side chain or otherwise.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:44:04 AM
 #14918

if Blockstream is successful at convincing mining pools to freely merge mining from the beginning, the SC can function securely while cultivating the innovation.  once proven stable, if i were a whale, i'd go for the pump knowing i have a risk free put.

Are you confused  Huh

I'm tired of going in circles with you  Undecided

Remember your "new" base case is one where there is now a sidechain block subsidy with issuance of new assets. these are not secured by the proposed merged mining.

The other problem with this new twist to your "base case" is it brings a very concerning security risk. Do not fool yourself. Leaving the BTC main chain for a sidechain securing its own issued asset is NOT a "risk free put"


i see what you're saying now.  the SC has to mine the sidecoin or the scBTC, not both at the same time?

good point.  but didn't the paper say that multiple assets could be secured on the same SC at the same time?  wtf?

from the paper
Quote
Of course, sidechains are able to support their own assets, which they would be responsible for maintaining the scarcity of

I think you are right that merge-mining solves this in a way BUT only if the majority of miners decide to mine the coin.

They will not unless they have an incentive to do so.

"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, 04:44:22 AM
 #14919

Or maybe not. I've recently seen the claim that risks introduced by the apparent progress toward side chains actually being implemented are behind the BTC price weakness. I don't buy it, but interesting theory.

well, i said that the day the paper came out and the price tanked.  i believe it IS related as SC's introduce considerable uncertainty into Bitcoin as in allowing a for profit company composed of several of its core devs make a change in what was supposed to be an open source consensus based source code that shouldn't favor any specific interested group, major contributors or not.

Quote
Quote
how does any blockchain do this?

You can certainly have two or more different types of coins on one chain, side chain or otherwise.

well there you go.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
October 30, 2014, 04:48:14 AM
 #14920

They will not unless they have an incentive to do so.

you're failing to read my posts.

small miners struggling to mine BTC right now mainly at a loss would gladly switch to a SC that is producing cheap sidecoins in the hope of scooping up large #'s of sidecoin w/o competition while hoping for price appreciation if they see the same things you said would result in a price rise of scBTC, that being an increasing #scBTC's appearing on the SC (from the whale pump) along with a rise in the price of those same scBTC from speculative buying on an exchange AND an innovation.

remember, the SC is designed to be superior.  all i'm talking about is a natural fulfillment of that superiority.
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 ... 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!