Bitcoin Forum
October 23, 2017, 07:14:01 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   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 ... 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] 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1997236 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 06:48:46 PM
 #15461

In that sense SC's can only add value to the main chain. If their features are useful then they add value, if they are not then they have no impact.

You can agree or disagree with that, but it's not economically naive.

that's not but what is: is failing to understanding that a feature that is more valuable will have an impact.

what if that value is laundering stolen coins? the arb opportunity will be 0ver 10% and there are about 1,000,000 stolen BTC out there.

what if some nation state: whats to use blockchain technology, and invests a failing fiat system or there gold reserves in a SC that is inflationary but comes with demurrage if saving in a private wallet and interest when held with a CB or some other feature that appeals to the 99% that is not Bitcoin. it is a great opportunity for Bitcoiners to arb initially until the arb gap is closed.  the goale here is to make Bitcoin attractive to Nation-State's note there isn't a Nation-State that should feel safe with bitcoin growing as it is. 

it is important to distinguish between bitcoin the asset and the blockchain as a programmable distributed trust infrastructure.  And we are interested in blockchain 2.0 and blockchain 2.0 using Bitcoin as a neutral transactional currency we believe is a great, offers great promise but I want to build a blockchain that could support a nation-state putting its national currency and phasing out paper dollars.



you got your quote mixed up.  that was rocks who said that.
1508786041
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508786041

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508786041
Reply with quote  #2

1508786041
Report to moderator
1508786041
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508786041

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508786041
Reply with quote  #2

1508786041
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508786041
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508786041

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508786041
Reply with quote  #2

1508786041
Report to moderator
1508786041
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508786041

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508786041
Reply with quote  #2

1508786041
Report to moderator
1508786041
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508786041

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508786041
Reply with quote  #2

1508786041
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 07:06:37 PM
 #15462


SC are an horrible hybrid, imagine creating an assent you want like a house and when you buy it your BTC get locked away. sure you get your BTC back when you destroy your house, but why exchange back if you want your house more then the BTC.  If SC are allowed on the prototypical level BTC won't be used as an exchange of value the SC will.

NewLiberty described it well; why let your competitor into the Core engine of your business?

imagine you're an entrepreneur with a start up.  your biz model has gone from $0 to $4 billion in value and your stock from $0 to $325 in just 6yrs.  your top competitor comes to you and says, "let me set up my biz within your walls here.  i'll stay out of the way over here in the corner.  i know you don't have time to test that top innovation you've been wanting to implement so let me do it instead.  don't mind the fact that i'll be attracting away from your customer base in the meantime and making some money while i'm at it, i'll return all of them in time along with a working implementation of your idea, i promise.

would you let him in?
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
November 03, 2014, 07:10:18 PM
 #15463

Considering the apparent serious implementation and backing behind the sidechain, the market starts using it and finds considerable value in it. price of BTC goes UP

why would price do this?

 Huh

People find value in the ability to make anonymous transactions. Buy BTC to use particular sidechain. Price of BTC goes up
ah, but in your world it's not possible for a sidescam to cause the price of BTC to go down?

No.

Is the price of BTC going down because of altscams? In fact, a successful sidescam might push BTC's value up since it would essentially increase the scarcity of the remaining coins.

wow, listen up everyone!  SC's, whether scam or not, can only make the price of BTC go up!  never down!

this is so blatantly economically naive that i am forced to give brg444 a pass; after all, he's a 24 yo kid with a self admitted shitty job.  

otoh, please explain to all of us in detail how SC's, real or scam, can only make the BTC price go up?

The way I read brg444's comments are; Since SC's only add functionality to the BTC main chain, that functionality can only be beneficial to the main chain and increase the main chain's value. If a SC was created who's functionality was not useful and does not add value, then that SC does nothing for the main chain but also does not have a negative effect. It just simply has no impact.

In that sense SC's can only add value to the main chain. If their features are useful then they add value, if they are not then they have no impact.

You can agree or disagree with that, but it's not economically naive.

It is economically naive to fail to consider that a feature that adds value in one economic condition, may subtract it in another, and that movement of money may follow this with a lag, sometimes a very significant lag due to practical constraints.
Further naivete would be in imaging that this is not happening all the time, and that this effect is commonly exploited.  "Economists" here are contemplating only static ideal cases, and implementing regulatory changes in spite of these concerns.  Changing the code is changing what ultimately regulates Bitcoin.

With this particular change, it is not so easy to undo it if it turns out to be a mistake.  Many Bitcoin may be destroyed.  People will make mistakes of trust.

There are many new risks with SC.  Lets address them rather than pretend that they don't exist.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 07:24:26 PM
 #15464

Considering the apparent serious implementation and backing behind the sidechain, the market starts using it and finds considerable value in it. price of BTC goes UP

why would price do this?

 Huh

People find value in the ability to make anonymous transactions. Buy BTC to use particular sidechain. Price of BTC goes up
ah, but in your world it's not possible for a sidescam to cause the price of BTC to go down?

No.

Is the price of BTC going down because of altscams? In fact, a successful sidescam might push BTC's value up since it would essentially increase the scarcity of the remaining coins.

wow, listen up everyone!  SC's, whether scam or not, can only make the price of BTC go up!  never down!

this is so blatantly economically naive that i am forced to give brg444 a pass; after all, he's a 24 yo kid with a self admitted shitty job.  

otoh, please explain to all of us in detail how SC's, real or scam, can only make the BTC price go up?

The way I read brg444's comments are; Since SC's only add functionality to the BTC main chain, that functionality can only be beneficial to the main chain and increase the main chain's value. If a SC was created who's functionality was not useful and does not add value, then that SC does nothing for the main chain but also does not have a negative effect. It just simply has no impact.

In that sense SC's can only add value to the main chain. If their features are useful then they add value, if they are not then they have no impact.

You can agree or disagree with that, but it's not economically naive.

It is economically naive to fail to consider that a feature that adds value in one economic condition, may subtract it in another, and that movement of money may follow this with a lag, sometimes a very significant lag due to practical constraints.
Further naivete would be in imaging that this is not happening all the time, and that this effect is commonly exploited.  "Economists" here are contemplating only static ideal cases, and implementing regulatory changes in spite of these concerns.  Changing the code is changing what ultimately regulates Bitcoin.

With this particular change, it is not so easy to undo it if it turns out to be a mistake.  Many Bitcoin may be destroyed.  People will make mistakes of trust.

There are many new risks with SC.  Lets address them rather than pretend that they don't exist.

yes, it's like the Fed when they print money.  you don't see the inflationary effects at first b/c you aren't the one who first touches the money.  only with time and in retrospect do you realize, oh shit, what just happened to the value of my money?  

i think we're already beginning to see this since the SC whitepaper. i had no idea Adrian-X was selling.  and neither did anyone else.  he's correctly anticipating, along with the market apparently, a decreased equilibrium in the BTC price if SC's get implemented. and yet a failure of Bitcoin has not yet been priced in.  you can argue the merit of this argument but we now have at least an example set of 1.  and we also have explained in a detailed, plausible, yet painfully contentious, and prolonged way how this dynamic might occur.  this doesn't mean, however, that the price can't stabilize from here or even start going back up.  but if Blockstream continues to advance their agenda, i would expect major selloffs at each step of the way which will not be fully balanced by those who hope that SC's don't become a reality.

i actually don't think the Blockstream core devs even realize what SC's will do economically.  they never did an economic study after all.  
chriswilmer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


View Profile WWW
November 03, 2014, 07:28:31 PM
 #15465

My two cents: you guys are getting way ahead of yourselves with the whole sidechains business. It's going to be at least a year or two before we have any idea what the effect of (actually useful) sidechains have on Bitcoin.

justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
November 03, 2014, 07:32:50 PM
 #15466

My two cents: you guys are getting way ahead of yourselves with the whole sidechains business. It's going to be at least a year or two before we have any idea what the effect of (actually useful) sidechains have on Bitcoin.
In the meantime, altcoins are dying even without sidechains, and by the time sidechains launch it might be the case that OT is being used for all the things use cases which has been proposed for sidechains.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 07:41:17 PM
 #15467

My two cents: you guys are getting way ahead of yourselves with the whole sidechains business. It's going to be at least a year or two before we have any idea what the effect of (actually useful) sidechains have on Bitcoin.



i don't care. 

i see SC's as the primary threat to Bitcoin's decentralized egalitarian approach to Sound Money.  i'd rather flush out all the gory details now.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 07:43:30 PM
 #15468

oil?  who the hell needs oil?  we only need the Fed!

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 07:57:10 PM
 #15469


i don't care.  

i see SC's as the primary threat to Bitcoin's decentralized egalitarian approach to Sound Money.  i'd rather flush out all the gory details now.

At its peak in S curve adoption 90% of Bitcoin will be centralized, like it or not.  How you chose to use it will be based on your decision.  But the general public will be using Coinbase/Circle/Bitpay wallet for everyday purchases and these purchases will be off chain and protected.  I see these SC in much of the same instance as these centralized wallets that will come about.  

well, i'm a little more idealistic/hopeful than that.  

Bitcoin has given people all around the world a wonderful opportunity.  let's seize it and protect it at the same time.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 07:58:29 PM
 #15470

Quote
In that sense SC's can only add value to the main chain. If their features are useful then they add value, if they are not then they have no impact.

You can agree or disagree with that, but it's not economically naive.

that's not but what is: is failing to understanding that a feature that is more valuable will have an impact.

what if that value is laundering stolen coins? the arb opportunity will be 0ver 10% and there are about 1,000,000 stolen BTC out there.

what if some nation state: whats to use blockchain technology, and invests a failing fiat system or there gold reserves in a SC that is inflationary but comes with demurrage if saving in a private wallet and interest when held with a CB or some other feature that appeals to the 99% that is not Bitcoin. it is a great opportunity for Bitcoiners to arb initially until the arb gap is closed.  the goale here is to make Bitcoin attractive to Nation-State's note there isn't a Nation-State that should feel safe with bitcoin growing as it is.  

Quote from:  Austin Hill - farther of SC  http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blockchain-2-0-let-a-thousand-chains-blossom/
it is important to distinguish between bitcoin the asset and the blockchain as a programmable distributed trust infrastructure.  And we are interested in blockchain 2.0 and blockchain 2.0 using Bitcoin as a neutral transactional currency we believe is a great, offers great promise but I want to build a blockchain that could support a nation-state putting its national currency and phasing out paper dollars.



you got your quote mixed up.  that was rocks who said that.

the quote is @ 44 minutes http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blockchain-2-0-let-a-thousand-chains-blossom/ is that not Austin Hill?
Quote
it is important to distinguish between bitcoin the asset and the blockchain as a programmable distributed trust infrastructure.  And we are interested in blockchain 2.0 and blockchain 2.0 using Bitcoin as a neutral transactional currency we believe is a great, offers great promise but I want to build a blockchain that could support a nation-state putting its national currency and phasing out paper dollars.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 07:59:34 PM
 #15471

In that sense SC's can only add value to the main chain. If their features are useful then they add value, if they are not then they have no impact.

You can agree or disagree with that, but it's not economically naive.

that's not but what is: is failing to understanding that a feature that is more valuable will have an impact.

what if that value is laundering stolen coins? the arb opportunity will be 0ver 10% and there are about 1,000,000 stolen BTC out there.

what if some nation state: whats to use blockchain technology, and invests a failing fiat system or there gold reserves in a SC that is inflationary but comes with demurrage if saving in a private wallet and interest when held with a CB or some other feature that appeals to the 99% that is not Bitcoin. it is a great opportunity for Bitcoiners to arb initially until the arb gap is closed.  the goale here is to make Bitcoin attractive to Nation-State's note there isn't a Nation-State that should feel safe with bitcoin growing as it is. 

it is important to distinguish between bitcoin the asset and the blockchain as a programmable distributed trust infrastructure.  And we are interested in blockchain 2.0 and blockchain 2.0 using Bitcoin as a neutral transactional currency we believe is a great, offers great promise but I want to build a blockchain that could support a nation-state putting its national currency and phasing out paper dollars.



you got your quote mixed up.  that was rocks who said that.

the quote is @ 44 minutes http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blockchain-2-0-let-a-thousand-chains-blossom/ is that not Austin Hill?
Quote
it is important to distinguish between bitcoin the asset and the blockchain as a programmable distributed trust infrastructure.  And we are interested in blockchain 2.0 and blockchain 2.0 using Bitcoin as a neutral transactional currency we believe is a great, offers great promise but I want to build a blockchain that could support a nation-state putting its national currency and phasing out paper dollars.


wrong one.  this is not me:

In that sense SC's can only add value to the main chain. If their features are useful then they add value, if they are not then they have no impact.

You can agree or disagree with that, but it's not economically naive.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 08:00:12 PM
 #15472


SC are an horrible hybrid, imagine creating an assent you want like a house and when you buy it your BTC get locked away. sure you get your BTC back when you destroy your house, but why exchange back if you want your house more then the BTC.  If SC are allowed on the prototypical level BTC won't be used as an exchange of value the SC will.

NewLiberty described it well; why let your competitor into the Core engine of your business?

imagine you're an entrepreneur with a start up.  your biz model has gone from $0 to $4 billion in value and your stock from $0 to $325 in just 6yrs.  your top competitor comes to you and says, "let me set up my biz within your walls here.  i'll stay out of the way over here in the corner.  i know you don't have time to test that top innovation you've been wanting to implement so let me do it instead.  don't mind the fact that i'll be attracting away from your customer base in the meantime and making some money while i'm at it, i'll return all of them in time along with a working implementation of your idea, i promise.

would you let him in?
thanks, that NewLiberty quote had an impact on my undertaking when looking at Bitcoin as a whole. its great.  

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 08:03:26 PM
 #15473


wrong one.  this is not me:


I'll update my post sorry I was on my phone.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 08:04:10 PM
 #15474


SC are an horrible hybrid, imagine creating an assent you want like a house and when you buy it your BTC get locked away. sure you get your BTC back when you destroy your house, but why exchange back if you want your house more then the BTC.  If SC are allowed on the prototypical level BTC won't be used as an exchange of value the SC will.

NewLiberty described it well; why let your competitor into the Core engine of your business?

imagine you're an entrepreneur with a start up.  your biz model has gone from $0 to $4 billion in value and your stock from $0 to $325 in just 6yrs.  your top competitor comes to you and says, "let me set up my biz within your walls here.  i'll stay out of the way over here in the corner.  i know you don't have time to test that top innovation you've been wanting to implement so let me do it instead.  don't mind the fact that i'll be attracting away from your customer base in the meantime and making some money while i'm at it, i'll return all of them in time along with a working implementation of your idea, i promise.

would you let him in?
thanks, that NewLiberty quote had an impact on my undertaking when looking at Bitcoin as a whole. its great.  

it's the truth.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 08:08:54 PM
 #15475

all you goldbugs will be happy to know that i now cry every night:

Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 08:17:13 PM
 #15476


i don't care. 

i see SC's as the primary threat to Bitcoin's decentralized egalitarian approach to Sound Money.  i'd rather flush out all the gory details now.

At its peak in S curve adoption 90% of Bitcoin will be centralized, like it or not.  How you chose to use it will be based on your decision.  But the general public will be using Coinbase/Circle/Bitpay wallet for everyday purchases and these purchases will be off chain and protected.  I see these SC in much of the same instance as these centralized wallets that will come about.  

if you have a small percentage lets say greater than 0.00001% of the blockchain today enlarge it by 2 orders of magnitude in value and you'll probably be one of those central entities protecting your investment.

its only those who sell out that worry.   

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 08:21:53 PM
 #15477

Regarding point 2. - how big did you think Bitcoin could scale? - after a SC has more fiat value assuming thirs fiat is interchangeable for real wealth not just zim$, at this time the side chain can scale to bigger than Bitcoin and via the arb. If we are thinking things like Bitcoin will have a market cap of gold in a couple of years, this value must come from an investment into Bitcoin.  With a SC token one could investing in the side chain and grow that overtime if one intended to invest over $4 billion there would be nothing left on the Bitcoin blockchain, and the SC would be the master chain.

How many do you need to repeat this.

symetric 2-way-peg (you are free to move in and out 1:1 conversion rate)

1. move BTC into SC and create more scBTC
2. sell scBTC -> extract fiat
3. buy more cheap BTC
4. goto 1


edit:
if SC has all bitcoins then SC is better coin.

as far as arbing goes, i agree that it will be done.  it's the consequences of that where i disagree with you.

once again, you're taking a chunk of highly valued, highly secure BTC from a blockchain ledger thats never been hacked and moving them over to an insecure blockchain ledger that has every potential of being hacked.  those scBTC will be less valued straight away.  as arbitrage begins to kick in, the equilibrium will result in a lower BTC price.

we've already seen evidence of this dynamic playing out in the market place; Adrian-X.  he's front running/selling b/c of this leeching of value that he and others perceive.  yes, i'll go out on a limb and say that is why the BTC price has been falling since the whitepaper.  see chart i posted above.  it's quite probable  dumping comes in stages with each incremental step that the Blockstream ppl are able to advance their for-profit ball.

We create 2-way-peg  using YOU as central authority.
This mean:
 - you will generate pKeys where people will send bitcoin (to lock into cypherSC)
 - then you will create cypherCertificates (let's say they are harder to counterfeit than USD -> some value added)
 - if I'll send you BTC then you will give me your cypherCertificates
 - if I'll bring you cypherCertificates  then you will give me BTC

I'm expecting that you are not a scammer. I'm trusting you b/c it is proven by MATH/ALGO you will do what you promised. Converting BTC <-> cypherCertificate 1:1

Can you explain how bitcoin will lose value ?
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


View Profile
November 03, 2014, 08:22:55 PM
 #15478


SC are an horrible hybrid, imagine creating an assent you want like a house and when you buy it your BTC get locked away. sure you get your BTC back when you destroy your house, but why exchange back if you want your house more then the BTC.  If SC are allowed on the prototypical level BTC won't be used as an exchange of value the SC will.

NewLiberty described it well; why let your competitor into the Core engine of your business?

imagine you're an entrepreneur with a start up.  your biz model has gone from $0 to $4 billion in value and your stock from $0 to $325 in just 6yrs.  your top competitor comes to you and says, "let me set up my biz within your walls here.  i'll stay out of the way over here in the corner.  i know you don't have time to test that top innovation you've been wanting to implement so let me do it instead.  don't mind the fact that i'll be attracting away from your customer base in the meantime and making some money while i'm at it, i'll return all of them in time along with a working implementation of your idea, i promise.

would you let him in?

The fact is that it's the Bitcoin Foundation camp which wants to change the direction of Bitcoin toward a centralized monolith which is diametrically opposed to what a lot of us early adopters saw as Bitcoin's potential promise.  They are trying to gently turn the ship to get it into the vortex with panicking the lemmings. 

The Sidechains proposal, to the extent that it needs to even steer Bitcoin at all, is very modest.  Certainly not on par with the suggestion of hard-forking Bitcoin to make transaction rates and resource usage grow without limit.

The fact that you guys are most comfortable thinking of Bitcoin a some sort of a for-profit biz which 'competition' and that sort of thing speaks volumes about why you are having such trouble with the concept of sidechains being simply another user of the Bitcoin solution.  This is especially droll since in doing so, sidechains is providing a great service to Bitcoin (by making it not need to destroy itself) as well as the universe of private individuals who really would benefit by options to get away from the corp/gov control of their monetary exchange mechanisms.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 08:33:05 PM
 #15479

Regarding point 2. - how big did you think Bitcoin could scale? - after a SC has more fiat value assuming thirs fiat is interchangeable for real wealth not just zim$, at this time the side chain can scale to bigger than Bitcoin and via the arb. If we are thinking things like Bitcoin will have a market cap of gold in a couple of years, this value must come from an investment into Bitcoin.  With a SC token one could investing in the side chain and grow that overtime if one intended to invest over $4 billion there would be nothing left on the Bitcoin blockchain, and the SC would be the master chain.

How many do you need to repeat this.

symetric 2-way-peg (you are free to move in and out 1:1 conversion rate)

1. move BTC into SC and create more scBTC
2. sell scBTC -> extract fiat
3. buy more cheap BTC
4. goto 1


edit:
if SC has all bitcoins then SC is better coin.

as far as arbing goes, i agree that it will be done.  it's the consequences of that where i disagree with you.

once again, you're taking a chunk of highly valued, highly secure BTC from a blockchain ledger thats never been hacked and moving them over to an insecure blockchain ledger that has every potential of being hacked.  those scBTC will be less valued straight away.  as arbitrage begins to kick in, the equilibrium will result in a lower BTC price.

we've already seen evidence of this dynamic playing out in the market place; Adrian-X.  he's front running/selling b/c of this leeching of value that he and others perceive.  yes, i'll go out on a limb and say that is why the BTC price has been falling since the whitepaper.  see chart i posted above.  it's quite probable  dumping comes in stages with each incremental step that the Blockstream ppl are able to advance their for-profit ball.

We create 2-way-peg  using YOU as central authority.
This mean:
 - you will generate pKeys where people will send bitcoin (to lock into cypherSC)
 - then you will create cypherCertificates (let's say they are harder to counterfeit than USD -> some value added)
 - if I'll send you BTC then you will give me your cypherCertificates
 - if I'll bring you cypherCertificates  then you will give me BTC

I'm expecting that you are not a scammer. I'm trusting you b/c it is proven by MATH/ALGO you will do what you promised. Converting BTC <-> cypherCertificate 1:1

Can you explain how bitcoin will lose value ?

b/c trusting me requires first that you know me.  your trust then is based on my past actions which you can assess.  only then do you allow me to set up a certificate server.  much like WOT where ppl sign off on each other credibility using their private keys but only after assessment and identity has been established.  you trust me to set up a server and install federated software that won't steal your keys.  these servers reside in centralized datacenters that you've paid with your IRL identity.  these servers won't ever be totally independent b/c they need to be maintained by someone with a real identity.

so increased centralization meaning less trust and lower value.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
November 03, 2014, 08:35:40 PM
 #15480



yes, it's like the Fed when they print money.  you don't see the inflationary effects at first b/c you aren't the one who first touches the money.  only with time and in retrospect do you realize, oh shit, what just happened to the value of my money?  

i think we're already beginning to see this since the SC whitepaper. i had no idea Adrian-X was selling.  and neither did anyone else.  he's correctly anticipating, along with the market apparently, a decreased equilibrium in the BTC price if SC's get implemented. and yet a failure of Bitcoin has not yet been priced in.  you can argue the merit of this argument but we now have at least an example set of 1.  and we also have explained in a detailed, plausible, yet painfully contentious, and prolonged way how this dynamic might occur.  this doesn't mean, however, that the price can't stabilize from here or even start going back up.  but if Blockstream continues to advance their agenda, i would expect major selloffs at each step of the way which will not be fully balanced by those who hope that SC's don't become a reality.

i actually don't think the Blockstream core devs even realize what SC's will do economically.  they never did an economic study after all.  

I dough I'll have any impact, more over the bigger impact is the accumulation flow has switched, it is now in reverse, I'm not picking up cheep coins anymore, as I dont see them as cheep at the moment.

In my little investment brain - , note I dont have a good track record of investing bitcoins - selling a huge stake for gold at golds top, but being true to my understanding the primary reason i felt confident with bitcoin in the first place, isn't reflected in the majority of vocal bitcoiners opinions.

the real trigger is all this regulation, i feel it's holding back illicit uses for bitcoin, and there will be a net sell-off through the first anonymous outlet, most likely enabled through a SC's (while the risk SC provide will take time to manifest we may still see growth spurts in Bitcoin,)

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 ... 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!