Bitcoin Forum
June 23, 2017, 03:35:40 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.14.2  [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 ... 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] 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 ... 1559 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1920780 times)
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 08:40:36 PM
 #15821

If you've been following the pre-sidechain discussions in this thread about money as a ledger and the inseparability of currency from the Blockchain, you'll recognize the irony in this CoinDesk article about lighter regulations for "non-financial use of blockchain technology":

http://www.coindesk.com/lawsky-non-financial-block-chain-projects-exempt-current-bitlicense/

However untrue it may be, I'm starting to see that the meme "blockchain technology has a bright future but the currency-aspect is dubious" is actually in our benefit.  I'm rolling with it  Cheesy.  People can accept this premise much easier and thereby recognize the importance of the Network and the Blockchain.  

Of course this meme is a Trojan horse.  Once one has accepted the importance of a decentralized, trustless, and unforgeable ledger, it's a much smaller step to realize that our most important records (and also the one's most tempting to alter) should be stored on that ledger.  These records are money itself. Bitcoin will force the world to re-learn what money is...  

Hi Peter great to have your input, the meme "blockchain technology has a bright future but the currency-aspect is dubious" was a great trojan, but if the proposed Blockstream "soft" fork is introduced it wont be a meme it'll be reality.

edit Spelling.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
1498232140
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498232140

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498232140
Reply with quote  #2

1498232140
Report to moderator
1498232140
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498232140

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498232140
Reply with quote  #2

1498232140
Report to moderator
1498232140
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498232140

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498232140
Reply with quote  #2

1498232140
Report to moderator
POLONIEX TRADING SIGNALS
+50% Profit and more via TELEGRAM
ALTCOINTRADER.CO
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1498232140
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498232140

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498232140
Reply with quote  #2

1498232140
Report to moderator
1498232140
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498232140

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498232140
Reply with quote  #2

1498232140
Report to moderator
1498232140
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498232140

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1498232140
Reply with quote  #2

1498232140
Report to moderator
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 08:42:00 PM
 #15822

Of course this meme is a Trojan horse.  Once one has accepted the importance of a decentralized, trustless, and unforgeable ledger, it's a much smaller step to realize that our most important records (and also the one's most tempting to alter) should be stored on that ledger.  These records are money itself. Bitcoin will force the world to re-learn what money is...  
The largest risk of that strategy is underestimating the intelligence of whomever the Trojan horse is supposed to fool.

this  Wink

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 08:42:15 PM
 #15823


who said there was?  it's only on the scBTC which is why they will moved to the ZC SC in the first place; to get anonymity.

Here is exmple how to implement ZC feature over BITCOIN block-chain

scBTC will not move to ZC.
1. We will create new SC over btc-blockchain
2. This new mixerSC can be mined by HMM  and (Timestamp server or hashing Oracle)

Now you can use 2x swaps.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with 2 people.
Or you can use 2x 2wp.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with other 2 x N people.
Or you can deposit 10 BTC and withdraw 10 x 1 BTC.
You can do few random transaction in mixerSC to mix them more using mixerZC protocol (it will use same alg. as ZC, but that is all. No other connection to ZC alt-chain).



this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself unlike brg444, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 05, 2014, 08:45:49 PM
 #15824

i'll just recycle the same arguments i gave above calmly.

when you say NO ONE WILL USE IT, that comes from only your perspective as a Bitcoin proponent who can't see past his nose.  you ignore the fact that i keep saying that if the altcoin is designed with a fixed supply goal just like Bitcoin, it can and will attract speculators who will buy the same features that Bitcoin has plus anonoymity, but at a much lower early adopter price.  yes, it will up to the altcointo attract mining.  but b/c anonymity is a desired feature and b/c it offers a chance at getting in on a ground floor price of say $0.006/altcoin as an example, attracting miners shouldn't be a problem b/c not only will miners be getting scZC block rewards, they will be getting scBTC and scZC tx fees.  and the scBTC will be protected by the 1:1 peg.

if this scenario not possible solely from a technical standpoint of SC's, then i need to know now, otherwise i believe i'm right.

See where this is going?

Speculators can already buy the same feature of Bitcoin plus anonymity : Monero/Darkcoin

But now with sidechains Bitcoin users have access to anonymity through scBTC on a 1:1 peg.

So essentially there exist no more distinguishable feature for any altcoin/sidecoin. The utility is now available using Bitcoin and not having to expose yourself to additional volatility and security risks. Therefore, the altcoin/sidecoin have no more argument to attract users. Speculation? Speculation on what exactly? Future use? There is no future use because there is now a better, safer option offering the same features.

You have to understand, as everyone here does, that the sidecoin booted on top of the sidechain is useless, offers no additional value for the users. The experiment of innovative utility failed to catch any traction with altcoins, even considering the "discount ground floor price". Contrarily to what you think, this experiment has no better chance on a sidechain. In fact, it is stripped of all its appeal by scBTC on 1:1 peg that can offer the SAME features without any tradeoff.  




"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
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 08:48:26 PM
 #15825

Cypherdoc, I would like to know your real intentions. Why are you trying to confuse people.

Are you invested in an alt-coin and now your investment is evaporating ?
Are you trolling ?

 Cheesy not Cypher doing the confusing its brg444 he pulls the discussion away form the issue Cypers being trolled hard.  Smiley

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 08:50:12 PM
 #15826

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

as Bitcoin stands, it makes anything other than money very difficult to implement.  i've talked about this for years here.  how many times have i said "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money"?

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 05, 2014, 08:50:49 PM
 #15827


I personally don't completely write off cypherdoc's assertions that he only cares about the health of Bitcoin


this is exactly where i'm coming from.  everybody here knows i already run my mouth even before this SC issue.  so in that sense, i'm behaving normally.  and b/c i have no conflict of interest, i don't care what ppl think of me.  i'm just trying to protect Bitcoin.

it's brg444 incessant counter posting of my every thought beginning the exact day of the whitepaper that is suspicious.

My persistence is because of my duty to counter misinformation and FUD based on willful ignorance of basic concepts and inability to comprehend sidechains.

You are trying to protect Bitcoin from shadows that do not exist. This is bordeline schizophrenia.

There might be some risks to Sidechains but you are so far off them you are doing the worst possible job playing the RISK position advocate. Maybe take a moment to sharpen your tools and come back with something more plausible because your are trying to poke holes in something using arguments sporting even bigger holes in them.

"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
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2184


View Profile
November 05, 2014, 08:51:12 PM
 #15828

...
so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

Sidechains will have to subsidize Bitcoin to a well functioning state else they cannot themselves function.  Indeed, there will probably be a competition among sidechains to subsidize Bitcoin (which has both pros and cons.)

This would hold as long as Bitcoin is seen as a credible and performant reserve currency, and driving it into reliance on and control by mainstream corporate infrastructure providers through excessive growth is the main thing which could cause Bitcoin to fail in this respect.

The magic here is that it gives Bitcoin a very credible means of survival even if native profitability fails.  This is key because there are some real question marks about how Bitcoin can achieve this on it's own given the sha256 capacity and distribution.


brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 05, 2014, 08:53:46 PM
 #15829

this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself unlike brg444, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

 Cheesy

You are great at selective reading cypher, really, really good.

"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
November 05, 2014, 08:57:18 PM
 #15830

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

as Bitcoin stands, it makes anything other than money very difficult to implement.  i've talked about this for years here.  how many times have i said "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money"?

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?

 Lips sealed

Sidechains is possibly the best thing to have ever happened to Bitcoin as far as its sound money property.

It allows us to improve its money function without disrupting its ledger.

Without sidechain you can absolutely expect more inflation/fractional reserve, more centralization, and more trust in central entities.

Your analysis of sidechains has been a failure all around.

"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
November 05, 2014, 08:59:17 PM
 #15831

i'll just recycle the same arguments i gave above calmly.

when you say NO ONE WILL USE IT, that comes from only your perspective as a Bitcoin proponent who can't see past his nose.  you ignore the fact that i keep saying that if the altcoin is designed with a fixed supply goal just like Bitcoin, it can and will attract speculators who will buy the same features that Bitcoin has plus anonoymity, but at a much lower early adopter price.  yes, it will up to the altcointo attract mining.  but b/c anonymity is a desired feature and b/c it offers a chance at getting in on a ground floor price of say $0.006/altcoin as an example, attracting miners shouldn't be a problem b/c not only will miners be getting scZC block rewards, they will be getting scBTC and scZC tx fees.  and the scBTC will be protected by the 1:1 peg.

if this scenario not possible solely from a technical standpoint of SC's, then i need to know now, otherwise i believe i'm right.

See where this is going?

Speculators can already buy the same feature of Bitcoin plus anonymity : Monero/Darkcoin

But now with sidechains Bitcoin users have access to anonymity through scBTC on a 1:1 peg.

So essentially there exist no more distinguishable feature for any altcoin/sidecoin. The utility is now available using Bitcoin and not having to expose yourself to additional volatility and security risks. Therefore, the altcoin/sidecoin have no more argument to attract users. Speculation? Speculation on what exactly? Future use? There is no future use because there is now a better, safer option offering the same features.

You have to understand, as everyone here does, that the sidecoin booted on top of the sidechain is useless, offers no additional value for the users. The experiment of innovative utility failed to catch any traction with altcoins, even considering the "discount ground floor price". Contrarily to what you think, this experiment has no better chance on a sidechain. In fact, it is stripped of all its appeal by scBTC on 1:1 peg that can offer the SAME features without any tradeoff.  





this is easily answered.

the scZC can "poach" its security from the MM and direct mining currently dedicated to Bitcoin.   this is enabled by the 2wp.  how does this happen?  b/c it has to happen to protect scBTC that seeks out the same anonymity features that  the ZC sidechain offers and that scZC already has.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 09:00:33 PM
 #15832

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

as Bitcoin stands, it makes anything other than money very difficult to implement.  i've talked about this for years here.  how many times have i said "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money"?

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?

 Lips sealed

Sidechains is possibly the best thing to have ever happened to Bitcoin as far as its sound money property.

It allows us to improve its money function without disrupting its ledger.

Without sidechain you can absolutely expect more inflation/fractional reserve, more centralization, and more trust in central entities.

Your analysis of sidechains has been a failure all around.

your insolent behavior and insults have greatly exceeded mine.  everyone needs to factor this in.
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 09:01:27 PM
 #15833


who said there was?  it's only on the scBTC which is why they will moved to the ZC SC in the first place; to get anonymity.

Here is exmple how to implement ZC feature over BITCOIN block-chain

scBTC will not move to ZC.
1. We will create new SC over btc-blockchain
2. This new mixerSC can be mined by HMM  and (Timestamp server or hashing Oracle)

Now you can use 2x swaps.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with 2 people.
Or you can use 2x 2wp.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with other 2 x N people.
Or you can deposit 10 BTC and withdraw 10 x 1 BTC.
You can do few random transaction in mixerSC to mix them more using mixerZC protocol (it will use same alg. as ZC, but that is all. No other connection to ZC alt-chain).



this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself unlike brg444, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

miners will MM Bitcoin for posterity and love of the Bitcoin community.  

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 09:02:36 PM
 #15834

brg444, at least take joy from the fact that i weep:

Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1148



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 09:07:44 PM
 #15835


who said there was?  it's only on the scBTC which is why they will moved to the ZC SC in the first place; to get anonymity.

Here is exmple how to implement ZC feature over BITCOIN block-chain

scBTC will not move to ZC.
1. We will create new SC over btc-blockchain
2. This new mixerSC can be mined by HMM  and (Timestamp server or hashing Oracle)

Now you can use 2x swaps.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with 2 people.
Or you can use 2x 2wp.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with other 2 x N people.
Or you can deposit 10 BTC and withdraw 10 x 1 BTC.
You can do few random transaction in mixerSC to mix them more using mixerZC protocol (it will use same alg. as ZC, but that is all. No other connection to ZC alt-chain).



this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

As I said endless times. :-)
I can imagine few MM sidechains (one of them is for testing new fork to bitcoin protocol ... if some MM chain will have 50-70% then we can do fork )

10-20 year:
Then there will be a lot of local sidechains doing local business fast => MC will be used to move wealth between regions.

I can imagine company will have its own sidechain (it will not be public SC, company do not want internal transactions to be public -> Federated Peg own server ). Companies will born and die. ->  wealth between companies will be transfered using MC.

I can imagine company can create companyShareBlockchain (backed by shares,  1:N exchange rate to BTC), b/c it is easy and safe to interact with world using block-chain techology.

Bank will operate inside insuranceSC for security reason.

People can create private SC.

Now divide 21M BTC into  1,000,000 SCs. And this SCs will timestamping thier blocks on MC.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 05, 2014, 09:09:19 PM
 #15836

To be clear I am pro secure trust free 1:1 Pegs that can be diploid within the existing feature set of the Bitcoin protocol, they are an essential innovation to the future of Bitcoin, It’s my view that this is in debate when in fact it isn’t.

Some considerations for MM SC:
Is it possible a MM SC with a 1:1 peg could provide a feature that attracts over 50% of transactions?
Possible, but doubtful. In any case, not a problem
Is it possible there will be over 2 (or 1000) other SC with a 1:1 peg competing for transaction fees?
Over 2? Maybe. 1000? Not a chance. Refer to my post about the properties and function of money. There are not 1000 ways you can improve money or its feature
Is it possible that the other 2 (or 1000) SC could represent approximately 30% of total transactions of all SC combined?
Possible, hardly a problem
Is it possible that if 80% of all transactions happened on SC’s then there would be approximately 20% of transactions happening on the Bitcoin Blockchain?
That looks like some sound calculations
Is it possible Miners will supplement their income by mining SC’s?  
It is not only possible but very likely. The problem with you logic is assuming they will stop mining Bitcoin complementary
Is it possible that the chain with the most fees would attract the most mining?  
It isn't black and white like that. Bitcoin has block subsidy. Sidechains don't so as long as miners can claim the BTC they mine 1:1 for scBTC they will continue mining
Is it possible that the chain that generated the most profit for miners would get the greatest hashing power?
Miners will MM EVERY chain that support any considerable value. It is trivial for them to do so
Is it possible that Bitcoin block rewards, supplement transaction fees? (Rhetorical question I hope)
Roll Eyes
Is it possible That the Bitcoin protocol reduces block rewards exponentially? (Rhetorical question I hope)
Roll Eyes
Is it possible that the chain with the heist profit margins for miners won’t be Bitcoin?  
Miners will MM EVERY chain that support any considerable value. It is trivial for them to do so. They will especially continue to support Bitcoin's chain until there is no more block subsidy
Is it possible that when Bitcoin’s block rewards reduce to less than the transaction fees generated by the Block reward, at least 51% of miners will still mine for profit? (not some ideological reason)  
It is actually logical to believe and quite likely that 100% of them continue to mine it for block subsidy since it is trivial to do so and naive to believe ALL transactions would disappear from this chain

"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
November 05, 2014, 09:11:21 PM
 #15837


Now divide 21M BTC into  1,000,000 SCs. And this SCs will timestamping thier blocks on MC.


that's sounds terrible.

congratulations, you've just succeeded in breaking the first, and probably the last chance we'll ever have at Sound Money, into 1,000,000 Berkshare Buck locations.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 09:15:40 PM
 #15838

brg444 is like the "shadow defender" i used to employ back when i coached my son's basketball team years ago (we won 2 straight league championships, btw  Wink)

when we went up against a team with a particularly prolific scorer, i would assign my best defender to shadow this guy, while the rest of the team played zone.  i told him "deny him the ball.  do whatever it takes.  i want you to front him, face him at all times, run thru all picks, push him, shove him, and don't even let him touch the ball.  if you do, it'll be 4 laps for you!" 

the last part is an exaggeration but you know what i mean.  i wonder who assigned brg444 to me...
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358



View Profile
November 05, 2014, 09:19:20 PM
 #15839

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

as Bitcoin stands, it makes anything other than money very difficult to implement.  i've talked about this for years here.  how many times have i said "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money"?

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?

I have a count of 3 Bitcoin proponents who see what you see, - sad reflection on comprehension skill. If Blockstreem gets to implement the protocol change to allow the extraction of value from the blockchain, we may get another chance at sound money in another 100 years, who knows, it could be longer as the sad truth is the majority cant see how this proposal destroys the one hope we have at sound money.   

The sad thing is those crazy evaluations people where projecting wont materialist, they'll be eaten by inflation in the SC that your tormenters are so eager to see happen.

There is still a chance they wake up. 
 


Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1153


View Profile
November 05, 2014, 09:19:24 PM
 #15840

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

The BTC block reward will be more than enough to protect the network for another 20-30 years.

If after that time most transaction fees shift to MM'ed sidecoins to the extent that there are not enough fees on the main chain to support the main chain then one of 2 things will happen, either: 1) Adjustments will be made to shift MM fees from sidecoins to the main chain (after all sidecoins need this too since their protection is based on MM'ing with the main chain) or 2) some side chain will become the main chain since essentially the main chain was abandoned. Note: this wouldn't hurt BTC since at most 21M BTC would transfer over the 1:1 peg.

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?

I only see bitcoin as Sound Money, it is the entire reason I support the project. If the concept is broken in the slightest I will abandon ship.

Sidechain's do nothing to effect the Sound Money aspect. Sidechains are sub-coins that only exist within the 21M supply limit and this is enforced with 1:1 pegging.

Altcoins (meaning new coins outside of the 21M limit) are the only real threat Bitcoin has, because they are the real threat that can inflate the money supply. 1 year ago I saw altcoin's as becoming a real problem and had second thoughts about the project because "anyone can create a coin".

However the past year has shown that network effects are working as intended, and I'm more comfortable with the altcoin threat not being a problem.

Once you understand that sidechains are just that "sub-coins to Bitcoins 21M controlled supply", then it is natural to see sidechains as part of the original Sound Money plan. They simply offer a mechanism to increase functionality without a hard fork. Period
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 ... 1559 »
  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!