Bitcoin Forum
November 24, 2017, 07:14:39 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 ... 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] 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2013931 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 09, 2014, 10:28:55 PM
 #16381

not only are all sorts of altcoin Sidescams going to bolt themselves onto the Bitcoin MC as shown by Truthcoin but as odalv has shown even Silk Road 4.0. How do you explain that to the Feds?  

I sincerely hope this was a joke. A very bad one at that.

again, no substance or imagination from you!:


Oh, I see.  Laying prostrate before the Feds and explaining everything that is remotely associated with Bitcoin is a sufficiently imaginative strategy then?

I'll set my mind to imagining how that strategy will end up...thinking...Got it: 'Poorly'.

Say, you didn't get hooked up with CoinValidation with the expectation that your stash would be perma-cleared or something did you?  I know we've been through this before, but I cannot shake the whiff of something stinky going down here.  Sorry to ask.



lol, you and brg444 desperately heaving loads of shit trying to get at least something to stick!!! Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

Join ICO Now Coinlancer is Disrupting the Freelance marketplace!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
November 09, 2014, 10:32:49 PM
 #16382


lol, you and brg444 desperately heaving loads of shit trying to get at least something to stick!!! Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy



Funny enough, I have been out destroying wetlands (accding to the fuckin' watermellons.)  I've still got my boots on in fact.  I can tell at a glance that we're looking at hydric soils here.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 09, 2014, 10:33:51 PM
 #16383

seriously brg444, you have go me laughing so hard right now at your ludicrousy my wife thinks something is wrong.

i am literally in tears:



brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 09, 2014, 10:45:19 PM
 #16384

why do we get this from Poelstra?

You might want to read the "purpose" section of this document. This is effectively a PSA against the danger of altcoins creation & adoption. It is essentially there to discourage people with ill-intented ideas from participating in such activities. I read this as a "PROCEED WITH CAUTION".

Andrew expresses his disappointement in the travesty that has become the creation of crypto-money. A vocation once fueled by motives like innovation and advancement of cryptography has turned into a gimmick full of scams, speculation and just to drive the point home : memes.

With the advent of sidechains Andrew and the team incapacitate altcoins by removing the #1 argument they are using to lure foolish investors into their scheme : innovation. Innovation is no more reserved to sidechains.

This notion is also why scams like your own's favorite Truthcoin are now at least half less likely to succeed. The reason it is so is because a clone that offers the same features/innovation while respecting the 1:1 peg will be created.

Provided with that risk free option, the market will inevitably favor the option that preserves the value of their investment by recognizing their stake in the primary ledger/mainchain. And where the market goes, the miners goes.

the reason it hasn't happened is b/c the only coin that has been MM'd on top of Bitcoin has been Namecoin out of public service.  so no, the guys conclusions are not wrong or invalidated.  btw, that's dooglus aka Chris Moore, a very talented Bitcoin early adopter who if you take the time to look is a MAJOR contributor #8 in reputation, right up there behind Pieter Wiullie, in total rankings to Bitcoin Stack Exchange and our understanding of what Bitcoin is, so fuck off:

I couldn't care less who he is, he was wrong in his assumption (reasonable at the time) that this was a threat to Bitcoin.

What you need to answer is why has Namecoin been the only altcoin that has been MM on top of Bitcoin? What incentives were missing for the miners to mine other coins?

What additional incentive is there now that we have the scenario of sidechains?


"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 09, 2014, 10:52:23 PM
 #16385

So is there a peg or not?
Is it just "correlated" now?

Let's assume the SC has some feature or other, faster, more private, whatever it is doesn't matter, we can pick whichever one is most successful and has the most liquidity at the moment to take advantage of the time premium and do this.

The feature, increased utility or existing adoption do not matter.

What you need to demonstrate is how your "pump" increases the demand for this feature. I believe they are NOT at all correlated

Because remember, the prices are pegged, therefore one can ride your "pump" on BTC or scBTC. You cannot pump the adoption of your scBTC through speculation and the feature is already existent and does not "improve"

"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 09, 2014, 10:57:07 PM
 #16386

why do we get this from Poelstra?

You might want to read the "purpose" section of this document. This is effectively a PSA against the danger of altcoins creation & adoption. It is essentially there to discourage people with ill-intented ideas from participating in such activities. I read this as a "PROCEED WITH CAUTION".

Andrew expresses his disappointement in the travesty that has become the creation of crypto-money. A vocation once fueled by motives like innovation and advancement of cryptography has turned into a gimmick full of scams, speculation and just to drive the point home : memes.

With the advent of sidechains Andrew and the team incapacitate altcoins by removing the #1 argument they are using to lure foolish investors into their scheme : innovation. Innovation is no more reserved to sidechains.

This notion is also why scams like your own's favorite Truthcoin are now at least half less likely to succeed. The reason it is so is because a clone that offers the same features/innovation while respecting the 1:1 peg will be created.

you're missing the point again.  TC is probably going to maintain the 1:1 peg.  if not, i would advise them to do so to fool ppl like you who don't understand what's going on so that you can still get fleeced by being tempted to trade 1scBTC for perhaps an inflationary 2TC.

Quote
Provided with that risk free option, the market will inevitably favor the option that preserves the value of their investment by recognizing their stake in the primary ledger/mainchain. And where the market goes, the miners goes.

the reason it hasn't happened is b/c the only coin that has been MM'd on top of Bitcoin has been Namecoin out of public service.  so no, the guys conclusions are not wrong or invalidated.  btw, that's dooglus aka Chris Moore, a very talented Bitcoin early adopter who if you take the time to look is a MAJOR contributor #8 in reputation, right up there behind Pieter Wiullie, in total rankings to Bitcoin Stack Exchange and our understanding of what Bitcoin is, so fuck off:

I couldn't care less who he is, he was wrong in his assumption (reasonable at the time) that this was a threat to Bitcoin.

so much disrespect for so many ahead of and more experienced than you.  you said this:

Well it's been almost 3 years now and there has been no sign of his theory being proven right.

you completely ignore that there is no sign of his being proven wrong either.  lol.

man, my belly hurts from laughing at you.  you've become absurd.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 09, 2014, 10:57:27 PM
 #16387

seriously brg444, you have go me laughing so hard right now at your ludicrousy my wife thinks something is wrong.

i am literally in tears:


I love that I have turned yourself into a troll unable to realize the foolishness of his position and piggybacking off others argument to support your desperate stance.

I can tell that your credibility has taken a shot since this all began. Maybe this is what is making you lose reason?  


"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 09, 2014, 11:03:01 PM
 #16388

seriously brg444, you have go me laughing so hard right now at your ludicrousy my wife thinks something is wrong.

i am literally in tears:


I love that I have turned yourself into a troll unable to realize the foolishness of his position and piggybacking off others argument to support your desperate stance.

I can tell that your credibility has taken a shot since this all began. Maybe this is what is making you lose reason?  



lol, your stubbornness is gonna help me push this to 1,000,000 views soon enough.

you will single handedly be held responsible for causing the SC concept to fail with all the negative publicity you're gonna create.
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile
November 09, 2014, 11:03:47 PM
 #16389

Let's troll more. :-)

The Earth is flat, instead of spherical.
The Earth is statical and the Sun revolves around.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 09, 2014, 11:16:09 PM
 #16390

you're missing the point again.  TC is probably going to maintain the 1:1 peg.  if not, i would advise them to do so to fool ppl like you who don't understand what's going on so that you can still get fleeced by being tempted to trade 1scBTC for perhaps an inflationary 2TC.

 Cheesy

Man it takes some audacity to come up with the stupidity you do on a regular basis. How exactly is the market fleeced into trading into an inflationary secondary sidechain when they already declined this proposition at first.

You do realise that...

1 BTC > 2 sc(1)BTC

is the same as

1 BTC > 1 sc(1)BTC> 2 sc(2)BTC

... is the same right?

If the user is concerned with the conservation of his value, what scenario do you suggest that would have him change his mind once on sc(1).

This is so preposterous. It really is tragic how clueless you are.

I couldn't care less who he is, he was wrong in his assumption (reasonable at the time) that this was a threat to Bitcoin.

so much disrespect for so many ahead of and more experienced than you.  you said this:

Well it's been almost 3 years now and there has been no sign of his theory being proven right.

you completely ignore that there is no sign of his being proven wrong either.  lol.

 Huh

But there absolutely is. Network effect has shown to be too important for such a thing to happen. The reason he is proven wrong is because the market, in almost 3 years, has shown no desire for diversification of currencies. No competitor has shown itself valuable enough that its feature would compete with Bitcoin's network effect.

"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 09, 2014, 11:18:41 PM
 #16391

you will single handedly be held responsible for causing the SC concept to fail with all the negative publicity you're gonna create.

 Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

that's what is so funny. sidechains are going to happen, they are gonna help bring Bitcoin to the next level, and there is nothing you can do about it  Grin

enjoy that crow for the rest of your life

"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 09, 2014, 11:28:44 PM
 #16392

you're missing the point again.  TC is probably going to maintain the 1:1 peg.  if not, i would advise them to do so to fool ppl like you who don't understand what's going on so that you can still get fleeced by being tempted to trade 1scBTC for perhaps an inflationary 2TC.


In fact YOU are the one missing the point. Point being that sidechains do not enable altcoins. In fact they considerably incapacitate their "raison d'être" by making their inflationary coins dispensable.

"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 09, 2014, 11:35:03 PM
 #16393

like you address any of the thousands of points i have made.   Roll Eyes 

there's going to be thousands of these sidecoins created, just like we've seen with TC.  for the first time ever, altcoins have an easy avenue to attract BTC thru the peg at no cost and apparently no risk.  this is a result of severing the link btwn BTC the currency and BTC the blockchain.  and they can sell that to ordinary users by saying "risk free put" or "easy way out" when referring to the 2wp.  after all, it's true, right? look at the Truthcoin ad below:



the advertising will be compelling enough to attract users like keystroke.  you'll see claims like "Truthcoin:  Sidechain Enabled", "The New Bitcoin", "Ethereum, Bitshares, CP all wrapped up into One", "The New Bitcoin 2.0".  it's all there:



SC's are disrupting the mining equilibrium by opening other channels for revenue.  once users like keystroke start using TC, speculation will guarantee some mining for sure just like altcoins attract mining today.  you can't say that won't happen.  you guys have been wrong before and you'll be wrong again.  unprofitable Bitcoin miners will defect to speculate on becoming early adopters of TC for block rewards (like when Bitcoin blocks were 50 BTC each) and to collect tx fees from scBTC and TC.  it won't matter if there is a 1:1 peg.  if TC becomes popular enough they could attract MM out of greed. if this plays out significantly over time, this is where the dooglus scenario would come in grinding down overall network security. there are going to be thousands/billions of these, if you believe Odalv.  they won't all fail.

this is the danger for Bitcoin; that it gets converted to an inflationary derivative violating its initial tenet of Sound Money all facilitated by SC's.

now your turn to answer a question.  why does Austin Hill want to allow gvts to start SC's for their currencies?  how is that not a problem?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 09, 2014, 11:41:12 PM
 #16394

do i have to remind you again?  these sidecoins are going to happen to SC's whether you like or not as well.  you will have to live with that crow for the rest of your life.  they are going to love the fact that they can suck BTC off MC so easily BTC--->scBTC--->2TC at no charge.  they can't believe you're letting them into the house!



brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 10, 2014, 12:02:38 AM
 #16395

what makes you say that?  why don't you ask keystroke why he would gladly do it?

I do not pretend to have the power of making insinuations out of keystroke's post and pretend to know his intentions the way you have been doing for the last couple of pages.

Of course it was expected of you to jump on a 10 word sentence and twist it to fit your argument.

no it's not.  NL just explained to you a decapitation attack which i think is a reasonable concern for a new risk created by SC's

The "decapitation" attack is very much theoretical and sound to me just like another scam scheme that can be avoided by proper due diligence of the user. I fail to see how this become a potential bitcoin-killer. There are only so many fools.

there's going to be thousands of these sidecoins created, just like we've seen with TC.  the advertising will be compelling enough to attract users like keystroke.  unprofitable miners will defect to speculate on becoming early adopters of TC for block rewards and to collect tx fees from scBTC and TC.

Your "unprofitable miners" theory is full of holes. As examplified by your inability to correctly answer this post

What you need to answer is why has Namecoin been the only altcoin that has been MM on top of Bitcoin? What incentives were missing for the miners to mine other coins?

What additional incentive is there now that we have the scenario of sidechains?

Also, remember that there is no block reward. You chose to fit your TC theory to a scenario where they use a 1:1 peg. You cannot go back on your words.

if TC becomes popular enough they could attract MM out of greed. this is where dooglus scenario would come in grinding down overall network security.  this is the danger for Bitcoin; that it gets converted to an inflationary derivative violating its initial tenet of Sound Money.

We have not seen it happen with altcoins. Considering most successful sidechains will be using BTC as a monetary unit (1:1 peg) then dooglus scenario does not apply.

Again, you fall into the same fallacy of attaching the altcoin menace to sidechain without proper arguments for why they enable them. I, on the other hand, have demonstrated why they don't. You also casually dismiss the BTC network effect as an irrelevant force when it is the only reason why dooglus scenario did not unfold like he predicted.


"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 10, 2014, 12:22:33 AM
 #16396

basically your problem comes down to this:  you think you can control speculation by using SC's.

i think you are very wrong on this.  altcoin devs are going to have a field day with SC's of all types:  corporations, banks, reward programs.  hell, even Austin Hill wants gvts to have one.  Jack Liu has all sorts of ideas too:

http://jackcliu.com/post/102166140017/bitcoin-backed-corporate-currencies-are-coming

my arguments have pidgeon holed you down to a scenario that HAS to play out for SC's to work as you envision:  2 utility chains for fast txs and anonynity with 100% MM and NO SPECULATIVE SC's.

that expectation of yours is ludicrous.  we already have TC and keystroke IRL examples of what's coming.  we have the whitepaper talking about Freicoin demurrage coin, section 5.2 Issued assets, pg 15 talks about complementary currencies, pg 16:

Subsidy.
A sidechain could also issue its own separate native currency as reward, effectively
forming an altcoin. However, these coins would have a free-floating value and as a result
would not solve the volatility and market fragmentation issues with altcoins.


these are all coming with SC's yet you persist with your delusions.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 10, 2014, 12:40:24 AM
 #16397

basically your problem comes down to this:  you think you can control speculation by using SC's.

i think you are very wrong on this.  altcoin devs are going to have a field day with SC's of all types:  corporations, banks, reward programs.  hell, even Austin Hill wants gvts to have one.  Jack Liu has all sorts of ideas too:

http://jackcliu.com/post/102166140017/bitcoin-backed-corporate-currencies-are-coming

my arguments have pidgeon holed you down to a scenario that HAS to play out for SC's to work as you envision:  2 utility chains for fast txs and anonynity with 100% MM and NO SPECULATIVE SC's.

that expectation of yours is ludicrous.  we already have TC and keystroke IRL examples of what's coming.  we have the whitepaper talking about Freicoin demurrage coin, section 5.2 Issued assets, pg 15 talks about complementary currencies, pg 16:

Subsidy.
A sidechain could also issue its own separate native currency as reward, effectively
forming an altcoin. However, these coins would have a free-floating value and as a result
would not solve the volatility and market fragmentation issues with altcoins.


these are all coming with SC's yet you persist with your delusions.

I don't think I can control it, I'm arguing the market will go for the safest, most risk-averse options.

I believe I am the one who has pidgeon holed the other by effectively confirming that all of your risk scenario are already possible through altcoins but have not materialized.

You continue to dodge my arguments because I don't believe you have an answer to them

You're afraid of altcoins, but altcoins already exist. You assume I think only non-speculative sidechains will be created when in fact I'm only arguing that now that it is possible to create them, altcoins are severely incapacitated and will not prevail in a market looking to preserve the value of its assets. The network effect will continue to work in BTC's favors. Idiots and fools might fall victim to more elaborated schemes through the use of sidechains but bad actors can only stay in business so long and eventually community supported/vetted alternatives suceed. Leaving the scammers in the dirt.

You're shallowness and blind ego is your downfall.

"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 10, 2014, 12:52:52 AM
 #16398

I am also done arguing with you.

You have conveniently avoided most of my posts and have responded to none of my questions.

Your "unprofitable miners" theory is full of holes. As examplified by your inability to correctly answer this post

What you need to answer is why has Namecoin been the only altcoin that has been MM on top of Bitcoin? What incentives were missing for the miners to mine other coins?

What additional incentive is there now that we have the scenario of sidechains?

Also, remember that there is no block reward. You chose to fit your TC theory to a scenario where they use a 1:1 peg. You cannot go back on your words.

if TC becomes popular enough they could attract MM out of greed. this is where dooglus scenario would come in grinding down overall network security.  this is the danger for Bitcoin; that it gets converted to an inflationary derivative violating its initial tenet of Sound Money.

We have not seen it happen with altcoins. Considering most successful sidechains will be using BTC as a monetary unit (1:1 peg) then dooglus scenario does not apply.

Again, you fall into the same fallacy of attaching the altcoin menace to sidechain without proper arguments for why they enable them. I, on the other hand, have demonstrated why they don't. You also casually dismiss the BTC network effect as an irrelevant force when it is the only reason why dooglus scenario did not unfold like he predicted.

Can you address that with sound, reasonable arguments?

"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 10, 2014, 01:24:25 AM
 #16399

like you address any of the thousands of points i have made.   Roll Eyes  

there's going to be thousands of these sidecoins created, just like we've seen with TC.  for the first time ever, altcoins have an easy avenue to attract BTC thru the peg at no cost and apparently no risk.  this is a result of severing the link btwn BTC the currency and BTC the blockchain.  and they can sell that to ordinary users who will gladly use them by saying "risk free put" or "easy way out" when referring to the 2wp.  after all, it's true, right? the peg works? look at the Truthcoin ad below:



the advertising will be compelling enough to attract users like keystroke.  you'll see claims like "Truthcoin:  Sidechain Enabled", "The New Bitcoin", "Ethereum, Bitshares, CP all wrapped up into One", "The New Bitcoin 2.0".  it's all there:



SC's are disrupting the mining equilibrium by opening other channels for revenue.  once users like keystroke start using TC, speculation will guarantee some mining for sure just like altcoins attract mining today.  you can't say that won't happen.  you guys have been wrong before and you'll be wrong again.  unprofitable Bitcoin miners will defect to speculate on becoming early adopters of TC for block rewards (like when Bitcoin blocks were 50 BTC each) and to collect tx fees from scBTC and TC.  it won't matter if there is a 1:1 peg.  if TC becomes popular enough they could attract MM out of greed. if this plays out significantly over time, this is where the dooglus scenario would come in grinding down overall network security. there are going to be thousands/billions of these, if you believe Odalv.  they won't all fail and they will be competition for Bitcoin.

this is the danger for Bitcoin; that it gets converted to an inflationary derivative violating its initial tenet of Sound Money all facilitated by SC's.

now your turn to answer a question.  why does Austin Hill want to allow gvts to start SC's for their currencies?  how is that not a problem?
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 10, 2014, 01:55:02 AM
 #16400

there's going to be thousands of these sidecoins created, just like we've seen with TC.  for the first time ever, altcoins have an easy avenue to attract BTC thru the peg at no cost and apparently no risk.

No no no. How can you still say this!? Altcoins can not claim the "risk free put" feature. Either they are altcoin or scBTC. Anyone will be able to verify if the peg is effectively 1:1, it doesn't matter what the coin promoter advertises.

Advertising that you can switch between BTC & TC freely is no indication that the peg is 1:1. It is merely a decentralized exchange process between an altcoin and BTC. This feature alone is not enough to fuel demand for a particular altcoins.

the advertising will be compelling enough to attract users like keystroke.  you'll see claims like "Truthcoin:  Sidechain Enabled", "The New Bitcoin", "Ethereum, Bitshares, CP all wrapped up into One", "The New Bitcoin 2.0".  it's all there:

So again your argument is a more elaborate scam scheme leveraging the "sidechain" brand and using an altcoin will lead to the demise of Bitcoin? You do realize such deceptive schemes can only work so much until the community of fools in general is better advised and has learn from their foolish mistake?

The honeybadger doesn't care about petty criminal schemes. The market, with time, punishes bad actors and create trusted communities around good ones. Good money drives out bad money. Your altscams are in no way a significant threat to Bitcoin. They only threaten idiots and greedy, ill-advised investors.

SCs are disrupting the mining equilibrium by opening other channels for revenue.  once users like keystroke start using TC, speculation will guarantee some mining for sure just like altcoins attract mining today.  you can't say that won't happen.  you guys have been wrong before and you'll be wrong again.  unprofitable Bitcoin miners will defect to speculate on becoming early adopters of TC for block rewards (like when Bitcoin blocks were 50 BTC each) and to collect tx fees from scBTC and TC.  it won't matter if there is a 1:1 peg.  if TC becomes popular enough they could attract MM out of greed. if this plays out significantly over time, this is where the dooglus scenario would come in grinding down overall network security. there are going to be thousands/billions of these, if you believe Odalv.  they won't all fail.

this is the danger for Bitcoin; that it gets converted to an inflationary derivative violating its initial tenet of Sound Money all facilitated by SC's.

Spectacularly wrong, again. Yes, speculation might guarantee SOME mining. Unfortunately SOME mining makes your stupid TC considerably less secure than the BTC blockchain. A situation already observable with conventional altcoins.

So now we have two reasons why the market should and will avoid your scamcoin :
1. Inherently less secure
2. Proposes a scammy altcoin as its monetary unit instead of using the safer 1:1 peg

Remember that no matter the feature your scamcoin will claim, there will be one created exactly the same BUT attracting more users because of its safer, more risk-averse 1:1 peg.

Unprofitable Bitcoin miners can defect to speculate on becoming early adopter of ALTCOIN for block rewards ALREADY. Sidechains do not enable this possibility nor do they come with better equipped altcoins.

If TC becomes popular enough = if ALTcoin becomes popular enough. History shows this is not likely to happen significantly enought to endanger Bitcoin's leading position. It does not matter how many are created, the majority of them will be as irrelevant and insignificant to BTC's value than any other alts.

It seems you are still unable to answer these questions with clear arguments void of distraction and fallacious assumptions :

What you need to answer is why has Namecoin been the only altcoin that has been MM on top of Bitcoin? What incentives were missing for the miners to mine other coins?

What additional incentive is there now that we have the scenario of sidechains?


"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
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 ... 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!