Bitcoin Forum
November 20, 2017, 07:16:33 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 ... 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] 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2010263 times)
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:19:07 AM
 #17021

in this entire 200 pg discussion, my arguments have centered on the SPVproof mainly b/c that is Blockstreams main goal; to insert SPVproof into the source.  even they say federated servers are an interim insecure, centralized step.  i agree, i discount them as any real long term implementation of SC's for exactly those reasons.  the real meat of everything i've argued has and always will apply to SPVproof as it systematizes the SC concept and implies that a community consensus has been reached regarding these things.

stop pretending that i'd be upset at the federated model as you keep gloating and screaming about as above.  i could give a shit b/c it's not a threat and should NOT be a reason for us to scream in fear "OMG, give us SPVproof!"

So this:

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

Was some kind of delusion of yourself that never happened? Some fragment of your imagination created by your schyzophrenic mind? The "basis of your argument" is no more the "basis of your argument" because you cannot defend it anymore?

I'm very sorry but federated servers supported sidechains are ABSOLUTELY part of the future of BTC. Do you not remember those scary opaque, centralized sidechains you make nightmares about? You think they're gonna hand over control of their chain to miners? Hell no! They will most certainly use federations/oracles to verify their chain.  

Which leads me back to what I have tried to explain to you repeatedly. Most of the sidechains created by Blockstream for clients will be booted on top of federated model servers. They cannot afford the uncertainty of MM and its consequent insecurity.

SPVproof are effectively our best ally against any of these opaque, centralized/off-chain schemes. The market should absolutely demand algorithmically pegged sidechains. They are the most certain and secure way to prevent the inflation of Bitcoin through off-chain fractional reserve.

Of course they come with a whole lot of implications that should be considered. Others have done a great job at pointing these out, in a couple of posts at that, while you've been witch hunting for the last 200 pages without any valuable contribution.


"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
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511205393
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511205393

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511205393
Reply with quote  #2

1511205393
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:23:42 AM
 #17022

in this entire 200 pg discussion, my arguments have centered on the SPVproof mainly b/c that is Blockstreams main goal; to insert SPVproof into the source.  even they say federated servers are an interim insecure, centralized step.  i agree, i discount them as any real long term implementation of SC's for exactly those reasons.  the real meat of everything i've argued has and always will apply to SPVproof as it systematizes the SC concept and implies that a community consensus has been reached regarding these things.

stop pretending that i'd be upset at the federated model as you keep gloating and screaming about as above.  i could give a shit b/c it's not a threat and should NOT be a reason for us to scream in fear "OMG, give us SPVproof!"

So this:

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

Was some kind of delusion of yourself that never happened? The "basis of your argument" is no more the "basis of your argument" because you cannot defend it anymore?

I'm very sorry but federated servers supported sidechains are ABSOLUTELY part of the future of BTC. Do you not remember those scary opaque, centralized sidechains you make nightmares about? You think they're gonna hand over control of their chain to miners? Hell no! They will most certainly use federations/oracles to verify their chain.  

Which leads me back to what I have tried to explain to you repeatedly. Most of the sidechains created by Blockstream for clients will be booted on top of federated model servers. They cannot afford the uncertainty of MM and its consequent insecurity.

SPVproof are effectively our best ally against any of these opaque, centralized/off-chain schemes. The market should absolutely demand algorithmically pegged sidechains. They are the most certain and secure way to prevent the inflation of Bitcoin through off-chain fractional reserve.

Of course they come with a whole lot of implications that should be considered. Others have done a great job at pointing these out, in a couple of posts at that, while you've been witch hunting for the last 200 pages without any valuable contribution.



so your argument has morphed from SC's solely being implemented as utility chains, to maybe a NASDAQ stock SC being great, and now to all these Blockstream, IBM, Google created federated server SC's that we all should fear!  lol!

go right ahead and dream that fantasy b/c i don't fear them at all.  let 'em do it.

as long as they don't change source.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:26:22 AM
 #17023

you mean like this trick?

i'm an asshole.

Everytime you resort to ignoring my comments I smile knowing I've won that argument.

You are a sad, sad person cypher. I hope you get some help. This pathetic ego of yours is digging you a hole from where you'll have a hard time climbing out of.


"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
Jimmy_Zed
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:27:06 AM
 #17024

Gold will hold above 1000 USD for ever, and will hit 5 K before 2020. Maybe even 10 K. BTC will follow.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:28:18 AM
 #17025

you mean like this trick?

i'm an asshole.

Everytime you resort to ignoring my comments I smile knowing I've won that argument.

You are a sad, sad person cypher. I hope you get some help. This pathetic ego of yours is digging you a hole from where you'll have a hard time climbing out of.



i read them but i ignore answering them b/c they are usually a bunch of shill bullshit and not worth the time.  you never listen to my answers anyway and certainly never answer any of my questions.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:28:56 AM
 #17026

in this entire 200 pg discussion, my arguments have centered on the SPVproof mainly b/c that is Blockstreams main goal; to insert SPVproof into the source.  even they say federated servers are an interim insecure, centralized step.  i agree, i discount them as any real long term implementation of SC's for exactly those reasons.  the real meat of everything i've argued has and always will apply to SPVproof as it systematizes the SC concept and implies that a community consensus has been reached regarding these things.

stop pretending that i'd be upset at the federated model as you keep gloating and screaming about as above.  i could give a shit b/c it's not a threat and should NOT be a reason for us to scream in fear "OMG, give us SPVproof!"

So this:

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

Was some kind of delusion of yourself that never happened? The "basis of your argument" is no more the "basis of your argument" because you cannot defend it anymore?

I'm very sorry but federated servers supported sidechains are ABSOLUTELY part of the future of BTC. Do you not remember those scary opaque, centralized sidechains you make nightmares about? You think they're gonna hand over control of their chain to miners? Hell no! They will most certainly use federations/oracles to verify their chain.  

Which leads me back to what I have tried to explain to you repeatedly. Most of the sidechains created by Blockstream for clients will be booted on top of federated model servers. They cannot afford the uncertainty of MM and its consequent insecurity.

SPVproof are effectively our best ally against any of these opaque, centralized/off-chain schemes. The market should absolutely demand algorithmically pegged sidechains. They are the most certain and secure way to prevent the inflation of Bitcoin through off-chain fractional reserve.

Of course they come with a whole lot of implications that should be considered. Others have done a great job at pointing these out, in a couple of posts at that, while you've been witch hunting for the last 200 pages without any valuable contribution.



so your argument has morphed from SC's solely being implemented as utility chains, to maybe a NASDAQ stock SC being great, and now to all these Blockstream, IBM, Google created federated server SC's that we all should fear!  lol!

go right ahead and dream that fantasy b/c i don't fear them at all.  let 'em do it.

as long as they don't change source.

Should we really run a list of your argument beginning at the start of this discussion?

Do you even remember this one?

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

What you don't care about Bitcoin's Sound Money principles anymore  Angry How dare you !  Cry

"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: 2324


View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:29:15 AM
 #17027


Anyway p2sh and the multi-sig support and such is far more significant protocol level stuff than the modest proposals to better support sidechains.  If all that stuff doesn't turn Bitcoin into 'Funny Money' (note the capitalization appropriate for religious-tinted dogma) then I don't know what does.  That didn't kill Bitcoin.  I myself was actually concerned that it would, but not for phony-baloney economic reasons.



huh?  why would you think multi sig would be a threat?

I didn't say 'threat'.  I said 'funny' in the context of how money normally works.  Contrast it to 'sound'.

I had some concerns that the added complexity would produce attack modes that nobody anticipated.  So far it has not seemed to...unless one has some absurd idea that sidechains are a threat and some of these mechanisms might be used to facilitate federations and such.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:31:14 AM
 #17028


Anyway p2sh and the multi-sig support and such is far more significant protocol level stuff than the modest proposals to better support sidechains.  If all that stuff doesn't turn Bitcoin into 'Funny Money' (note the capitalization appropriate for religious-tinted dogma) then I don't know what does.  That didn't kill Bitcoin.  I myself was actually concerned that it would, but not for phony-baloney economic reasons.



huh?  why would you think multi sig would be a threat?

I didn't say 'threat'.  I said 'funny' in the context of how money normally works.  Contrast it to 'sound'.

I had some concerns that the added complexity would produce attack modes that nobody anticipated.  So far it has not seemed to...unless one has some absurd idea that sidechains are a threat and some of these mechanisms might be used to facilitate federations and such.



you don't think SC's are vulnerable to attack?  how does that help Bitcoin?  but also how does forcing a choice btwn corpGovCoin and PaypalCoin help any of us?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:33:33 AM
 #17029

in this entire 200 pg discussion, my arguments have centered on the SPVproof mainly b/c that is Blockstreams main goal; to insert SPVproof into the source.  even they say federated servers are an interim insecure, centralized step.  i agree, i discount them as any real long term implementation of SC's for exactly those reasons.  the real meat of everything i've argued has and always will apply to SPVproof as it systematizes the SC concept and implies that a community consensus has been reached regarding these things.

stop pretending that i'd be upset at the federated model as you keep gloating and screaming about as above.  i could give a shit b/c it's not a threat and should NOT be a reason for us to scream in fear "OMG, give us SPVproof!"

So this:

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

Was some kind of delusion of yourself that never happened? The "basis of your argument" is no more the "basis of your argument" because you cannot defend it anymore?

I'm very sorry but federated servers supported sidechains are ABSOLUTELY part of the future of BTC. Do you not remember those scary opaque, centralized sidechains you make nightmares about? You think they're gonna hand over control of their chain to miners? Hell no! They will most certainly use federations/oracles to verify their chain.  

Which leads me back to what I have tried to explain to you repeatedly. Most of the sidechains created by Blockstream for clients will be booted on top of federated model servers. They cannot afford the uncertainty of MM and its consequent insecurity.

SPVproof are effectively our best ally against any of these opaque, centralized/off-chain schemes. The market should absolutely demand algorithmically pegged sidechains. They are the most certain and secure way to prevent the inflation of Bitcoin through off-chain fractional reserve.

Of course they come with a whole lot of implications that should be considered. Others have done a great job at pointing these out, in a couple of posts at that, while you've been witch hunting for the last 200 pages without any valuable contribution.



so your argument has morphed from SC's solely being implemented as utility chains, to maybe a NASDAQ stock SC being great, and now to all these Blockstream, IBM, Google created federated server SC's that we all should fear!  lol!

go right ahead and dream that fantasy b/c i don't fear them at all.  let 'em do it.

as long as they don't change source.

Should we really run a list of your argument beginning at the start of this discussion?

Do you even remember this one?

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

What you don't care about Bitcoin's Sound Money principles anymore  Angry How dare you !  Cry


you can't stop ALL ppl from doing stupid shit.  plus, federated servers don't change the source code and force all of us to scramble to adjust our strategies based on a disruption of the mining equilibrium as well as user disincentives to further utilize Bitcoin as Sound Money as it will have been broken by an SPVproof.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:39:22 AM
 #17030

you mean like this trick?

i'm an asshole.

Everytime you resort to ignoring my comments I smile knowing I've won that argument.

You are a sad, sad person cypher. I hope you get some help. This pathetic ego of yours is digging you a hole from where you'll have a hard time climbing out of.



do you really think ppl actually listen to your bullshit ad hominems?  it just shows how young and immature you are.

they just laugh at you like i do.
Bagatell
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 722



View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:41:29 AM
 #17031

you mean like this trick?

i'm an asshole.

Everytime you resort to ignoring my comments I smile knowing I've won that argument.

You are a sad, sad person cypher. I hope you get some help. This pathetic ego of yours is digging you a hole from where you'll have a hard time climbing out of.



do you really think ppl actually listen to your bullshit ad hominems?  it just shows how young and immature you are.

they just laugh at you like i do.

Pots and kettles..
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372



View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:44:32 AM
 #17032


Everytime you resort to ignoring my comments I smile knowing I've won that argument.

It's a special kind of insolence, that can hold a belief that off block chain transactions and on blockchain transaction are the same, all the while claim superior knowledge, insight and understanding, while insulting those who attempt to point out otherwise.

I can only laugh when it boils down to a self proclaimed victory.

Cypher this girl has trolled you hard, even lamchop ran away.
brg444's too ignorant to know what he's talking about or he's lying

The intelligent posts speak for themselves, brg444 is only seeking to cover them in $#!±.

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

Activity: 1372



View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:49:06 AM
 #17033

p

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

What you don't care about Bitcoin's Sound Money principles anymore  Angry How dare you !  Cry


They're one and the same point, I don't understand your pitch?

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2324


View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:50:52 AM
 #17034

you mean like this trick?

i'm an asshole.

Everytime you resort to ignoring my comments I smile knowing I've won that argument.

You are a sad, sad person cypher. I hope you get some help. This pathetic ego of yours is digging you a hole from where you'll have a hard time climbing out of.

do you really think ppl actually listen to your bullshit ad hominems?  it just shows how young and immature you are.

they just laugh at you like i do.

Seems to my like he's pounding your balls flat with a mallet.  It's all kinds of funny.


brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:52:26 AM
 #17035


Everytime you resort to ignoring my comments I smile knowing I've won that argument.

It's a special kind of insolence, that can hold a belief that off block chain transactions and on blockchain transaction are the same, all the while claim superior knowledge, insight and understanding, while insulting those who attempt to point out otherwise.

I can only laugh when it boils down to a self proclaimed victory.

Cypher this girl has trolled you hard, even lamchop ran away.
brg444's too ignorant to know what he's talking about or he's lying

The intelligent posts speak for themselves, brg444 is only seeking to cover them in $#!±.

I'm still waiting for you to counter-argument my reply to your question.

"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 16, 2014, 07:53:03 AM
 #17036

you mean like this trick?

i'm an asshole.

Everytime you resort to ignoring my comments I smile knowing I've won that argument.

You are a sad, sad person cypher. I hope you get some help. This pathetic ego of yours is digging you a hole from where you'll have a hard time climbing out of.

do you really think ppl actually listen to your bullshit ad hominems?  it just shows how young and immature you are.

they just laugh at you like i do.

Seems to my like he's pounding your balls flat with a mallet.  It's all kinds of funny.



i'm just relieved to know that i really am arguing with a 24yo kid with a shitty job. Wink  (who still might be a Blockstream shill)
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 16, 2014, 07:55:42 AM
 #17037

p

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

What you don't care about Bitcoin's Sound Money principles anymore  Angry How dare you !  Cry


They're one and the same point, I don't understand your pitch?

My pitch?

My pitch is that cypherclown has been championing the danger of breaking the holy link between the BTC unit and its blockchain for the past 50 pages but now that he FINALLY realizes federated server sidechains creates this exact mechanism and that these are implementable natively he has yet again moved the goal post to another fallacious argument.


"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 16, 2014, 07:57:08 AM
 #17038

i'm just relieved to know that i really am arguing with a 24yo kid with a shitty job. Wink  (who still might be a Blockstream shill)

this 24 y/o has been making a mockery of you in your own thread. that should bring you no form of relief whatsoever


"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 16, 2014, 07:57:10 AM
 #17039

p

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

What you don't care about Bitcoin's Sound Money principles anymore  Angry How dare you !  Cry


They're one and the same point, I don't understand your pitch?

My pitch?

My pitch is that cypherclown has been championing the danger of breaking the holy link between the BTC unit and its blockchain for the past 50 pages but now that he FINALLY realizes federated server sidechains creates this exact mechanism and that these are implementable natively he has yet again moved the goal post to another fallacious argument.



wat?!  lol!

always misportraying my position to try and make yourself look good.  girl.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 16, 2014, 08:00:05 AM
 #17040

p

the basis of my argument is that the BTC unit cannot be separated from its blockchain (mainchain) w/o breaking Bitcoin as Money. imo, sidechains allow this and if you read their whitepaper, their core assumption is that they they can be separated.

What you don't care about Bitcoin's Sound Money principles anymore  Angry How dare you !  Cry


They're one and the same point, I don't understand your pitch?

My pitch?

My pitch is that cypherclown has been championing the danger of breaking the holy link between the BTC unit and its blockchain for the past 50 pages but now that he FINALLY realizes federated server sidechains creates this exact mechanism and that these are implementable natively he has yet again moved the goal post to another fallacious argument.



wat?!  lol!

always misportraying my position to try and make yourself look good.  girl.

girl  Huh where is that even coming from

by the way I'm standing right here on the corner waiting for you to formulate your next sidechains doomsday scenario. better make it a good one this time, the last few were a bit too shallow on paranoia  Undecided

"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 ... 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] 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 ... 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!