Bitcoin Forum
October 17, 2017, 05:10:20 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 ... 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] 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1995050 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 20, 2014, 01:55:02 AM
 #17621

This is where economics in the economy come in to play risks and reward, at the moment federation/oracles/OT all are owned by the entities that want you to trust them with your Bitcoin, what happens there after is business. (And federation/oracles/OT are magnitudes more trusted than anything before) What entities do to build trust or create value, if it has any impact on miners it is catered for in the existing incentive structure.
There's something important to be said here about OT (and other off-chain systems).

OT is a contract processing system that operates on liabilities.

You'll never be able to transact with Bitcoins anywhere except on the Bitcoin blockchain, in OT or in any other system.

If we want Bitcoin to succeed as money, then we need as many Bitcoin transactions to happen as possible.

yes, and they should happen on MC to maximize miner tx revenue.

but they cant  Undecided

Gavin will get his proposals thru.

https://bitcoinfoundation.org/2014/11/everybody-pivots/
1508260220
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508260220

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508260220
Reply with quote  #2

1508260220
Report to moderator
1508260220
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508260220

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508260220
Reply with quote  #2

1508260220
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508260220
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508260220

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508260220
Reply with quote  #2

1508260220
Report to moderator
1508260220
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508260220

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508260220
Reply with quote  #2

1508260220
Report to moderator
1508260220
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508260220

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508260220
Reply with quote  #2

1508260220
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:05:52 AM
 #17622

if memory serves I read somewhere that the cap on the block size was introduced due to DDoS attacks against the network using very large blocks, is it correct?
Due to the potential for such attacks.

I like to think that, like myself, sidechains at least occurred to Satoshi early on in his ruminations about scaling modes.  Likely we'll never know though.  For my part I imagined the name 'child chains', but whatever.  Same diff.  They are just a logical sub-set of the Bitcoin solution one way or another.

I actually had a similar thought experiment the other day.

Imagine that Satoshi had built sidechains out the box with Bitcoin.

Would we be worse off

or significantly ahead?

I think sidechains are the most natural extension possible to Bitcoin if they can execute what is in the white paper. Of course that remains to be seen but considering just about all of silicon valley invested in their 20 million seed round. My bet is they will.



one of my other memes is that "most investors in cryptocurrency will lose money".  and that includes Silicon Valley investors.

that's b/c most investors/geeks, imo, don't understand what Bitcoin is and what its ultimate destiny will be.  and that is the fulfillment of Sound Money as envisioned by the goldbugs and cypherpunks.  there are too many common ppl in the world who are depending on us to provide a way to "exit" the fiat system.  what resonates with most non US ppl round the world is the fixed supply nature of Bitcoin.  they don't care about stocks, bonds, insurance, smart contracts, etc which SC's wants to provide.  all they care about is Sound Money that is liquid and acts like a SOV.  even Americans hold few stocks and bonds these days as none of them are compelling at these inflated prices and dangerous levels.  everyone knows it's a Ponzi Scheme enable by the #1 problem of the day:  fiat money printing ala central banks.  Bitcoin is a poison dart aimed directly at the heart of this problem and i don't think humanity is going to let this chance go by.  this is why the Bitcoin community needs to maintain a focus on what got us to where we are:  the SOV sound money function.

we want to force the outsiders to "buy in" to BTC on MC.  this is what will take us to The Moon.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
November 20, 2014, 02:07:01 AM
 #17623

Quote
Coloring Bitcoins. The systems I’ve looked at don’t route bids/offers over the Bitcoin system so any matching will be done external to the platform. So it seems to me that “decentralized exchanges” on this model will have to require those posting bids or offers to demonstrate that they have placed the corresponding colored coins/Bitcoins in escrow with one or more acceptable third parties.

http://gendal.wordpress.com/2014/06/10/a-decentralized-securities-trading-and-settlement-system-is-being-built-hidden-in-plain-sight/

How true is this?
It's possible to build decentralized order books.

Order matching does not require escrow with a third party.

Orders can be executed with atomic swaps on the blockchain.

At the same time, it's possible to use semi- or fully trusted third parties for any or all of those functions.

I expect both models to see real world usage.

But this doesn't really address the original statement you made. Originally you did not specify that you were talking about certain ways markets could be built that utilized colored coins.

Without that clarification, your statement about sidechains being "more decentralized" is false.

Colored coin tokens are stored on the main chain and enjoy the full security model of Bitcoin. The same can not be said for tokens created on a sidechain.
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:11:20 AM
 #17624

hey, looky here.  thanks to brg444, i've catapulted past D&T to #2 poster here on the forum.  thanks brg444!  take me to #1!



Don't worry I will catch up Cypher.  Grin Grin Grin

███████████████████████████████████████

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████æ   
  ,████²█████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       Ñ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████Ñ         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ²██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                   ²²²                 
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.        SMOOTHIE'S HEALTH AND FITNESS JOURNAL          History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:14:58 AM
 #17625

hey, looky here.  thanks to brg444, i've catapulted past D&T to #2 poster here on the forum.  thanks brg444!  take me to #1!



Don't worry I will catch up Cypher.  Grin Grin Grin

not while i have my shadow assassin.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:29:28 AM
 #17626

Quote
Coloring Bitcoins. The systems I’ve looked at don’t route bids/offers over the Bitcoin system so any matching will be done external to the platform. So it seems to me that “decentralized exchanges” on this model will have to require those posting bids or offers to demonstrate that they have placed the corresponding colored coins/Bitcoins in escrow with one or more acceptable third parties.

http://gendal.wordpress.com/2014/06/10/a-decentralized-securities-trading-and-settlement-system-is-being-built-hidden-in-plain-sight/

How true is this?
It's possible to build decentralized order books.

Order matching does not require escrow with a third party.

Orders can be executed with atomic swaps on the blockchain.

At the same time, it's possible to use semi- or fully trusted third parties for any or all of those functions.

I expect both models to see real world usage.

But this doesn't really address the original statement you made. Originally you did not specify that you were talking about certain ways markets could be built that utilized colored coins.

Without that clarification, your statement about sidechains being "more decentralized" is false.

Colored coin tokens are stored on the main chain and enjoy the full security model of Bitcoin. The same can not be said for tokens created on a sidechain.

My original statement refers to trust. Decentralized trust. Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?

"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
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
November 20, 2014, 02:33:34 AM
 #17627

Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?
That depends on how you define "another layer of trust".

Colored coins are inherently used for tracking things outside the blockchain - that by definition means representing obligations a.k.a counterparty risk. Any technique that tracks obligations outside the blockchain will be tracking counterparty risk.

But none of that has nothing to do with the underlying technology used to create the token. Colored coins as tokens are no different from other bitcoins. A colored coin token doesn't all of a sudden become less trustworthy than a non-colored Bitcoin.
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:39:30 AM
 #17628

Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?
That depends on how you define "another layer of trust".

Colored coins are inherently used for tracking things outside the blockchain - that by definition means representing obligations a.k.a counterparty risk. Any technique that tracks obligations outside the blockchain will be tracking counterparty risk.

But none of that has nothing to do with the underlying technology used to create the token. Colored coins as tokens are no different from other bitcoins. A colored coin token doesn't all of a sudden become less trustworthy than a non-colored Bitcoin.

How much bitoshis will it take to create a coloured token. Is there a minimum? Will it burn them as bits forever?

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:40:28 AM
 #17629

Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?
That depends on how you define "another layer of trust".

Colored coins are inherently used for tracking things outside the blockchain - that by definition means representing obligations a.k.a counterparty risk. Any technique that tracks obligations outside the blockchain will be tracking counterparty risk.

But none of that has nothing to do with the underlying technology used to create the token. Colored coins as tokens are no different from other bitcoins. A colored coin token doesn't all of a sudden become less trustworthy than a non-colored Bitcoin.

I define "another layer of trust" as trusting anything else but the Bitcoin network.

In that regard colored coins are less decentralized than 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
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:43:11 AM
 #17630

Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?
That depends on how you define "another layer of trust".

Colored coins are inherently used for tracking things outside the blockchain - that by definition means representing obligations a.k.a counterparty risk. Any technique that tracks obligations outside the blockchain will be tracking counterparty risk.

But none of that has nothing to do with the underlying technology used to create the token. Colored coins as tokens are no different from other bitcoins. A colored coin token doesn't all of a sudden become less trustworthy than a non-colored Bitcoin.

I define "another layer of trust" as trusting anything else but the Bitcoin network.

In that regard colored coins are less decentralized than sidechains.

I don't get sidechains. Will they just be alt-coins then?

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:44:54 AM
 #17631

...
I like to think that, like myself, sidechains at least occurred to Satoshi early on in his ruminations about scaling modes.  Likely we'll never know though.  For my part I imagined the name 'child chains', but whatever.  Same diff.  They are just a logical sub-set of the Bitcoin solution one way or another.

I actually had a similar thought experiment the other day.

Imagine that Satoshi had built sidechains out the box with Bitcoin.

Would we be worse off

or significantly ahead?

I think sidechains are the most natural extension possible to Bitcoin if they can execute what is in the white paper. Of course that remains to be seen but considering just about all of silicon valley invested in their 20 million seed round. My bet is they will.


Satoshi had some ideas about pruning.  Apparent that went nowhere, but it seems possible via some hieroglyphics by some of the more clever of the core devs that sidechains might have been evident as to be a better solution some time ago.

Satoshi also had a seemingly weird artifact where even with a small payment, the whole wad went went into the system and change came back out.  I remember back when I started paying attention some of the main active people at the time were kind of scratching their heads about what he might have been thinking then basically shrugged and said 'who knows?'  The thought occurred to me that between this mechanism and pruning there was potentially quite a bit of room for optimization to deal with some of the scaling issues (but not all.)  I actually like the whole idea of sidechains better anyway due to the advantages of flexibility and diversity in addition to their providing a much better scaling potential.


justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
November 20, 2014, 02:47:20 AM
 #17632

I define "another layer of trust" as trusting anything else but the Bitcoin network.

In that regard colored coins are less decentralized than sidechains.
Now you're just making up inconsistent, dishonest bullshit.
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:52:04 AM
 #17633

...
I like to think that, like myself, sidechains at least occurred to Satoshi early on in his ruminations about scaling modes.  Likely we'll never know though.  For my part I imagined the name 'child chains', but whatever.  Same diff.  They are just a logical sub-set of the Bitcoin solution one way or another.

I actually had a similar thought experiment the other day.

Imagine that Satoshi had built sidechains out the box with Bitcoin.

Would we be worse off

or significantly ahead?

I think sidechains are the most natural extension possible to Bitcoin if they can execute what is in the white paper. Of course that remains to be seen but considering just about all of silicon valley invested in their 20 million seed round. My bet is they will.


Satoshi had some ideas about pruning.  Apparent that went nowhere, but it seems possible via some hieroglyphics by some of the more clever of the core devs that sidechains might have been evident as to be a better solution some time ago.

Satoshi also had a seemingly weird artifact where even with a small payment, the whole wad went went into the system and change came back out.  I remember back when I started paying attention some of the main active people at the time were kind of scratching their heads about what he might have been thinking then basically shrugged and said 'who knows?'  The thought occurred to me that between this mechanism and pruning there was potentially quite a bit of room for optimization to deal with some of the scaling issues (but not all.)  I actually like the whole idea of sidechains better anyway due to the advantages of flexibility and diversity in addition to their providing a much better scaling potential.



Will there be a sidechain for micropayments? For example? Are there any proposals?

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:55:59 AM
 #17634

Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?
That depends on how you define "another layer of trust".

Colored coins are inherently used for tracking things outside the blockchain - that by definition means representing obligations a.k.a counterparty risk. Any technique that tracks obligations outside the blockchain will be tracking counterparty risk.

But none of that has nothing to do with the underlying technology used to create the token. Colored coins as tokens are no different from other bitcoins. A colored coin token doesn't all of a sudden become less trustworthy than a non-colored Bitcoin.

I define "another layer of trust" as trusting anything else but the Bitcoin network.

In that regard colored coins are less decentralized than sidechains.

I don't get sidechains. Will they just be alt-coins then?

Sidechains have two models. They are effectively an alt-chain that is supported by the BTC unit on a 1:1 peg.*

In the proposed concept, they use a SPV client to settle between chains. To secure the chain they would use merged-mining which potentially lets them access 100% of Bitcoin's mining power. They are not quite as secure though as they are not accepted by all nodes.

They can also use a less-decentralized model that rely on Oracles/Federations/Voting Pools.

*the unit is technically not the actual BTC but an image of it locked in a multi-sig type of way. the peg could also be a deterministic function but that defeats the purpose and effectively creates an altcoin.

"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
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 02:59:07 AM
 #17635

Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?
That depends on how you define "another layer of trust".

Colored coins are inherently used for tracking things outside the blockchain - that by definition means representing obligations a.k.a counterparty risk. Any technique that tracks obligations outside the blockchain will be tracking counterparty risk.

But none of that has nothing to do with the underlying technology used to create the token. Colored coins as tokens are no different from other bitcoins. A colored coin token doesn't all of a sudden become less trustworthy than a non-colored Bitcoin.

I define "another layer of trust" as trusting anything else but the Bitcoin network.

In that regard colored coins are less decentralized than sidechains.

I don't get sidechains. Will they just be alt-coins then?

Sidechains have two models. They are effectively an alt-chain that is supported by the BTC unit on a 1:1 peg.*

In the proposed concept, they use a SPV client to settle between chains. To secure the chain they would use merged-mining which potentially lets them access 100% of Bitcoin's mining power. They are not quite as secure though as they are not accepted by all nodes.

They can also use a less-decentralized model that rely on Oracles/Federations/Voting Pools.

*the unit is technically not the actual BTC but an image of it locked in a multi-sig type of way. the peg could also be a deterministic function but that defeats the purpose and effectively creates an altcoin.


Ah. Gracias Senior:) But what's the point?

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 20, 2014, 03:01:25 AM
 #17636

Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?
That depends on how you define "another layer of trust".

Colored coins are inherently used for tracking things outside the blockchain - that by definition means representing obligations a.k.a counterparty risk. Any technique that tracks obligations outside the blockchain will be tracking counterparty risk.

But none of that has nothing to do with the underlying technology used to create the token. Colored coins as tokens are no different from other bitcoins. A colored coin token doesn't all of a sudden become less trustworthy than a non-colored Bitcoin.

I define "another layer of trust" as trusting anything else but the Bitcoin network.

In that regard colored coins are less decentralized than sidechains.

I don't get sidechains. Will they just be alt-coins then?

Sidechains have two models. They are effectively an alt-chain that is supported by the BTC unit on a 1:1 peg.*

In the proposed concept, they use a SPV client to settle between chains. To secure the chain they would use merged-mining which potentially lets them access 100% of Bitcoin's mining power. They are not quite as secure though as they are not accepted by all nodes.

They can also use a less-decentralized model that rely on Oracles/Federations/Voting Pools.

*the unit is technically not the actual BTC but an image of it locked in a multi-sig type of way. the peg could also be a deterministic function but that defeats the purpose and effectively creates an altcoin.


Ah. Gracias Senior:) But what's the point?

there is no point if you believe, as i do, that Bitcoin is destined to become a global reserve currency.
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 03:03:56 AM
 #17637

Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?
That depends on how you define "another layer of trust".

Colored coins are inherently used for tracking things outside the blockchain - that by definition means representing obligations a.k.a counterparty risk. Any technique that tracks obligations outside the blockchain will be tracking counterparty risk.

But none of that has nothing to do with the underlying technology used to create the token. Colored coins as tokens are no different from other bitcoins. A colored coin token doesn't all of a sudden become less trustworthy than a non-colored Bitcoin.

I define "another layer of trust" as trusting anything else but the Bitcoin network.

In that regard colored coins are less decentralized than sidechains.

I don't get sidechains. Will they just be alt-coins then?

Sidechains have two models. They are effectively an alt-chain that is supported by the BTC unit on a 1:1 peg.*

In the proposed concept, they use a SPV client to settle between chains. To secure the chain they would use merged-mining which potentially lets them access 100% of Bitcoin's mining power. They are not quite as secure though as they are not accepted by all nodes.

They can also use a less-decentralized model that rely on Oracles/Federations/Voting Pools.

*the unit is technically not the actual BTC but an image of it locked in a multi-sig type of way. the peg could also be a deterministic function but that defeats the purpose and effectively creates an altcoin.


Ah. Gracias Senior:) But what's the point?

there is no point if you believe, as i do, that Bitcoin is destined to become a global reserve currency.

Probably. But Gavin is accepting of the idea, if not somehow working on it. Do we want slick new features? Or something Huh

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 20, 2014, 03:04:51 AM
 #17638

Is colored coins not introducing an additional layer of trust?
That depends on how you define "another layer of trust".

Colored coins are inherently used for tracking things outside the blockchain - that by definition means representing obligations a.k.a counterparty risk. Any technique that tracks obligations outside the blockchain will be tracking counterparty risk.

But none of that has nothing to do with the underlying technology used to create the token. Colored coins as tokens are no different from other bitcoins. A colored coin token doesn't all of a sudden become less trustworthy than a non-colored Bitcoin.

I define "another layer of trust" as trusting anything else but the Bitcoin network.

In that regard colored coins are less decentralized than sidechains.

I don't get sidechains. Will they just be alt-coins then?

Sidechains have two models. They are effectively an alt-chain that is supported by the BTC unit on a 1:1 peg.*

In the proposed concept, they use a SPV client to settle between chains. To secure the chain they would use merged-mining which potentially lets them access 100% of Bitcoin's mining power. They are not quite as secure though as they are not accepted by all nodes.

They can also use a less-decentralized model that rely on Oracles/Federations/Voting Pools.

*the unit is technically not the actual BTC but an image of it locked in a multi-sig type of way. the peg could also be a deterministic function but that defeats the purpose and effectively creates an altcoin.


Ah. Gracias Senior:) But what's the point?

there is no point if you believe, as i do, that Bitcoin is destined to become a global reserve currency.

Probably. But Gavin is accepting of the idea, if not somehow working on it. Do we want slick new features? Or something Huh

of what idea and working on what?
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
November 20, 2014, 03:05:14 AM
 #17639

But sidechains

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
November 20, 2014, 03:07:12 AM
 #17640

But sidechains

link?
Pages: « 1 ... 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] 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 ... 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!