Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 10:09:40 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   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 ... 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 [963] 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1805269 times)
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 815



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:05:50 PM
 #19241

We don't need sidechains. The internet of coins is almost upon us and will be ready far sooner then anyone can convince the world to deploy sidechains(hint: january): http://bitcoinmagazine.com/18167/what-is-the-supernet-jl777s-vision/

316 users in supernet slack from all the different corners of crypto cooperating and developing different projects together. It's a sight to behold.

No thanks

Deny it all you want. The code is nearing completion and it will be released whether you like it or not. The first true shining beacon of cooperation and teamwork that has ever occurred in crypto has been happening under your noses for many months now. I'm just mentioning this now so I can quote myself later when it becomes more obvious.

1481062180
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481062180

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481062180
Reply with quote  #2

1481062180
Report to moderator
1481062180
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481062180

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481062180
Reply with quote  #2

1481062180
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481062180
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481062180

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481062180
Reply with quote  #2

1481062180
Report to moderator
1481062180
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481062180

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481062180
Reply with quote  #2

1481062180
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:07:03 PM
 #19242

Adam, how can you possibly say you're not "for-profit" when in fact that is precisely what Blockstream is?  do you seriously expect us to believe that Reid Hoffman, et al invested $21M while not expecting at least a 10x return on their investment?

I read somewhere that they invested personally instead of via organized venture funds specifically because they are bitcoin supporters and the investment didn't really meet the usual criteria for the funds (roughly described by you as a 10x return). I can't vouch for any of this being actually true or relevant, but I did read it.


That doesn't jive with this from their blog:

The round was led by Reid Hoffman, Khosla Ventures and Real Ventures, with investments from Nicolas Berggruen, Crypto Currency Partners, Future\Perfect Ventures, Danny Hillis, Eric Schmidt’s Innovation Endeavors, Max Levchin, Mosaic Ventures, Ray Ozzie, Ribbit Capital, Jerry Yang’s AME Cloud Ventures and several others.

http://www.blockstream.com/2014/11/17/blockstream-closes-21m-seed-round/
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:10:03 PM
 #19243

Oh great, incendiary loud mouth brg444  back in the mix. Just when I thought we had a proper chance of a decent discussion to get going.

There is no such chance with you in the mix.

You have refused or flat out ignored the most logic counter-arguments to your "concerns" and prefer dancing around spewing the same platitudes. It's like groundhog day with you.

If the best way to deal with a troll is to ignore him, then why don't you leave, especially  since I'm the one doing most of the talking around here? Or maybe it's because you find what I have to say not all together unreasonable?  

Not quite, your thread is merely just one other source of information and sometimes valuable discussion. I certainly would not qualify your opinion as particularly insightful or worthy of merits. You are anything but "reasonable".

Case in point Adam, in the few last post of his has provided more insights and valuable discussion material than certainly your few last thousands post on here.

Blah, blah, blah.

Not in my opinion. As JR said, there's nothing new in what he said. Just his opinions as to where the project stands, that Bitcoin has a "problem ",  and that we should "trust"  him. 

And neither you, nor Adam, had provided a good reason add to why we should up end 6 years of a " no trust" system just to let them establish a $21M for profit entity that seeks to leverage core development to change Bitcoin into their vision while profiting. The core devs refusal to step down speaks volumes and I think Reid Hoffman, et al, would never have plunked down that amount of money if they didn't think it would make a difference.

No trust? You trust Gavin & the Bitcoin Foundation. You trust Jeff Garzik & Bitpay. You trust the miners.

The mere notion you are pushing forward that the addition of op_code to bitcoin core translates into you & everyone having to trust Blockstream for all things Bitcoin is so spectacularly stupid I don't know where to begin.

Add to that the fact that you are parading the $21 SEED investment as the "smoking gun" of conflicted interests and ill-intentions when that amount is literally pocket change to the nearly 40 investors involved. As if these guys are hell-bent on getting a 10x return on their seed-round investement. This is a grave misunderstanding of the business venture capitalists are in.


"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: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:10:53 PM
 #19244

We don't need sidechains. The internet of coins is almost upon us and will be ready far sooner then anyone can convince the world to deploy sidechains(hint: january): http://bitcoinmagazine.com/18167/what-is-the-supernet-jl777s-vision/

316 users in supernet slack from all the different corners of crypto cooperating and developing different projects together. It's a sight to behold.

No thanks

Deny it all you want. The code is nearing completion and it will be released whether you like it or not. The first true shining beacon of cooperation and teamwork that has ever occurred in crypto has been happening under your noses for many months now. I'm just mentioning this now so I can quote myself later when it becomes more obvious.

 Cheesy



Please


"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: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:14:03 PM
 #19245

Adam, how can you possibly say you're not "for-profit" when in fact that is precisely what Blockstream is?  do you seriously expect us to believe that Reid Hoffman, et al invested $21M while not expecting at least a 10x return on their investment?

I read somewhere that they invested personally instead of via organized venture funds specifically because they are bitcoin supporters and the investment didn't really meet the usual criteria for the funds (roughly described by you as a 10x return). I can't vouch for any of this being actually true or relevant, but I did read it.


That doesn't jive with this from their blog:

The round was led by Reid Hoffman, Khosla Ventures and Real Ventures, with investments from Nicolas Berggruen, Crypto Currency Partners, Future\Perfect Ventures, Danny Hillis, Eric Schmidt’s Innovation Endeavors, Max Levchin, Mosaic Ventures, Ray Ozzie, Ribbit Capital, Jerry Yang’s AME Cloud Ventures and several others.

http://www.blockstream.com/2014/11/17/blockstream-closes-21m-seed-round/

From the horses' mouth

Quote
And that’s why I’m participating in this first-round financing as an individual investor, and why Blockstream itself will function similarly to the Mozilla Corporation. Here, our first interest is maintaining and enhancing Bitcoin’s strong open ecosystem. And the structure we’ve chosen will give us the freedom and flexibility to prioritize public good over returns to investors.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141117154558-1213-the-future-of-the-bitcoin-ecosystem-and-trustless-trust-why-i-invested-in-blockstream

Public good pretty nice heh  Wink

"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
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:16:00 PM
 #19246

Adam, how can you possibly say you're not "for-profit" when in fact that is precisely what Blockstream is?  do you seriously expect us to believe that Reid Hoffman, et al invested $21M while not expecting at least a 10x return on their investment?

I read somewhere that they invested personally instead of via organized venture funds specifically because they are bitcoin supporters and the investment didn't really meet the usual criteria for the funds (roughly described by you as a 10x return). I can't vouch for any of this being actually true or relevant, but I did read it.


That doesn't jive with this from their blog:

The round was led by Reid Hoffman, Khosla Ventures and Real Ventures, with investments from Nicolas Berggruen, Crypto Currency Partners, Future\Perfect Ventures, Danny Hillis, Eric Schmidt’s Innovation Endeavors, Max Levchin, Mosaic Ventures, Ray Ozzie, Ribbit Capital, Jerry Yang’s AME Cloud Ventures and several others.

http://www.blockstream.com/2014/11/17/blockstream-closes-21m-seed-round/

Well maybe it isn't true then.

I agree with you that a for profit entity should be assumed to be in business to generate profits, and unless they can convincingly tell us how they plan to do that, ulterior (though not necessarily nefarious) motives should be assumed. That is just common sense.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:19:24 PM
 #19247

Oh great, incendiary loud mouth brg444  back in the mix. Just when I thought we had a proper chance of a decent discussion to get going.

There is no such chance with you in the mix.

You have refused or flat out ignored the most logic counter-arguments to your "concerns" and prefer dancing around spewing the same platitudes. It's like groundhog day with you.

If the best way to deal with a troll is to ignore him, then why don't you leave, especially  since I'm the one doing most of the talking around here? Or maybe it's because you find what I have to say not all together unreasonable?  

Not quite, your thread is merely just one other source of information and sometimes valuable discussion. I certainly would not qualify your opinion as particularly insightful or worthy of merits. You are anything but "reasonable".

Case in point Adam, in the few last post of his has provided more insights and valuable discussion material than certainly your few last thousands post on here.

Blah, blah, blah.

Not in my opinion. As JR said, there's nothing new in what he said. Just his opinions as to where the project stands, that Bitcoin has a "problem ",  and that we should "trust"  him. 

And neither you, nor Adam, had provided a good reason add to why we should up end 6 years of a " no trust" system just to let them establish a $21M for profit entity that seeks to leverage core development to change Bitcoin into their vision while profiting. The core devs refusal to step down speaks volumes and I think Reid Hoffman, et al, would never have plunked down that amount of money if they didn't think it would make a difference.

No trust? You trust Gavin & the Bitcoin Foundation. You trust Jeff Garzik & Bitpay. You trust the miners.

The mere notion you are pushing forward that the addition of op_code to bitcoin core translates into you & everyone having to trust Blockstream for all things Bitcoin is so spectacularly stupid I don't know where to begin.

Add to that the fact that you are parading the $21 SEED investment as the "smoking gun" of conflicted interests and ill-intentions when that amount is literally pocket change to the nearly 40 investors involved. As if these guys are hell-bent on getting a 10x return on their seed-round investement. This is a grave misunderstanding of the business venture capitalists are in.



We've already gone over this with your poor memory. Gavin works for a  non profit and gets paid modestly I'd  bet.  Certainly not the $500k Adam was throwing around earlier (which makes me wonder what Blockstream is paying their core devs). He has no stock or investors to please. Jeff is a lone wolf over at Bitpay. Yeah, big difference is say with Blockstream having 2 core devs plus 3 top committers.

As for the $21M seed, what's your point? How old are you?

You really should stop. Adam and the rest of us were having a decent conversation and now you're going to scare him away.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:30:38 PM
 #19248

Oh great, incendiary loud mouth brg444  back in the mix. Just when I thought we had a proper chance of a decent discussion to get going.

There is no such chance with you in the mix.

You have refused or flat out ignored the most logic counter-arguments to your "concerns" and prefer dancing around spewing the same platitudes. It's like groundhog day with you.

If the best way to deal with a troll is to ignore him, then why don't you leave, especially  since I'm the one doing most of the talking around here? Or maybe it's because you find what I have to say not all together unreasonable?  

Not quite, your thread is merely just one other source of information and sometimes valuable discussion. I certainly would not qualify your opinion as particularly insightful or worthy of merits. You are anything but "reasonable".

Case in point Adam, in the few last post of his has provided more insights and valuable discussion material than certainly your few last thousands post on here.

Blah, blah, blah.

Not in my opinion. As JR said, there's nothing new in what he said. Just his opinions as to where the project stands, that Bitcoin has a "problem ",  and that we should "trust"  him.  

And neither you, nor Adam, had provided a good reason add to why we should up end 6 years of a " no trust" system just to let them establish a $21M for profit entity that seeks to leverage core development to change Bitcoin into their vision while profiting. The core devs refusal to step down speaks volumes and I think Reid Hoffman, et al, would never have plunked down that amount of money if they didn't think it would make a difference.

No trust? You trust Gavin & the Bitcoin Foundation. You trust Jeff Garzik & Bitpay. You trust the miners.

The mere notion you are pushing forward that the addition of op_code to bitcoin core translates into you & everyone having to trust Blockstream for all things Bitcoin is so spectacularly stupid I don't know where to begin.

Add to that the fact that you are parading the $21 SEED investment as the "smoking gun" of conflicted interests and ill-intentions when that amount is literally pocket change to the nearly 40 investors involved. As if these guys are hell-bent on getting a 10x return on their seed-round investement. This is a grave misunderstanding of the business venture capitalists are in.



We've already gone over this with your poor memory. Gavin works for a  non profit and gets paid modestly I'd  bet.  Certainly not the $500k Adam was throwing around earlier (which makes me wonder what Blockstream is paying their core devs). He has no stock or investors to please. Jeff is a lone wolf over at Bitpay. Yeah, big difference is say with Blockstream having 2 core devs plus 3 top committers.

As for the $21M seed, what's your point? How old are you?

You really should stop. Adam and the rest of us were having a decent conversation and now you're going to scare him away.

I believe tvbcof has adressed why any reference to the Bitcoin Foundation as a non-profit devoid of any individuals with selfish interest is naive & misguided. Gavin might have no stock holders or investors to please but he has a gang of, some quite influential shall I say, foundation members paying his salary.

The fact that Jeff is a "lone wolf" does not shield him from potential conflicts of interest. That's quite a poor "excuse" if I might say.

The point about the investment is both parties (Blockstream & investors) have made it quite clear that the reason for the existence of Blockstream first and foremost is to promote & improve the Bitcoin ecosystem as a public good. That is what the funds will be used for. I'm quite certain no one in there is expecting or even demanding 10x return on their investment. At least not in the immediate future.



"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
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:32:31 PM
 #19249

Gavin works for a  non profit and gets paid modestly I'd  bet.  Certainly not the $500k Adam was throwing around earlier

$209K in 2013 according to http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/527051/the-man-who-really-built-bitcoin
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:40:06 PM
 #19250



The point about the investment is both parties (Blockstream & investors) have made it quite clear that the reason for the existence of Blockstream first and foremost is to promote & improve the Bitcoin ecosystem as a public good.




Oh come on man. Even you're smart enough to know we,  as a  community,  should not buy into that sort of promise. History is littered with failed projects that were based on such naivete.  
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:42:58 PM
 #19251

You really should stop. Adam and the rest of us were having a decent conversation and now you're going to scare him away.

Strange, it seems to me Adam has made quite a case that characters the likes of yours are the reason he stays away from here.

"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: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 31, 2014, 08:57:08 PM
 #19252



The point about the investment is both parties (Blockstream & investors) have made it quite clear that the reason for the existence of Blockstream first and foremost is to promote & improve the Bitcoin ecosystem as a public good.




Oh come on man. Even you're smart enough to know we,  as a  community,  should not buy into that sort of promise. History is littered with failed projects that were based on such naivete.  

That's the problem. Whatever they will say you will attach ill intentions to them.

Excercising common sense & being cautious is one thing. Clouding your judgement with personal grudges and ill-informed opinions is another.

The model they are working from (Mozilla Foundation) is an excellent example of such projects that has succeeded. Given the backing they've received, the mindshare & the resources available to them my bet is the Blockstream venture will be a success as well.

"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
December 31, 2014, 09:01:17 PM
 #19253

You really should stop. Adam and the rest of us were having a decent conversation and now you're going to scare him away.

Strange, it seems to me Adam has made quite a case that characters the likes of yours are the reason he stays away from here.

Note to brg444:

He's here and been here for several days with over a dozen or so posts despite, and maybe because of me. Who knows. All I care about is that I'm learning his perspective and if more people convert to being SC proponents as a result, great. Who knows, I might be converted. There's a lot at stake here and you're not helping with your spamming.

Let's see how much he posts now that you're here. He's quite capable of schooling me on his own if what he says has merit. He doesn't need your help.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 31, 2014, 09:10:14 PM
 #19254

You really should stop. Adam and the rest of us were having a decent conversation and now you're going to scare him away.

Strange, it seems to me Adam has made quite a case that characters the likes of yours are the reason he stays away from here.

Note to brg444:

He's here and been here for several days with over a dozen or so posts despite, and maybe because of me. Who knows. All I care about is that I'm learning his perspective and if more people convert to being SC proponents as a result, great. Who knows, I might be converted. There's a lot at stake here and you're not helping with your spamming.

Let's see how much he posts now that you're here. He's quite capable of schooling me on his own if what he says has merit. He doesn't need your help.

Spamming?

I am merely attempting to correct some misconceived opinions. If you've read Adam's post it is apparent he doesn't quite hold you in high-esteem. I'm certain you could careless because you're cypherdoc and you're so awesome, found Bitcoin and understood it as sound money in 2011, etc, etc. but that's beside the point.

Quote
and maybe because of me.

there's that ego again  Cheesy

"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
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 09:15:53 PM
 #19255

Spamming?

I agree with CD, although the term spamming isn't really the right one.

Your volume of posts on the thread is too high and content per post is too low.

Nobody appointed you truth police to refute each individual cyperdoc post you disagree with, even when you have nothing new to add.

It isn't about you being a side chain supporter either. There are other side chain supporters here who express the same views as you but do so while contributing a lot more value per post (Adam for example).

The thread was more compelling in your absence or relative absence. Please cool it.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 09:18:07 PM
 #19256

You really should stop. Adam and the rest of us were having a decent conversation and now you're going to scare him away.

Strange, it seems to me Adam has made quite a case that characters the likes of yours are the reason he stays away from here.

Note to brg444:

He's here and been here for several days with over a dozen or so posts despite, and maybe because of me. Who knows. All I care about is that I'm learning his perspective and if more people convert to being SC proponents as a result, great. Who knows, I might be converted. There's a lot at stake here and you're not helping with your spamming.

Let's see how much he posts now that you're here. He's quite capable of schooling me on his own if what he says has merit. He doesn't need your help.

Spamming?

I am merely attempting to correct some misconceived opinions. If you've read Adam's post it is apparent he doesn't quite hold you in high-esteem. I'm certain you could careless because you're cypherdoc and you're so awesome, found Bitcoin and understood it as sound money in 2011, etc, etc. but that's beside the point.

Quote
and maybe because of me.

there's that ego again  Cheesy

No, it's just that I recognize that he wouldn't be here were  it not for the fact that I have been one of the more vocal opponents of SC's as well as being an early adopter with a popular thread. 
jertsy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 356


View Profile
December 31, 2014, 09:24:03 PM
 #19257

How come the thread was locked a while ago?
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 31, 2014, 09:27:50 PM
 #19258

Spamming?

I agree with CD, although the term spamming isn't really the right one.

Your volume of posts on the thread is too high and content per post is too low.

Nobody appointed you truth police to refute each individual cyperdoc post you disagree with, even when you have nothing new to add.

It isn't about you being a side chain supporter either. There are other side chain supporters here who express the same views as you but do so while contributing a lot more value per post (Adam for example).

The thread was more compelling in your absence or relative absence. Please cool it.

I'm sorry but there is a particular disingenuity in cypherdoc discourse that irritates & annoys me to the highest point.

Even though it is his own thread I don't believe it justifies or provide him with the right to promote slander, FUD or half-truths.

You accuse me of repeating the same content when cypherdoc has been parroting the same non-sense about sidechains & "sound money" anytime he gets the chance.

"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
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 09:31:25 PM
 #19259

You accuse me of repeating the same content when cypherdoc has been parroting the same non-sense about sidechains & "sound money" anytime he gets the chance.

Except that he also posts on a variety of other topics that add value. You don't.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
December 31, 2014, 09:34:53 PM
 #19260

I have some first hand knowledge that some companies are patenting things related to bitcoin, and probably much more I dont know about.

Thats another reason to want to be cautious about side chains and all this blossoming innovation. Every new improvement creates new openings for patents. If it is broken, then by all means fix it. But if it isn't broken, it might be best to leave well enough alone and let the patent clock on the existing methods run out.
Pages: « 1 ... 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 [963] 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 ... 1560 »
  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!