Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 04:43:58 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [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 ... 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 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1804453 times)
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:54:46 PM
 #19441

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

 - you are using tooo much "if"s
 - you see MM as only solutions (we will have only few 2-3 100% MM SC (edit: if any :-))) => there are other better solutions than MM

what are they besides federated servers?

 - yes, it is possible to use private federated server (FS) for local SC
 - it is possible to create independent oracles
 - it is possible to use timestamps in MC  (MCTS)
 - it is possible to use various combination of  FS, MCTS and oracles
1480913038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480913038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480913038
Reply with quote  #2

1480913038
Report to moderator
1480913038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480913038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480913038
Reply with quote  #2

1480913038
Report to moderator
1480913038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480913038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480913038
Reply with quote  #2

1480913038
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480913038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480913038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480913038
Reply with quote  #2

1480913038
Report to moderator
1480913038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480913038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480913038
Reply with quote  #2

1480913038
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:56:41 PM
 #19442

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

 - you are using tooo much "if"s
 - you see MM as only solutions (we will have only few 2-3 100% MM SC (edit: if any :-))) => there are other better solutions than MM

what are they besides federated servers?

 - yes, it is possible to use private federated server (FS) for local SC
 - it is possible to create independent oracles
 - it is possible to use timestamps in MC  (MCTS)
 - it is possible to use various combination of  FS, MCTS and oracles

but that isn't a better solution than MM.  it's inferior.
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 814


View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:57:37 PM
 #19443

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

Damn, don't be a tool. Who cares about the US?

i neither approve or disapprove of this.  this is just my observation.  the reality of the matter is that US pools are in a very difficult situation.  BTCGuild and Eleuthria sold out b/c he wasn't about to go against possible US regulation as he didn't want to go to jail.

A problem pos currencies don't have to deal with.
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:59:32 PM
 #19444

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

 - you are using tooo much "if"s
 - you see MM as only solutions (we will have only few 2-3 100% MM SC (edit: if any :-))) => there are other better solutions than MM

what are they besides federated servers?

 - yes, it is possible to use private federated server (FS) for local SC
 - it is possible to create independent oracles
 - it is possible to use timestamps in MC  (MCTS)
 - it is possible to use various combination of  FS, MCTS and oracles

but that isn't a better solution than MM.  it's inferior.

Using 1,000 local SC is much more better (decentralized, authority resistant) than 1 global MM SC

edit:
it cost 1/1000 of resources
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 12:12:13 AM
 #19445

15 yr weekly USD/$DJI comparison chart.  there's some weird shit going on here.  note the late change:

Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 12:28:49 AM
 #19446

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

 - you are using tooo much "if"s
 - you see MM as only solutions (we will have only few 2-3 100% MM SC (edit: if any :-))) => there are other better solutions than MM

what are they besides federated servers?

 - yes, it is possible to use private federated server (FS) for local SC
 - it is possible to create independent oracles
 - it is possible to use timestamps in MC  (MCTS)
 - it is possible to use various combination of  FS, MCTS and oracles

but that isn't a better solution than MM.  it's inferior.

Once you create SC with some functionality and then you can run 1,000,000 (zerocoin?) clones.
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 12:50:18 AM
 #19447

Bitcoin now


Bitcoin with sidechain support
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 01:55:28 AM
 #19448

i've been nice to you ever since you entered this thread in a big way.  yet this is about the 4th time you've called me a troll despite the fact i even complimented you on your POW work.

Relax, just a joke Smiley  I dont think you're a troll, though I see I am not alone in enjoying flame fests sometimes.

Quote from: cipherdoc
instead, perhaps you might want to answer some of the real questions i've posed to you but you have failed to answer:

I guess I missed some of those, it was a long thread!

1. in the WP, you mentioned that it is possible that if a SC became popular enough, then Bitcoiners might have to move all their BTC to the SC.  what about those who don't get the memo?  this question is similar to the big debate we had a couple years ago about harvesting apparent "un-used" addresses.  that was obviously shot down real quick in that there is no way to ever be sure exactly that the true owner was dead or had lost the privkey.

Personally I would not see anything that didnt protect all ownership, being accepted by anyone sane.  What I mean is eg in the same way you keep your bitcoins as we go from 0.09 to 0.10; you'd keep your bitcoins if we went from 0.99 to 1.0 if that was a hard fork implemented and switched over to using a sidechain as the live-beta process.

not if the MC gets destroyed or fails in the years after abandonment.  who would mine the tx into the SC?
Quote
Quote from: cipherdoc
2. philosopically, do you see Bitcoin as Money or as an economic "system" for trading assets of all types?

Personally I guess I see it as a kind of virtual commodity which can be used as sound money.  But bitcoin is programable and as I wrote somewhere on the thread I think the programability, smart-contracts are also a big deal as well as the sound-money which is by itself awesome if thats all bitcoin could ever do.

i think that's wrong.  i view it as money. digital cash.  digital gold.  i think this is the biggest source of our disagreement.  SC's turns Bitcoin into a WoW trading platform.  anyone seeking to invest in Bitcoin after SC's are implemented will be faced with a menu of assets from which to invest in.  as opposed to simply the BTC unit currently.  i want anyone interested in Bitcoin to have to buy into the BTC unit on MC to force the price higher and higher.  To The Moon higher.  this will ensure mining profits and ensure security of the MC.  SC's are a distraction and confuse the issue of what i think is Bitcoins larger purpose, that of Sound Money.  fiat printing is where the problem is currently in the financial world which is why the biggest markets in the world currently are the Forex which trade $5T/day.  we need to solve this problem first and foremost with Bitcoin as Money before we move on to Bitcoin enabled speculative assets on SC's.  someone help me find that Forex comparison graph i posted last month in this debate.
Quote
Quote from: adam3us link=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg9991853#msg9991853
Bitcoin has a lot to offer, and some of those things are not possible for the legacy systems to mimic.  Particularly sound money, no counter-party risk, irreversable transactions (seizing and freezing basically prevent that outside of paper cash, though even that is partly relying on fungibility laws or it could have reversibility problems).  Smart-contracts that are strengthened by no counter-party risk and irreversibility are one of the most interesting advantages I think.  Without irreversibility and no freezability a "smart-contract" isnt smart, its just an electronic contract and we already have those.  Ultimately if you combine it all you could rearchitect the financial system to largely remove systemic risk, add competition legacy systems cant react to (they intrinsically need their governance costs).  This is why people gave us $21mil.  Bitcoin all-in is a big deal.  Sound-money is cool, but its only part of the picture.

this is too premature.  we haven't even solved the sound money problem yet but we're off to a good start.  sound money is the key to everything.
Quote
I also wrote a kind of parable/scifi story about bitcoin as sound-money which is some kind of argument of bitcoin is special as it came first, universal equivalence of proof of electricity as the unit of bitcoin.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=911339.msg10012730

Quote from: cipherdoc
3. what real difference is there in forcing more transparency (as we are now doing with Merkle root audits, regulation, better VC funded exchanges) on 3rd party merchants vs. using SC's where supposedly we will be able to view the source code to ensure no backdoors (only a select few can do that)?  i would argue that the former is no different than the real mechanisms we have today and therefore not experimental or as risky to the degree you're wanting to construct via an unprecedented and untested 2wp.

Matter of debate.  I guess while its true as you said they are improving at governance, its also true the scammers our out in force, so its risky relying on governance alone, and merkle audits are after-the-fact.  Mtgox could've had merkle audits and still lost $500m the next day.

Either way I think it is important to simplify, modularise and freeze the basic bitcoin as sound money to protect it from failure.  You realise bitcoin has been lucky or the devs have been epically proficient in coding and testing the code and fixing bugs carefully for nothing to have blown up at a level that wiped out long stored coins.  We want bitcoin to be here in 50 and 100 years.

Then you want people who are using bitcoin for fancier things to do it somewhere else, with a guaranteed firewall between your savings and their more complex code bases.  IMO.  Sidechains is one way to do that.  Another one is provably secure consistency enforcing bytecode VM.

we already have secured the sound money aspect with Bitcoin as it is.  don't fix something that isn't broken.  if Bitcoin becomes a bonafide traded forex currency, all those other speculative assets can start being denominated in BTC units w/o SC's.
Quote
Quote from: cipherdoc
i say risky b/c i am still not convinced that separating the BTC unit from its native blockchain (MC) is a safe economic thing to do.  its not safe b/c it requires all sorts of new assumptions/requirements such as no bugs in the spvp itself

Well as I wrote here:

Quote from: adam3us link=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg10001937#msg10001937
Another way to look at sidechains btw is that a federated peg is a multi-sig (with modest parameters eg 5 of 10 and some trustworthy security competent bitcoin interested businesses) and a SPV peg is a bigger federated peg with a 5000 of 10000 multisig with dynamic membership (ie whoever is mining the chain right now).  The spv peg op_code is an opcode to understand those dynamic membership multisigs.  The dynamic membership multi sigs (DMMS for short) are written about in the sidechain white paper http://www.blockstream.com/sidechains.pdf and are a different way to look at bitcoin mining, though its actually the same thing.

You can also combine DMMS sigs with regular multisigs, its just an op code so you can program with it.  eg IF ( 0.5*DMMS + 0.5*multisig(5,10) ) THEN spend coin.  Or IF ( hashrate > 75% AND DMMS ) OR ( hashrate <= 75% AND multisig(5,10) ) THEN spend coin can react to hashrate drops.  Different people could even use different peg rules on the same chain depending on their security tradoff preferences.

so a DMMS signature is not so different from a mutlisig, and it is just a new type of multisig, and the bitcoins never actually leave the bitcoin block chain, so I dont think its that ridiculously complex from bitcoins side, and so we can have robust confidence in the security firewall.  Certainly once the sample implementation & BIP are up for discussion, we'll be interested in expert opinion on that and any suggestions to simplify or improve it.

Its also not that alien - the DMMS is just a reuse of bitcoins PoW blockchain as an opcode.  Basically the only new thing is a way to compact it.  As I mentioned it is nearly possible to implement it (or maybe would be with some ugly chained script) already.

way too complex.  Bitcoin is simple yet elegant. you make a mistake and we're all finished and you will have destroyed our $4-5B of value, most of which is not yours i'd bet.
Quote
Quote from: cypherdoc
unscrupulous altcoin devs that you despise

Yeah I like people who innovate, and some altcoin devs have innovated eg freicoin, cryptonote/bytecoin etc.  I dont like pump & dumps nor false advertising of features that are technobabble and insecure, though along with a lot of other people.

no one likes them.  but i also don't like a for profit company changing source.
Quote
Quote from: cypherdoc
The sidechain, 100% MM of the SC to be simply "as safe", no bugs or backdoors in the SC code written by all the unscrupulous altcoin devs that you despise of which only a few in the Bitcoin community will be able to vet via inspection of their code.  

I gave examples of how the MM rate can be reactively handled in the peg script above.

The code on sidechains is caveat emptor, I wrote this somewhere too:

Quote from: adam3us link=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg9994476#msg9994476
its caveat emptor, you shouldnt put money into a chain unless there is some assurance that security & bitcoin protocol knowledgeable people have audited it.  People could certify chains (like sign them - "my name is blah and I'm a security researcher with reputation and I and my buddies audited this code and its good") or wallets could etc.  Its good and a feature that people can opt to use uncertified chains.  You want a situation where there is real open possibility for technical innovation & competition in chain features.

You also want no central control so no chains can get black listed.

Quote from: cypherdoc
i expect hundreds of SC's to pop up as a result of your proposal and you yourself said that there are really only a few in the community who could or would take the time to vet potentially malicious code.  given this proliferation, if i'm right, how can honest devs ever keep up with this?

audit and certify and firewalled risk and dont use dodgy stuff as in quote above, plus train more devs as GMaxwell wrote about here http://www.coindesk.com/gregory-maxwell-went-bitcoin-skeptic-core-developer/

Quote from: cipherdoc
4. given that most of the real world already views a fixed supply of any currency as a liability, what feedback effects do you think a continuous destruction of scBTC from failed SC's will have on Bitcoin itself?  please just don't say "it will only make our BTC go up!"  i think the answer needs to acknowledge that it might be that the market views that negatively as a hopeless downward spiraling deflationary currency that continuously damages the merchant economy by encouraging hoarding.  in this sense, i am drawing parallels to gold being a fairly fixed supply that for the most part nevers decreases.

I contend that widespread use of on-chain security, user controlled private keys, air-gapped hw wallets, and smart-contract business logic executed by the chain (not scam chains, but certified or written by people with competence and good intent) will reduce thefts relative to the governance model that has seen 50% failure rate and loss of perhaps $1bil to date.

About supply decreasing via mishap, another source of loss of coins is user backup failure.  Happens all the time.  I think there's possibility to use trustless bank/custodian where ownership reverts to you (or someone designated like your heirs or an offline key or a banking ombudsan or another bank) if they go bankrupt/freeze your assets.

that's different from an integrated offramp that's sanctioned by core devs and the community.
Quote
will you sell SC's to govt's if asked?

My opinion is we dont need too many chains, as more asset types can be available on the same chain (its easier to write a smart-contract between assets natively on or pegged to the same chain).  So I think a separate chain should be for something that cant co-exist with because its mutually exclusive or a different risk profile (say like zerocash or snark smart-contracts (very private and safe/efficient to verify arbitrarily complex contract!) with its dependence on novel crypto).  I would therefore imagine it would more be to help people issue assets, or integrate an existing sidechain than to make someone there very own sidechain.  I mean a chain should be a blockchain which implies decentralisation and neutrality from undue code influence etc.  A company or government "owning" a chain seems like a bad idea, and probably doesnt make sense.  

But I do think it would be interesting to have a government issue its electronic M0 directly onto a chain, which it would do with a secure hw signing key.  The interesting part is that they could make a smart-monetary-policy eg committing to cap QE at 2%/year.  Something like that might greatly improve the stability and exchange rate of a currency that is currently poorly run, because they'd be intentionally giving up control of moral hazard.  Its not an alien concept to monetary policy because they often set eg mandates and limits, its just that in times of stress they break their own rules to their own currencies detriment.

Whether we'd want to consult for someone would depend on whether we think what they're proposing to do is non-evil for humans and for bitcoin.

why should we trust someone like gmax to be in a position, along with the others in BS, to make that sort of decision?  i'm certainly not comfortable about the idea of having a gvt-enabled SC that could be declared mandatory in their jurisdiction.  i think this is all going in the wrong direction of what Bitcoin is all about and you're articulating it right here with no qualms.
Quote
Quote from: cypherdoc
you still didn't answer me as to why we should "trust" you and Blockstream when it goes against the very ethos of what Bitcoin is all about.

what does?  modularising bitcoin and making a securely firewalled extension mechanism?

just as smooth said.  how can you have an all encompassing Bitcoin system that has SC's playing a major role, yet at the same time, claim that it will have no feedback negative effects on the MC?  it makes no sense at all.

Quote
i posted above that there are several venture funds that have invested.  how can they not want the std 10x return of their investment? those fund constituents do not just represent the viewpoint of their founder.

Sure I said something about profit here:

Quote from: adam3us link=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg9997666#msg9997666
You should view blockstream as a sort of hybrid.  We are developing FOSS open IP much as a not-for-profit would.  But we are also aiming to make a profit by selling services, doing partnerships, advising integrators etc this is all complicated stuff and people need help to make it work.  Like was said its kind of like Mozilla.

and

Quote from: adam3us link=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg9997307#msg9997307
The quote didnt say not to make a profit it said to have a dual objective and compared the approach to Mozilla.  Mozilla made plenty of profit (and is a hybrid incorporating both a for profit and a not-for-profit) and also did a good job of making the firefox browser a leading source of user ethos focussed innovation and features.

Greg Maxwell (nullc on reddit) wrote some about how blockstream plans to make profit.  

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2k3u97/we_are_bitcoin_sidechain_paper_authors_adam_back/clhoo7d

I dont think making a profit is a bad thing - to hire developers & QA and UX designers and maintain software and design protocols and figure out how to use smart-contracts and find business partnerships to make those available to users all takes money.  As those are good outcomes, and require more money, you have to have a profit to fuel it, you cant rely on investors to keep putting in more rounds!

Its quite feasible to make money without being controlling, proprietary, centralising or evil.  We certainly aim to try.

Quote from: cipherdoc
btw, you show your bias when you nitpick my trivial comment to tvbcof here w/o even acknowledging the disgusting, immature video he put up.  i suggest it's b/c he supports your view:

Probably predisposed to side with the underdog (no pun intended:), problems with authority, libertarian you know how it goes.  Nah its not for his views but cause you were trying to be rude/belittling.  But chortle at the Chihuahua humping someones ankle video.  Well you did kind of ask for it by saying "you're still that little dog who nips at my trouser bottoms" though, so its hard to complain Smiley

Adam

to summarize.  i think our ideologies about what Bitcoin is are too different to achieve an agreement.  i view it simply as Sound Money which can fix all our problems.  i don't think you see it the same way:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=907157.0
JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 01:57:32 AM
 #19449

Bitcoin now


Bitcoin with sidechain support


Sorry for the pessimism, but my image of the bitcoin blockchain with all those appendages is the first image above with 20 chairs bolted to each wing and three cargo containers attached underneath the fuselage.  Then, moving away from bitcoin as currency would be like removing the engine and propellers to make room for more luggage.

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 02:00:59 AM
 #19450

Bitcoin now


Bitcoin with sidechain support


Sorry for the pessimism, but my image of the bitcoin blockchain with all those appendages is the first image above with 20 chairs bolted to each wing and three cargo containers attached underneath the fuselage.  Then, moving away from bitcoin as currency would be like removing the engine and propellers to make room for more luggage.

i hate to have to agree with the ultimate Bitcoin troll but you're right.

and we know this by Adam's vision of what Bitcoin is and his thoughts.
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 02:10:05 AM
 #19451

Bitcoin now


Bitcoin with sidechain support


Sorry for the pessimism, but my image of the bitcoin blockchain with all those appendages is the first image above with 20 chairs bolted to each wing and three cargo containers attached underneath the fuselage.  Then, moving away from bitcoin as currency would be like removing the engine and propellers to make room for more luggage.

this one ?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 02:16:42 AM
 #19452

Bitcoin now


Bitcoin with sidechain support


Sorry for the pessimism, but my image of the bitcoin blockchain with all those appendages is the first image above with 20 chairs bolted to each wing and three cargo containers attached underneath the fuselage.  Then, moving away from bitcoin as currency would be like removing the engine and propellers to make room for more luggage.

i hate to have to agree with the ultimate Bitcoin troll but you're right.

and we know this by Adam's vision of what Bitcoin is and his thoughts.

oops.  you simply said Bitcoin and not Bitcoin+SC's.  my mistake.  i don't agree with you.  you're simply a troll.
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 02:22:41 AM
 #19453

oops.  you simply said Bitcoin and not Bitcoin+SC's.  my mistake.  i don't agree with you.  you're simply a troll.

SC BIP published. ... few months ago
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 02:29:11 AM
 #19454

Asking "[w]ho really rules?" researchers Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page argue that over the past few decades America's political system has slowly transformed from a democracy into an oligarchy, where wealthy elites wield most power.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/princeton-experts-say-us-no-longer-democracy

you guys have to ask yourselves why they have so much power.  the answer, if you're reading this, is that you already know:  control of Money.

with Bitcoin, as it is, we are slowly taking back those reins of power.  and now, we are being asked to change Bitcoin into a SC-enabled asset trading platform? speculative asset trading is NOT needed and distracts us from Bitcoins main function:  Sound Money.
Wandererfromthenorth
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 02:36:46 AM
 #19455

Bitcoin now


Bitcoin with sidechain support



Sorry but more like this:









 Grin
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 02:38:46 AM
 #19456

Asking "[w]ho really rules?" researchers Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page argue that over the past few decades America's political system has slowly transformed from a democracy into an oligarchy, where wealthy elites wield most power.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/princeton-experts-say-us-no-longer-democracy

you guys have to ask yourselves why they have so much power.  the answer, if you're reading this, is that you already know:  control of Money.

with Bitcoin, as it is, we are slowly taking back those reins of power.  and now, we are being asked to change Bitcoin into a SC-enabled asset trading platform? speculative asset trading is NOT needed and distracts us from Bitcoins main function:  Sound Money.

Do nothing, you can eat and drink bitcoins. Bitcoins are very tasty and very well nutrition.
STT
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190



View Profile WWW
January 03, 2015, 02:47:37 AM
 #19457

To have sidechains as jet engine technology to bitcoin you'd need to see a great deal of benefit and efficiency increase from including them.  Not many think that is the case, I think its more like adding more seats or more luggage space.  It'd be nice if sidechains somehow improved everything about bitcoin not just tagged onto it

tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974


View Profile
January 03, 2015, 03:19:22 AM
 #19458


Native Bitcoin:




Sidechains backed by Native Bitcoin:




JorgeStolfi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868



View Profile
January 03, 2015, 03:23:29 AM
 #19459

Sorry for the pessimism, but (1) my image of the bitcoin blockchain with all those appendages is the first image above with 20 chairs bolted to each wing and three cargo containers attached underneath the fuselage.  Then, (2) moving away from bitcoin as currency would be like removing the engine and propellers to make room for more luggage.
i hate to have to agree with the ultimate Bitcoin troll but you're right.
and we know this by Adam's vision of what Bitcoin is and his thoughts.
oops.  you simply said Bitcoin and not Bitcoin+SC's.  my mistake.  i don't agree with you.  you're simply a troll.
No, by "the bitcoin blockchain with all those appendages" in sentence (1) I meant the bitcoin plus sidechains plus wahetever additions to the protocol are being considered to make sidechains work and to try to co-opt any promising altcoins.

That project is trying to patch extraneous functionality into the already-abused bitcoin protocol in order to turn it into a global production service for a multitude of fuzzy tasks that it was not intended to do.

The bitcoin protocol was frugally designed and implemented by "Satoshi" for a single specifc purpose: namely, to test whether his solution to an old technical problem (motivating a bunch of uncoordinated volunteers to maintain and protect a distributed, decentralized payment ledger) actually worked.  Just like the Wright Brothers' Flyer One was designed and built specifically for one purpose: namely, test whether their solution for heavier-than-air flight actually flew and could be steered - nothing more.  

The bitcoin protocol is already ill-suited for all the things that people want to use it for today -- hedge against inflation, get-rich-quick scheme, internet roulette/dice, global competitior to paypal, visa and western union, ....  And now it is to become the central timestamping and trust management and whatnot for thousands of sidechains.  Such extreme repurposing of an inadequate design is bound to produce a monstrosity that will not stand on its feet.

The second part (2) above refers to the more extreme view that bitcoin would cease to be used as a currency and would become to all cryptos what the gold used to be to all national currencies.  But gold used to fill that role only because of historical and cultural inertia, and it lost it once people got used to unbacked paper money.  Bitcoin does not have such history; on the contrary, the altcoins started out as fiercely independent of it.  Thus, trying to turn it into the 'gold of crypto' and convincing the altcoins to adhere to the 'gold standard' is going against the natural evolution of money.  Worse, if bitcoin stops being used as a currency of commerce, it will lose its value, and then will become useless also as crypto-gold.

Academic interest in bitcoin only. Not owner, not trader, very skeptical of its longterm success.
BlindMayorBitcorn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728


Blockchain Theorist


View Profile
January 03, 2015, 03:29:46 AM
 #19460

Sorry for the pessimism, but (1) my image of the bitcoin blockchain with all those appendages is the first image above with 20 chairs bolted to each wing and three cargo containers attached underneath the fuselage.  Then, (2) moving away from bitcoin as currency would be like removing the engine and propellers to make room for more luggage.
i hate to have to agree with the ultimate Bitcoin troll but you're right.
and we know this by Adam's vision of what Bitcoin is and his thoughts.
oops.  you simply said Bitcoin and not Bitcoin+SC's.  my mistake.  i don't agree with you.  you're simply a troll.
No, by "the bitcoin blockchain with all those appendages" in sentence (1) I meant the bitcoin plus sidechains plus wahetever additions to the protocol are being considered to make sidechains work and to try to co-opt any promising altcoins.

That project is trying to patch extraneous functionality into the already-abused bitcoin protocol in order to turn it into a global production service for a multitude of fuzzy tasks that it was not intended to do.

The bitcoin protocol was frugally designed and implemented by "Satoshi" for a single specifc purpose: namely, to test whether his solution to an old technical problem (motivating a bunch of uncoordinated volunteers to maintain and protect a distributed, decentralized payment ledger) actually worked.  Just like the Wright Brothers' Flyer One was designed and built specifically for one purpose: namely, test whether their solution for heavier-than-air flight actually flew and could be steered - nothing more.  

The bitcoin protocol is already ill-suited for all the things that people want to use it for today -- hedge against inflation, get-rich-quick scheme, internet roulette/dice, global competitior to paypal, visa and western union, ....  And now it is to become the central timestamping and trust management and whatnot for thousands of sidechains.  Such extreme repurposing of an inadequate design is bound to produce a monstrosity that will not stand on its feet.

The second part (2) above refers to the more extreme view that bitcoin would cease to be used as a currency and would become to all cryptos what the gold used to be to all national currencies.  But gold used to fill that role only because of historical and cultural inertia, and it lost it once people got used to unbacked paper money.  Bitcoin does not have such history; on the contrary, the altcoins started out as fiercely independent of it.  Thus, trying to turn it into the 'gold of crypto' and convincing the altcoins to adhere to the 'gold standard' is going against the natural evolution of money.  Worse, if bitcoin stops being used as a currency of commerce, it will lose its value, and then will become useless also as crypto-gold.

Doesn't sound like a troll to me. +1 brother

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.
Pages: « 1 ... 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 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 ... 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!