Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[kodtycoon]

So why not Peg to the blockchain so people can easily transition to your alt?  Right now your on an island with a couple hundred other people. 

you apparently seem to be on the same island

Good rebuttal.    I'll give you a little piece of advice since you are obviously jr.  If you want to attract users for NEM, don't go around talking about how other protocols are inferior. The people here have a lot more crypto knowledge than you.  They've seen hundreds of alts come and go.  Be more welcoming to the crypto community, ask people to try NEM beta, tell them it's advantages without talking about others' disadvantages.  It's easy for me to say the creator of NEM, UtopianFuture, had hundreds of sock puppets and thus the whole premise of "fair distribution" is bullshit.  You are going to hear that a lot. 

fair point, but considering the beating that alts get from guys in here I would hope they can take it as well as they give it

[1714214795]

1714214795

[tabnloz]

Just a thought I had:

USD and Gold were both the safe haven plays of 2014; they strengthened in relation to everything else (and basically remained steady vs each other). Bitcoin reached a peak at the turn of the year, at that stage still a highly speculative asset. In a year that saw a flock to safety, bitcoin suffered, partly as it was the most speculative of plays. I look forward to bitcoin maturing and being seen as a growing, safer, alternate asset class. Like most others, I think it's coming.

Cypher sees market cap leaking from gold to bitcoin and I think if bitcoin matures and succeeds, in a digital age, this is inevitable. However, to what degree is yet to be seen. There will always be those who will never be turned by bitcoin and will go with what they know; but even small percentages of trillion dollar market caps will sufficiently expand btc.

[marcus_of_augustus]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-30/denmark-you-are-now-paid-take-out-mortgage

in centrally banked Denmark, the mortgage takes out you.

Negative interest rate mortgages for some customers on floating rates ... wonder if that 'income' stream is tax-exempt? So if you need bigger income just take a out a bigger mortgage? win-win?

[cypherdoc]

further decentralization.  Discus down to 18 from 21:

[NotHatinJustTrollin]

4 pools owning around 51% of the hashing power.

"Further decentralization"? lol

[johnyj]

4 pools owning around 51% of the hashing power.

"Further decentralization"? lol

Before it was 2 pools owning 60% 

[cbeast]

Bitcoin is in it's infancy. It needs pools to keep large corporate farms from keeping all mining profits from individual miners. Pools are much more decentralized than corporate miners. Miners on pools can switch to pools that prevent corporate miners from monopolizing all the blocks.

I wonder why people don't complain that Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, and Google haven't stolen all your money since they have control of all your personal and financial information? You can bet they will, it's only a matter of time. 

[readysalted89]

Bitcoin is in it's infancy. It needs pools to keep large corporate farms from keeping all mining profits from individual miners. Pools are much more decentralized than corporate miners. Miners on pools can switch to pools that prevent corporate miners from monopolizing all the blocks.

I wonder why people don't complain that Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, and Google haven't stolen all your money since they have control of all your personal and financial information? You can bet they will, it's only a matter of time. 

Pools have already grown to the size where they could launch an attack. They realized they were shooting themselves in the foot by getting too big and reduced their sizes.

[hdbuck]

Bitcoin is in it's infancy. It needs pools to keep large corporate farms from keeping all mining profits from individual miners. Pools are much more decentralized than corporate miners. Miners on pools can switch to pools that prevent corporate miners from monopolizing all the blocks.

I wonder why people don't complain that Apple, Oracle, Microsoft, and Google haven't stolen all your money since they have control of all your personal and financial information? You can bet they will, it's only a matter of time. 

Pools have already grown to the size where they could launch an attack. They realized they were shooting themselves in the foot by getting too big and reduced their sizes.

this is just oversimplistic rhetoric.

[sickpig]

From the bitcoin dev mailing list quoting Wladimir van der Laan:

The block chain is a single channel broadcasted over the entire
world, and I don't believe it will ever be possible nor desirable to broadcast all the
world's transactions over one channel.

The everyone-validates-everything approach doesn't scale. It is however
useful to settle larger transactions in an irreversible, zero-trust way.
That's what makes the bitcoin system, as it is now, valuable.

But it is absurd for the whole world to have to validate every purchase of
a cup of coffee or a bus ticket by six billion others.

Naively scaling up the block size will get some leeway in the short term,
but I believe a future scalable payment system based on bitcoin will be
mostly based on off-blockchain transactions (in some form) or that there
will be a hierarchical or subdivided system (e.g. temporary or per-locale
sidechains).

[cypherdoc]

https://twitter.com/cypherdoc2/status/561534566603980802

[cypherdoc]

Rhetoric is heating up. Cover your ears, pinch your nose, and buy bitcoin:

Varoufakis: Troika are a "rottenly constructured commitee"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11381071/Europes-creditors-play-with-political-fire-in-pushing-Greece-to-the-brink.html

[cypherdoc]

Rhetoric is heating up. Cover your ears, pinch your nose, and buy bitcoin:

Varoufakis: Troika are a "rottenly constructured commitee"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11381071/Europes-creditors-play-with-political-fire-in-pushing-Greece-to-the-brink.html

The deficits of the EMU crisis states may have fallen but the mix of perma-slump and “lowflation” - now deflation of minus 0.6pc – have by caused the debt stock to spiral upwards. This is a mathematical effect. The interest costs have been rising faster than nominal GDP. Italy’s public debt has jumped from 116pc to 133pc of GDP in three years despite a primary budget surplus.

[tvbcof]

From the bitcoin dev mailing list quoting Wladimir van der Laan:

The block chain is a single channel broadcasted over the entire
world, and I don't believe it will ever be possible nor desirable to broadcast all the
world's transactions over one channel.

The everyone-validates-everything approach doesn't scale. It is however
useful to settle larger transactions in an irreversible, zero-trust way.
That's what makes the bitcoin system, as it is now, valuable.

But it is absurd for the whole world to have to validate every purchase of
a cup of coffee or a bus ticket by six billion others.

Naively scaling up the block size will get some leeway in the short term,
but I believe a future scalable payment system based on bitcoin will be
mostly based on off-blockchain transactions (in some form) or that there
will be a hierarchical or subdivided system (e.g. temporary or per-locale
sidechains).

Thanks for quoting that!  Wladimir's quietness in the public muck is as pronounced as his activity in the codebase.  I never knew where he stood on this stuff.  My natural guess would be that anyone who is bright enough to be such a prolific code contributor would immediately understand certain things like this, but...Gavin...

As someone who has worked on and designed data management systems, Wladimir's statement is so common sense to me that it shouldn't even need to be stated.  I am aghast that there is so much dispute about it.  A very strong hypothesis is that many people who have some technical skills are busying themselves with solutions which will be viable only by at least a scaling induced semi-failure of Bitcoin...and those who's technical and analytical skills are weak or non-existent are just expressing their inborn goober-ishness.

Sidechains not only soundly addresses the issue, but the two-way peg completely demolishes any economic concerns as well.

[Erdogan]

Here is a glittering article by Keith Weiner. He is obviously not an anarhist economic, and the fiat money fall he is describing is not related to bitcoin, but to gold:

http://keithweinereconomics.com/2012/03/15/when-gold-backwardation-becomes-permanent/

The idea, as I understood it, is that deflation (debt repayment/cancellation) will reduce trust in bonds, and the fall of the fiat (or hyperinflation) will ensue quickly. The deflation phase will not last too long.

Now, bitcoin might not be universal enough when that happens, and gold will be the most used money, including debt nominated in gold with gold interest.

In such a case, we will have an unstable situation with a small total bitcoin value compared to golds total value. That means bitcoin will continue to fluctuate as people change their opinion of what is the best money.

Supposing states will not disappear, but become increasingly intrusive, I think bitcoin still will win in the end.

[NotHatinJustTrollin]

"Gold collapsing.  Bitcoin UP"

I LOL everytime.

[thezerg]

From the bitcoin dev mailing list quoting Wladimir van der Laan:

The block chain is a single channel broadcasted over the entire
world, and I don't believe it will ever be possible nor desirable to broadcast all the
world's transactions over one channel.

The everyone-validates-everything approach doesn't scale. It is however
useful to settle larger transactions in an irreversible, zero-trust way.
That's what makes the bitcoin system, as it is now, valuable.

But it is absurd for the whole world to have to validate every purchase of
a cup of coffee or a bus ticket by six billion others.

Naively scaling up the block size will get some leeway in the short term,
but I believe a future scalable payment system based on bitcoin will be
mostly based on off-blockchain transactions (in some form) or that there
will be a hierarchical or subdivided system (e.g. temporary or per-locale
sidechains).

Thanks for quoting that!  Wladimir's quietness in the public muck is as pronounced as his activity in the codebase.  I never knew where he stood on this stuff.  My natural guess would be that anyone who is bright enough to be such a prolific code contributor would immediately understand certain things like this, but...Gavin...

As someone who has worked on and designed data management systems, Wladimir's statement is so common sense to me that it shouldn't even need to be stated.  I am aghast that there is so much dispute about it.  A very strong hypothesis is that many people who have some technical skills are busying themselves with solutions which will be viable only by at least a scaling induced semi-failure of Bitcoin...and those who's technical and analytical skills are weak or non-existent are just expressing their inborn goober-ishness.

Sidechains not only soundly addresses the issue, but the two-way peg completely demolishes any economic concerns as well.

There is no doubt that a single forever remembered blockchain cannot handle every tip or coffee bought so offchain or better sidechains are needed.  But that does not mean that BTC should not also be scaled in block size.  With the price trending down discouraging new holders we need to welcome any and all real use.  And approaching a txn limit does not help that.

[cypherdoc]

"Gold collapsing.  Bitcoin UP"

I LOL everytime.

Markets cycle.  simple as that.  Bitcoin touched Gold once, it should touch it again.  at least.

[tvbcof]

There is no doubt that a single forever remembered blockchain cannot handle every tip or coffee bought so offchain or better sidechains are needed.  But that does not mean that BTC should not also be scaled in block size.  With the price trending down discouraging new holders we need to welcome any and all real use.  And approaching a txn limit does not help that.

I would not be at all surprised if Bitcoin were to become more in-demand if it DID start to cost something to use it.  Psychologically, if someone is given something 'for free' than it is not valued very highly.  As soon as it starts to cost something then it starts to be more highly prized.

Since most thinking persons are starting to catch on to the fact that it does not make sense to broadcast every cup of java purchase to every decentralized infrastructure provider (to hold forever) and Bitcoin's only realistic role is to be for higher importance transactions, having to pay at least to cost of network operation for transactions is, in my opinion, a positive and something we should be migrating towards.  Probably by shortly after then next coinbase notch-down (roughly 8 years from the genesis block) we should get to that point.  It's very much up-in-the-air about whether that will happen even if the block size stays at 1MB.

[NotLambchop]

From the bitcoin dev mailing list quoting Wladimir van der Laan:

The block chain is a single channel broadcasted over the entire
world, and I don't believe it will ever be possible nor desirable to broadcast all the
world's transactions over one channel.

The everyone-validates-everything approach doesn't scale. It is however
useful to settle larger transactions in an irreversible, zero-trust way.
That's what makes the bitcoin system, as it is now, valuable.

But it is absurd for the whole world to have to validate every purchase of
a cup of coffee or a bus ticket by six billion others.

Naively scaling up the block size will get some leeway in the short term,
but I believe a future scalable payment system based on bitcoin will be
mostly based on off-blockchain transactions (in some form) or that there
will be a hierarchical or subdivided system (e.g. temporary or per-locale
sidechains).

...
Since most thinking persons are starting to catch on to the fact that it does not make sense to broadcast every cup of java purchase to every decentralized infrastructure provider (to hold forever) ...

It took six years for Bitcoin intelegencia to realize that 7TPS might be problematic for a currency ...or a minor payment provider.
I realize that rocket surgery & MENSA meetings keep you guys real busy, but six years...