Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

Looks like Coinbase wired money is finally arriving.  Mine gets there tomorrow. Shucks. 

[1714217464]

1714217464

[1714217464]

1714217464

[1714217464]

1714217464

[1714217464]

1714217464

[cbeast]

How about using your energy to offer a solution.  Sticking your finger in the eye of the process is counterproductive.  It seems that the most productive people in Bitcoin are offering solutions and getting conversations started.  Without Gavin coding and testing the very large blocks we would not be talking about it or working toward a solution.

Believe it or not, but seeing a centralized non-community based hard-fork process as a problem and opening up a discussion on a possible method to resist/hold off that centralized change until it is more community driven, is in fact offering solutions to problems. Here the problem is centralized driven hard-forks, not block-size limit increases.  If no one likes or is on-board with the proposal, then there is little point spending energy on it. But if it resonates with some people then maybe it is. Oh, and people have been talking about large blocks since before Gavin took on his maintainer role.

 A method to resist is not a solution to a problem.  It is a hope for stagnation.   Since people have been discussing large blocks since before Gavin took it on, maybe large blocks are needed.  I think Gavin's method of suggestion and testing is much more constructive than obstructive and I fail to see how it is centralised.

http://www.bizforum.org/Journal/www_journalJVP018.htm

Gavin's method engenders some centralization of nodes.  A great number of nodes can be made to disappear by a single pool loading up some very large blocks.  There are other problems with it, but this one may be sufficient for some folks to disagree with it.  Node population is an important factor of scalability and functionality.  The proposal harms such scalability in order to foster microtransaction scalability.

The internet is not a uniform web of high speed links globally.  There are great differences in costs and deployed infrastructure.  Very large blocks may reduce Bitcoin to a Northern hemisphere usability.

There are going to be risks with any change.  Better proposals than Gavin's have been made and discussed, but they require more code.  They are not as simple.

One thing is sure, and that is if we do another hard fork to set-it-and-forget-it using a guess as to what the future of the internet will be based on current or past data, we are going to be wrong about that guess.

Gavin's solution is a very good one from a software-development perspective.  It is not a good solution from a protocol perspective.  These are very different things.

That we use the data of the block chain, the size of the blocks, or the fees paid to the miners, or a formula combining these, to determine what the environment of the future economy will require.

This says nothing technical. Fees are not technical data. They are sociological. He is implying a sociological solution to a protocol and claiming thre is some magical formula. Miners choose what size the block should be. Bitcoin already has that sociological base covered.

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

Can someone with access to Stratfor post the text of this article?

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/bitcoin-moves-closer-regulation

[cypherdoc]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up. Time for you to flip your tune and say you been calling it all along.

[cypherdoc]

http://insidebitcoins.com/news/tech-visionaries-predict-one-global-cryptocurrency-bitcoin/29422

[marcus_of_augustus]

Can someone with access to Stratfor post the text of this article?

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/bitcoin-moves-closer-regulation

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2ujrzh/bitcoin_could_soon_stabilize_stratfor/

[tvbcof]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up. Time for you to flip your tune and say you been calling it all along.

My being so right and you being so wrong with your one-trick-pony show is really getting under your skin I guess.  Sorry about that.  My good calls are mostly luck I assure you.

I am quite confident that if you get your way on Bitcoin it will be curtains for the solution.  You may realize that and simply plan to do your dump at that point, but I actually believe there is a better than 50% chance that you earnestly believe your own nonsense.  I'm burnt out on being more rude then that at the moment else I would use a variety of caustic characterizations to describe your being here.

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

Can someone with access to Stratfor post the text of this article?

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/bitcoin-moves-closer-regulation

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2ujrzh/bitcoin_could_soon_stabilize_stratfor/

Thanks. Thought it might be more insightftul.

[cbeast]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up. Time for you to flip your tune and say you been calling it all along.

My being so right and you being so wrong with your one-trick-pony show is really getting under your skin I guess.  Sorry about that.  My good calls are mostly luck I assure you.

I am quite confident that if you get your way on Bitcoin it will be curtains for the solution.  You may realize that and simply plan to do your dump at that point, but I actually believe there is a better than 50% chance that you earnestly believe your own nonsense.  I'm burnt out on being more rude then that at the moment else I would use a variety of caustic characterizations to describe your being here.

There is a irreconcilable difference between you two. cypherdoc wants to profit from Bitcoin's wide adoption while tvbcof wants to profit from daytrading. cypherdoc believes in the long term sociological impact the Bitcoin experiment will have while tvbcof believes Bitcoin is doomed to the whims of the controlling powers and no more than a pyramid that will eventually collapse.

As long as neither resort to social engineering, it's all good.

I understand the upload vs download bandwidth argument. It's not a problem because it will deter no fee transactions. Nobody wants to spend bitcoins that will never get confirm. Except double spenders, but there are better ways to catch them.

I understand the attractiveness of parallel processing Bitcoin transactions through side chains, but they don't solve the bandwidth problem unless you use only one side chain exclusively. That issue has not been addressed.

[gargantuar]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up. Time for you to flip your tune and say you been calling it all along.

My being so right and you being so wrong with your one-trick-pony show is really getting under your skin I guess.  Sorry about that.  My good calls are mostly luck I assure you.

I am quite confident that if you get your way on Bitcoin it will be curtains for the solution.  You may realize that and simply plan to do your dump at that point, but I actually believe there is a better than 50% chance that you earnestly believe your own nonsense.  I'm burnt out on being more rude then that at the moment else I would use a variety of caustic characterizations to describe your being here.

There is a irreconcilable difference between you two. cypherdoc wants to profit from Bitcoin's wide adoption while tvbcof wants to profit from daytrading. cypherdoc believes in the long term sociological impact the Bitcoin experiment will have while tvbcof believes Bitcoin is doomed to the whims of the controlling powers and no more than a pyramid that will eventually collapse.

As long as neither resort to social engineering, it's all good.

I understand the upload vs download bandwidth argument. It's not a problem because it will deter no fee transactions. Nobody wants to spend bitcoins that will never get confirm. Except double spenders, but there are better ways to catch them.

I understand the attractiveness of parallel processing Bitcoin transactions through side chains, but they don't solve the bandwidth problem unless you use only one side chain exclusively. That issue has not been addressed.

Also tvbcof is one of those people that can't tell the difference between "then" and "than."  Cypherdoc is smarter that way too. 

[tvbcof]

Also tvbcof is one of those people that can't tell the difference between "then" and "than."  Cypherdoc is smarter that way too. 

I also get 'ya' and 'yeah' mixed up.  Me dumb-dumb.

[cypherdoc]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up. Time for you to flip your tune and say you been calling it all along.

My being so right and you being so wrong with your one-trick-pony show is really getting under your skin I guess.  Sorry about that.  My good calls are mostly luck I assure you.

I am quite confident that if you get your way on Bitcoin it will be curtains for the solution.  You may realize that and simply plan to do your dump at that point, but I actually believe there is a better than 50% chance that you earnestly believe your own nonsense.  I'm burnt out on being more rude then that at the moment else I would use a variety of caustic characterizations to describe your being here.

There is a irreconcilable difference between you two. cypherdoc wants to profit from Bitcoin's wide adoption while tvbcof wants to profit from daytrading. cypherdoc believes in the long term sociological impact the Bitcoin experiment will have while tvbcof believes Bitcoin is doomed to the whims of the controlling powers and no more than a pyramid that will eventually collapse.

this pretty much sums it up.

except i believe tvbcof misrepresents his "calls" and is a legend in his own mind.  i don't remember him giving any "buy" or "sell" advice around here ever.

[tvbcof]

There is a irreconcilable difference between you two. cypherdoc wants to profit from Bitcoin's wide adoption while tvbcof wants to profit from daytrading. cypherdoc believes in the long term sociological impact the Bitcoin experiment will have while tvbcof believes Bitcoin is doomed to the whims of the controlling powers and no more than a pyramid that will eventually collapse.
...

Really?  I've gone through exactly three periods of activity since 2011.  Buying until the bottom, Getting my money back at 10x, and taking some profits at 100x.  'daytrading' is not at all my game.  For folks who like it and are good at it, God bless.

I did play around on Bitcoinica out of boredom once.  IIRC I about 10x'd my money in a few weeks trying to lose it.  That was PURE shit-house luck.  It was not worth the few hundred bucks to hand over my identity docs to an exchange in order to try to get USD so I just gave the proceeds to ~goat who used them for a party for some orphans in Thailand.  So he said anyway.

--edit:  Bitcoinica proceeded to 'lose' everyone's money not long after I drained my account.  I had similar 'luck' at Mt. Gox.  I took half the one-time 'pocket change' I had with Instawallet out like the day before they 'got hacked'.  Happily they gave me the other half back.  I guess I'm just lucky with these things.  Mt. Gox still owes me a $5k wire.  That's the one place I've been burnt so far.  Perhaps fiat will take precidence over BTC when the dust from this event finally settles.  Time will tell.  Whatever the case it is such a tiny fraction of my activities I can easily write it off as a 'cost of doing business'.  At least I didn't have to pay taxes on the $5k.  Yet.

As for being doomed, I wouldn't be here if I thought that.  The number of users even here on trolltalk who recognize the danger and futility of trying to make it some sort of universal exchange currency is one thing that I find encouraging.  There is a fair chance that the 1MB blocksize won't even be attempted which would gives me hope.  And of course, sidechains...

I understand the attractiveness of parallel processing Bitcoin transactions through side chains, but they don't solve the bandwidth problem unless you use only one side chain exclusively. That issue has not been addressed.

...which give the masses the power of Bitcoin at it's core and a whole heap of bells and whistles which actually make it usable by them.  Many of the additional capabilities will be mutually exclusive options so it would be logically impossible for native Bitcoin to fulfill these needs in any circumstance.

[tvbcof]

this pretty much sums it up.

except i believe tvbcof misrepresents his "calls" and is a legend in his own mind.  i don't remember him giving any "buy" or "sell" advice around here ever.

Pffft!  Just a few hours ago you were accusing me of doing so.  Whatever dude.

[traderCJ]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up.

Well hopefully people haven't been taking your advice for the past year.  Unfortunately, I'm sure some did, and they have paid dearly.  Shame on you.

[cypherdoc]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up.

Well hopefully people haven't been taking your advice for the past year.  Unfortunately, I'm sure some did, and they have paid dearly.  Shame on you.

except i haven't been saying buy for the entire year.

shame on you for your buy recommendations on gold and silver.  they've performed miserably since 2011 and have been flat at best for the last year.

you must be frustrated.

[traderCJ]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up.

Well hopefully people haven't been taking your advice for the past year.  Unfortunately, I'm sure some did, and they have paid dearly.  Shame on you.

except i haven't been saying buy for the entire year.

shame on you for your buy recommendations on gold and silver.  they've performed miserably since 2011 and have been flat at best for the last year.

you must be frustrated.

Cypher, you've been nothing but bullish over the course of the entire thread's life.  In fact, you admitted that this is a place for you to troll to bears.  When it comes to PMs, I never said buy (to my recollection).  I'm not a salesman, unlike you.  I called you out on being wrong on gold vs Bitcoin for an entire year.  Hell, more than a year.  And although you probably do not recall, what I said about PMs was my shift to them from Bitcoin worked in my favor.  Furthermore, I have stated many times that gold and Bitcoin solve different problems.  Comparing the two from a functional standpoint doesn't make sense.  You, on the other hand, would rather preach the ultimate dominance of Bitcoin from your pulpit.  And like I said, this I'm sure has resulted in losses from those hapless people who have taken your advice over the past year.  It is your unmitigated arrogance that I take exception to.

[tvbcof]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up.

Well hopefully people haven't been taking your advice for the past year.  Unfortunately, I'm sure some did, and they have paid dearly.  Shame on you.

except i haven't been saying buy for the entire year.

Oh, excuse me.  I took your suggestion that everything else including fiat sucks and should be dumped to be an indication that you were implying Bitcoin was where to be (from $1000 on down to $200.)  My bad.

shame on you for your buy recommendations on gold and silver.  they've performed miserably since 2011 and have been flat at best for the last year.

you must be frustrated.

Not at all.  I've not bought either one that I can recall since 2007-ish and have not suggested that anyone else do either.  All I've said is that _I_ would and do balance between the two items (Bitcoin and PM's) and I've said the same thing for 4 years here.  PM's have done exactly what I want them to do for me and a bunch more.  I have no regrets about any of my decisions on how to diversify my portfolio.

I would feel worse about dumping all my PM's and going all in to Bitcoin even if I had done so.  Even though it would have made me a ton of money it would have been an irresponsible gamble in my situation.  I don't pat myself on the back as having some special skill if I roll snake-eyes, land on community chest, and collect a 'bank error in my favor'.  That's just luck.  There were a bunch of things that could easily have gone haywire with Bitcoin over the last 4 years and we got very lucky on them.  The emergency hard-fork was one of these.

[cbeast]

Hey tvbcof, we're going back up.

Well hopefully people haven't been taking your advice for the past year.  Unfortunately, I'm sure some did, and they have paid dearly.  Shame on you.

except i haven't been saying buy for the entire year.

shame on you for your buy recommendations on gold and silver.  they've performed miserably since 2011 and have been flat at best for the last year.

you must be frustrated.

Cypher, you've been nothing but bullish over the course of the entire thread's life.  In fact, you admitted that this is a place for you to troll to bears.  When it comes to PMs, I never said buy (to my recollection).  I'm not a salesman, unlike you.  I called you out on being wrong on gold vs Bitcoin for an entire year.  Hell, more than a year.  And although you probably do not recall, what I said about PMs was my shift to them from Bitcoin worked in my favor.  Furthermore, I have stated many times that gold and Bitcoin solve different problems.  Comparing the two from a functional standpoint doesn't make sense.  You, on the other hand, would rather preach the ultimate dominance of Bitcoin from your pulpit.  And like I said, this I'm sure has resulted in losses from those hapless people who have taken your advice over the past year.  It is your unmitigated arrogance that I take exception to.

cypherdoc has not suggested anyone to buy more than they can hold long term. Therefore, there have been no resultant losses over the past year.

[traderCJ]

cypherdoc has not suggested anyone to buy more than they can hold long term. Therefore, there have been no resultant losses over the past year.

Losses in terms of USD, absolutely.