Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 08:58:14 AM *
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 ... 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 [1060] 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1807733 times)
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
February 10, 2015, 02:14:20 AM
 #21181

The good news is that the largest and most dangerous attackers tend to be slow (compared to the pace of software development) to believe that a threat exists, decide on the correct response to neutralize the threat, and effectively execute the response.

So your argument is that Bitcoin can succeed only if its opponents are incompetent or irrational?

Also, what about the attackers who aren't the largest and most dangerous? They're not a threat?

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481360294
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481360294

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481360294
Reply with quote  #2

1481360294
Report to moderator
1481360294
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481360294

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481360294
Reply with quote  #2

1481360294
Report to moderator
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1153


View Profile
February 10, 2015, 02:23:19 AM
 #21182

That's an interesting line of reasoning.

It suggests that Bitcoin can only succeed if no such attackers exist.
Bitcoin can only succeed by growing larger than all attackers.


Maybe you and Peter Todd need to get in a room:

"Nifty paper proving what we knew already: w/o a blocksize limit there's no PoW security -> death of Bitcoin." http://t.co/VPsgVkdzj9
(https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/564934207487897601?s=03)

Since his tweet misrepresents what the paper says, it seems to me that he's irrationally entrenched in his opinion.

Yep. It is another downside of problems like this remaining unresolved for so long. As the debate continues people do become entrenched when they have have invested so much time and mental energy in their position. They have to admit to themselves that they wasted a lot of effort, if they reverse their view. This is further "cemented" once they go public and stake their reputation on an entrenched position. Peter did this with his video, and Mircea has done it on his blog in front of all his followers.

I have still not seen any reasonable argument why Bitcoin can't be allowed to scale at the rate of the slowest improving computing technology that it uses:  (bandwidth, at present).

From the abstract
Quote
We show that any situation with a fixed fee is equivalent to another situation with a limited block size.

And this is why bitcoin only allows free transactions for "priority" transactions (that are small), while everything else requires a fee. This by design ensures that there will be enough fees to support the network even if block sizes are limitless.

It is also why "priority" transactions are determined in BTC units. As the value of the network increases, fewer and fewer transaction qualify for free processing. To send a free transaction requires the equivalent of 1 BTC day (for example 2 BTC for 1/2 day or 0.5 BTC for 2 days). When BTC = $0.01 it was easy to qualify for free transactions and most were, but when BTC = $1000 very few transactions start to qualify. So by design more fees are generated as the value of bitcoin increases.

Satoshi thought this one through, and his design is holding up to the various academic attacks we are seeing.
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
February 10, 2015, 02:32:15 AM
 #21183

That's an interesting line of reasoning.

It suggests that Bitcoin can only succeed if no such attackers exist.
Bitcoin can only succeed by growing larger than all attackers.

"Growing" implies a stage of being smaller, at which point such attackers can and will destroy it. How can anything grow if it is already destroyed?




Kinda the unlikely miracle of Bitcoin's current size, perhaps. This is partly why Wences Casares, for example, likes to assert that it's much less likely for Bitcoin to have gotten from 0 to where it is today, than for it to get to 1B users from where we are now.

Haven't heard that before,...

I think he's said it multiple times, but I first him say it in his Bitcoin 2014 presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NERAN-89j8M


It is also explains the 2011 bubble, which represented almost a 1000x increase in valuation. The reason was bitcoin crossed from being a small project among a few people (i.e. 0) to being a stand alone entity, this was a massive transition and validation of the platform.

Indeed. I think that's a reasonable distinction; the transition from effectively a pet project for a few dozen people, to something that could live on its own...

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
tabnloz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 793


View Profile
February 10, 2015, 03:04:32 AM
 #21184

The HSBC story is fantastic  Cheesy Shows once again double standard toward Bitcoins from regulators not even able to police traditional institutions

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/feb/08/hsbc-files-expose-swiss-bank-clients-dodge-taxes-hide-millions


Here's a link to the ZH article giving a list of some of the clients.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-09/if-your-name-list-prepare-be-audited-or-worse
domob
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 937


View Profile WWW
February 10, 2015, 07:08:17 AM
 #21185

This math assumes the fork starts just after adjustment.
You're right, I forgot about that. So would it be best to schedule the fork for the middle of a period to minimize this impact, if that can be done? I think the Doge merged mining hardfork was scheduled for a specific block count, not time.
Yes, that can be done.  However, you also can't schedule the fork too close to the end of a retargeting period - otherwise the difficulty won't drop much, even when the hashrate drops significantly.  (That's presumably why you said "middle of a period" - this makes sense.  At least it should be some compromise.)

Use your Namecoin identity as OpenID: https://nameid.org/
Donations: 1domobKsPZ5cWk2kXssD8p8ES1qffGUCm | NMC: NCdomobcmcmVdxC5yxMitojQ4tvAtv99pY
BM-GtQnWM3vcdorfqpKXsmfHQ4rVYPG5pKS | GPG 0xA7330737
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
February 10, 2015, 01:48:49 PM
 #21186

lol: https://xato.net/passwords/ten-million-passwords/#.VNoKgbCG-RT

torrent: http://www.justhack.co.in/10-million-userpass-combolist.html

Are you on the list? ^^
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
February 10, 2015, 08:36:07 PM
 #21187


This is why we need our social identity secured by the blockchain:

http://bytemaster.bitshares.org/article/2014/12/22/BitShares-Login/

proof of concept:

1) http://faucet.bitshares.org/users/sign_in?locale=en

my very own:

2) http://www.bitsharesdemo.com/presta/
bucktotal
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 211


View Profile
February 10, 2015, 08:51:54 PM
 #21188



identity, login, and other certificate authority information might as well be backed by the security of the bitcoin network. ie, use namecoin, which is merge mined with bitcoin.

for ex. https://onename.com/

uki
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


ZEIT Knight and cryptojunk bag holder


View Profile
February 10, 2015, 11:40:03 PM
 #21189

If there exist entities that both care about Bitcoin and want to end it (and have sufficient motivation and resources)
...then they will succeed, and there's no technological solution we can implement that will stop them.

There is no substitute for growth as a defence against such attackers.
I thought I will bring back the discussion to the original topic (gold vs. BTC), using this very interesting post that fully applies to both BTC and gold. Gold has started this year pretty promising, yet the rally got capped pretty quickly as soon as there was the risk of putting the confirmation of the bottom on the charts. And down we go with the gold (see again the underlined sentence).

rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1153


View Profile
February 11, 2015, 01:56:26 AM
 #21190

If there exist entities that both care about Bitcoin and want to end it (and have sufficient motivation and resources)
...then they will succeed, and there's no technological solution we can implement that will stop them.

There is no substitute for growth as a defence against such attackers.
I thought I will bring back the discussion to the original topic (gold vs. BTC), using this very interesting post that fully applies to both BTC and gold. Gold has started this year pretty promising, yet the rally got capped pretty quickly as soon as there was the risk of putting the confirmation of the bottom on the charts. And down we go with the gold (see again the underlined sentence).

Gold was attacked by outright banning possession for 2 generations until the general population forgot about gold's role as money. Today gold is regulated mostly to jewelry and central bank transfers. Without strong general public demand, it is easy for central bank's to manipulate prices.

Bitcoin is much more difficult to attack by banning possession, so they are left with regulation and compliance (for example tax compliance). The problem (for them) is greed is slowly taking hold with more and more people in positions of authority.

For example the ex-CEO of Credit Suisse recently stated "The only investment that demonstrably keeps its value over a long period is gold, and in future perhaps also bitcoins… Gold and Bitcoins production is limited.  Not so with money.  Central banks can print money limitlessly and these days they are telling us that openly.  It’s therefore no longer recoverable." There is a massive wealth transfer opportunity with bitcoin today and that is being recognized by more and more people, greed will protect the project.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
February 11, 2015, 03:40:35 AM
 #21191

There is a massive wealth transfer opportunity with bitcoin today and that is being recognized by more and more people, greed will protect the project.

Bitcoin has the capability to introduce a wedge between the individuals who make up the ruling institutions and the institutions themselves. Those institutions are only as powerful as their ability to promise the people who work for them a better deal than they could get anywhere else.

The name is intentional, DarkWallet is created to be radical.
Something which draws less attention probably would have been wise....too late now.
Actually quite the opposite.

Radical is the winning strategy.

Remember that "government" is just a word - there is no monolithic entity with that name. Instead, there are a large number of individuals who all have their own individual goals and motivations. The extent to which they cooperate to enforce certain policies on the rest of the population is a function of how well their individual goals and motivations align with the goals of the organization itself.

Regulators can't stop Bitcoin any more than the RIAA could stop P2P file sharing, so there's no need for Bitcoin users to self-censor out of a misplaced hope that doing so will protect them.

Every time regulators attempt to stifle Bitcoin and are unsuccessful, Bitcoin will gain more credibility and more users - and very importantly many of those users will be "defectors" from the government side. As governments are finding themselves unable to stop Bitcoin, their organizations will slowly start to fill up with Bitcoin users. Identifying the positive feedback loop in this scenario is left as an exercise for the reader.

Provoking conflict with the regulators is, in fact, the best thing that can happen for Bitcoin in the long term.
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
February 11, 2015, 06:54:24 AM
 #21192

If there exist entities that both care about Bitcoin and want to end it (and have sufficient motivation and resources)
...then they will succeed, and there's no technological solution we can implement that will stop them.

There is no substitute for growth as a defence against such attackers.

That's an interesting line of reasoning.

It suggests that Bitcoin can only succeed if no such attackers exist.




Sometimes such attackers keep what is being attacked healthy.

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

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

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

Activity: 1848


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
February 11, 2015, 06:59:24 AM
 #21193

5 Reasons To Buy Gold & Silver In 2015: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-08/guest-post-5-reasons-buy-gold-silver-2015



this chart oddly reminds me Bitcoin's diff+price chart  Lips sealed

A test of the $900 to $1050 range may be in the cards...

look at past resistance...should be support...well we will see.


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

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

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

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
February 11, 2015, 07:06:10 AM
 #21194

For a price chart which spans more than 10 years, the inflation-adjusted version is also useful. (This one a little stale though).


domob
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 937


View Profile WWW
February 11, 2015, 07:21:18 AM
 #21195



identity, login, and other certificate authority information might as well be backed by the security of the bitcoin network. ie, use namecoin, which is merge mined with bitcoin.

for ex. https://onename.com/



Do they (OneName) support logins?  The official identity system in Namecoin is the id/ namespace, by the way, not OneName.  See, for instance, https://nameid.org/ - including the ability to log into websites.  (Already in summer 2013, before BitShares was even in discussion, BTW.)

Use your Namecoin identity as OpenID: https://nameid.org/
Donations: 1domobKsPZ5cWk2kXssD8p8ES1qffGUCm | NMC: NCdomobcmcmVdxC5yxMitojQ4tvAtv99pY
BM-GtQnWM3vcdorfqpKXsmfHQ4rVYPG5pKS | GPG 0xA7330737
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
February 11, 2015, 08:33:12 AM
 #21196

For a price chart which spans more than 10 years, the inflation-adjusted version is also useful. (This one a little stale though).

Okay so we are fairly near but now somewhat below recent decades' highs. What do you think that indicates?

solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
February 11, 2015, 09:03:03 AM
 #21197

For a price chart which spans more than 10 years, the inflation-adjusted version is also useful. (This one a little stale though).

Okay so we are fairly near but now somewhat below recent decades' highs. What do you think that indicates?

It looks to me that it will bounce from the $1100s, probably for a few years, even permanently.
Too many shooting wars and currency wars going on for gold to stay down IMHO.

uki
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


ZEIT Knight and cryptojunk bag holder


View Profile
February 11, 2015, 01:55:08 PM
 #21198

5 Reasons To Buy Gold & Silver In 2015: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-08/guest-post-5-reasons-buy-gold-silver-2015



this chart oddly reminds me Bitcoin's diff+price chart  Lips sealed

A test of the $900 to $1050 range may be in the cards...

look at past resistance...should be support...well we will see.
great to see the updated version of this chart. When are the next talks about raising debt ceiling scheduled? This event may ignite some short-squeeze rally in gold, and possibly it may also have a positive influence on the price of bitcoin. It seems to me that there is a positive correlation between the price of gold and bitcoin, contrary to the title of this thread. Now, which of the two is leading it is another question.

bucktotal
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 211


View Profile
February 11, 2015, 02:20:51 PM
 #21199



identity, login, and other certificate authority information might as well be backed by the security of the bitcoin network. ie, use namecoin, which is merge mined with bitcoin.

for ex. https://onename.com/



Do they (OneName) support logins?  The official identity system in Namecoin is the id/ namespace, by the way, not OneName.  See, for instance, https://nameid.org/ - including the ability to log into websites.  (Already in summer 2013, before BitShares was even in discussion, BTW.)

onename site says login support is coming. btw, i support your work big time and its a bummer the onename guys did not use /id (a mistake imo). but you gotta admit, they have a nicer website (and that sometimes matters when linking to random examples of applications)

edit: but you're right. i should have included nameid.org too.. my bad Domob.
<3



NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
February 11, 2015, 02:44:03 PM
 #21200

If there exist entities that both care about Bitcoin and want to end it (and have sufficient motivation and resources)
...then they will succeed, and there's no technological solution we can implement that will stop them.

There is no substitute for growth as a defence against such attackers.
I thought I will bring back the discussion to the original topic (gold vs. BTC), using this very interesting post that fully applies to both BTC and gold. Gold has started this year pretty promising, yet the rally got capped pretty quickly as soon as there was the risk of putting the confirmation of the bottom on the charts. And down we go with the gold (see again the underlined sentence).

The goal in both cases XAU/XBT is to increase what is "sufficient" to subvert the currency.  XAU has had thousands of years head start, and is mostly but not completely subverted.

Justusranvier correctly points out that growth is a helpful defense or that.
Bad forks are harmful to it. 
Arguably, so also it is harmful for my showing how a proposal for a fork is bad.  It is just not as harmful as would be the implementation of it.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
Pages: « 1 ... 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 [1060] 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 ... 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!