Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 11:13:12 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 ... 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 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1807774 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 05:13:10 AM
 #22121


Litecoin fading != "there will only be one" is starting to catch on

All the recent attention to the dangers of BTC's lack of privacy and fungibility have only highlighted the need for coins that offer those features.

Radical transparency certainly has its uses in certain places.  But so does radical opacity.

Hence today's brouhaha among the redditurds:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2zrdxz/withdrawals_halted_as_stolen_evolution_coins_make/

That's just a bunch of FUD. Tainting coins has not worked once in Bitcoins history.
1481368392
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481368392

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481368392
Reply with quote  #2

1481368392
Report to moderator
1481368392
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481368392

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481368392
Reply with quote  #2

1481368392
Report to moderator
1481368392
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481368392

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481368392
Reply with quote  #2

1481368392
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 05:33:11 AM
 #22122


Litecoin fading != "there will only be one" is starting to catch on

All the recent attention to the dangers of BTC's lack of privacy and fungibility have only highlighted the need for coins that offer those features.

Radical transparency certainly has its uses in certain places.  But so does radical opacity.

Hence today's brouhaha among the redditurds:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2zrdxz/withdrawals_halted_as_stolen_evolution_coins_make/

That's just a bunch of FUD. Tainting coins has not worked once in Bitcoins history.

That depends what you mean by worked. If the reports of a blockage of btc-e transactions are correct (I'm not really sure) then people were inconvenienced by the mere attempt to sort through tainted coins, whether or not that attempt was successful. As long as people believe BTC has taint then maybe that perception itself is a problem? This is not the first and won't be the last time we've heard about the concern.

In any case, I have to agree with iCEBREAKER that LTC is irrelevant and the more interesting question is other coins that are actually different from BTC in meaningful ways.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
March 22, 2015, 05:59:37 AM
 #22123


Litecoin fading != "there will only be one" is starting to catch on

All the recent attention to the dangers of BTC's lack of privacy and fungibility have only highlighted the need for coins that offer those features.

Radical transparency certainly has its uses in certain places.  But so does radical opacity.

Hence today's brouhaha among the redditurds:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2zrdxz/withdrawals_halted_as_stolen_evolution_coins_make/

That's just a bunch of FUD. Tainting coins has not worked once in Bitcoins history.

You may define down, or otherwise minimize, as rigorously and deflectively as you like the term 'tainting.'

smooth and I prefer the functional definition, elucidated via praxis.

IE, if you wish to move your coins, but are prevented from doing so by consequence of some third parties' ostensible interest in them rather than technical obstacles, they are by the common understanding 'tainted.'

The nightmare scenario for you Old Whales is a whitelist, where by default movement of all non-permitted coins is forbidden.

Did you read the linked reddit discussion?  Peter Todd makes some good points in this area, albeit on the shaky grounds of the slippery slope trope.

The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy.  David Chaum 1996
Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect.  Adam Back 2014
"Monero" : { Private - Auditable - 100% Fungible - Flexible Blocksize - Wild & Free® - Intro - Wallets - Podcats - Roadmap - Dice - Blackjack - Github - Android }


Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016
Blocks must necessarily be full for the Bitcoin network to be able to pay for its own security.  davout 2015
Blocksize is an intentionally limited resource, like the 21e6 BTC limit.  Changing it degrades the surrounding economics, creating negative incentives.  Jeff Garzik 2013


"I believed @Dashpay instamine was a bug & not a feature but then read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg13017231#msg13017231
I'm not against people making money, but can't support questionable origins."
https://twitter.com/Tone_LLT/status/717822927908024320


The raison d'être of bitcoin is trustlessness. - Eric Lombrozo 2015
It is an Engineering Requirement that Bitcoin be “Above the Law”  Paul Sztorc 2015
Resiliency, not efficiency, is the paramount goal of decentralized, non-state sanctioned currency -Jon Matonis 2015

Bitcoin is intentionally designed to be ungovernable and governance-free.  luke-jr 2016

Technology tends to move in the direction of making surveillance easier, and the ability of computers to track us doubles every eighteen months. - Phil Zimmerman 2013

The only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small. Fight Features. - Andy Tanenbaum 2004

"Hard forks cannot be co
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 06:45:53 AM
 #22124

A very nice article about bitcoin and gold virtues if (when?) the dollar collapses:

When the Dollar Collapses, which is better Money, Gold or Bitcoin?
Was satoshis intent to allow for a gold backed bitcoin since there is a reason he chose 21 million units based on amount of gold oz estimated that will be mined?
I was also thinking that the limit would be removed though because an exchange medium involving two parties relies on work instead of debt... With proof of work you exchange work for proof of work.. With limit being reached the value of the work stops rising breaking incentive to provide work reducing value as a currency.. Although the population increase may negate that.

Maybe you make it asymptotically reach 21 million so that you have an ever increasing value of work and strong incentives to work to mine.. And create efficiencies to mine easier (making it an energy issue rather than a algorithm issue)
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 06:53:50 AM
 #22125

The nightmare scenario for you Old Whales is a whitelist, where by default movement of all non-permitted coins is forbidden.

Did you read the linked reddit discussion?  Peter Todd makes some good points in this area, albeit on the shaky grounds of the slippery slope trope.

Voluntary whitelisting will never take off. Government whitelisting might happen, but so might government bans. Both are likely to be isolated/temporary, because of the chilling effects they would have on economic growth in the countries implementing them, once Bitcoin is a little more advanced.

Peter Todd is sounding like a codehead, thinking of everything from the technical angle not actual incentives (cypher's meme: "The Geeks Fail to Understand That Which They Hath Created"). There is no slippery slope of incentives for a voluntary whitelist, and that's why it's never been done before. If thieves come to an exchange practically announcing, "THESE COINS ARE STOLEN," the exchange might see it as good PR to refuse them until the coins are better mixed, but if they do any more than that, refusing coins with some level of taint, they just destroy their own business.

There's a somewhat bombastic speech by Stefan Molyneux on /r/Bitcoin today where he points out that if people had to pay directly for the war on drugs, it would come to $XXXXX per person, and people would find their moral indignation fading away quite quickly. I think the same is true with whitelists. The momentary outrage at scammers is not realistically going to incentivize people to make actual sacrifices, especially monetary sacrifices. People might say they'd patronize BTC-e if they only take clean coins, but if accounts start getting frozen customers will make a beeline out of there.

People think they have a strong opinion when they're gabbing on a forum, but the market reveals how much they really care. It's only in government where people's voice on what they think they want, but would never be willing to pay for, comes to fruition.
tabnloz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 793


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 06:54:58 AM
 #22126

IBM, The Fed & GovCoin: Love blockchain, not bitcoin

http://seekingalpha.com/article/3016986-govcoin-ibm-and-intel-flirt-with-the-blockchain
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 07:16:36 AM
 #22127


That's just a bunch of FUD. Tainting coins has not worked once in Bitcoins history.

It's never been attempted.  The infrastructure has not been developed or if it has it is not yet unvailed.  All in good time.  Probably we need Gavin's bloatchain to make sure it isn't premature and fails due to adaptation.  I personally think that even primitive tainting will work quite well even at this point due to the mechanism I've described multiple times here.  We'll see soon enough I suspect unless it waits on Gavin and he gets enough resistance to push back his timing significantly.

You may define down, or otherwise minimize, as rigorously and deflectively as you like the term 'tainting.'

smooth and I prefer the functional definition, elucidated via praxis.

IE, if you wish to move your coins, but are prevented from doing so by consequence of some third parties' ostensible interest in them rather than technical obstacles, they are by the common understanding 'tainted.'

The nightmare scenario for you Old Whales is a whitelist, where by default movement of all non-permitted coins is forbidden.

Did you read the linked reddit discussion?  Peter Todd makes some good points in this area, albeit on the shaky grounds of the slippery slope trope.

Thankfully my coins are clean so whitelisting for me would only be a disaster insofar as it would destroy any reason whatsoever for anyone to used Bitcoin and thus the solution (and my stash) would eventually die.  I'd either cash out before it dawned on people that Bitcoin was useless, or hope that a following system would start out where Bitcoin left off vis-a-vis a value base.  Probably some combination of both.


smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 07:56:36 AM
 #22128

A very nice article about bitcoin and gold virtues if (when?) the dollar collapses:

When the Dollar Collapses, which is better Money, Gold or Bitcoin?
Was satoshis intent to allow for a gold backed bitcoin

No

Quote
since there is a reason he chose 21 million units based on amount of gold oz estimated that will be mined?

and no.

uki
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


ZEIT Knight and cryptojunk bag holder


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:02:32 AM
 #22129

Gold up, Bitcoin down in the last few days, folks.
Although in the grand scheme of things it is all versus the US dollar (the king). I don't think Bitcoin and gold are correlated in any direct way.

hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 02:33:45 PM
 #22130

Gold up, Bitcoin down in the last few days, folks.
Although in the grand scheme of things it is all versus the US dollar (the king). I don't think Bitcoin and gold are correlated in any direct way.


i think in the grand scheme vs the dollar they are correlated - as safe havens, store of value..
one digital, and one material - two faces of the same coin.
and both subjects to fiat-ers manipulations.
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 816



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 04:21:16 PM
 #22131

JR,

what's up with Odom leaving Monetas?
I only know one side of the story right now, so I can't really say.

Why aren't more people talking about this? OT was supposed to be huge for Bitcoin, it was Chris' baby for a long time now...
belmonty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 355


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 04:41:55 PM
 #22132

A very nice article about bitcoin and gold virtues if (when?) the dollar collapses:

When the Dollar Collapses, which is better Money, Gold or Bitcoin?
Was satoshis intent to allow for a gold backed bitcoin

No

Quote
since there is a reason he chose 21 million units based on amount of gold oz estimated that will be mined?

and no.



I might be wrong, but thought there was some programming reason why there are 100 million sats in a bitcoin. That might also be why he chose 21 million total coins.
uki
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


ZEIT Knight and cryptojunk bag holder


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 04:49:24 PM
 #22133

Gold up, Bitcoin down in the last few days, folks.
Although in the grand scheme of things it is all versus the US dollar (the king). I don't think Bitcoin and gold are correlated in any direct way.


i think in the grand scheme vs the dollar they are correlated - as safe havens, store of value..
one digital, and one material - two faces of the same coin.
and both subjects to fiat-ers manipulations.
that is true, although I think still not that much noticeable for Bitcoin due to relatively small market cap, as it is for gold.
Once Bitcoin becomes more widely spread (more applications) I expect similar "trends" as for gold, in function of US dollar.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 05:17:13 PM
 #22134

Gold up, Bitcoin down in the last few days, folks.
Although in the grand scheme of things it is all versus the US dollar (the king). I don't think Bitcoin and gold are correlated in any direct way.


weren't you the one with the great log chart of BTC/XAU showing a clear uptrend?
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 05:21:12 PM
 #22135

A very nice article about bitcoin and gold virtues if (when?) the dollar collapses:

When the Dollar Collapses, which is better Money, Gold or Bitcoin?
Was satoshis intent to allow for a gold backed bitcoin

No

Quote
since there is a reason he chose 21 million units based on amount of gold oz estimated that will be mined?

and no.


Yes

"This decreasing-supply algorithm was chosen because it approximates the rate at which commodities like gold are mined."

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_supply

If true then could be yes to first question too because many ppl would feel "safe" with their money in bitcoin backed by gold...ofcourse benefiting the early adopters the most..

The perception that bitcoin is not backed by anything would change and the negative nancies would have nothing else to fight with.. That is when we distribute.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 05:32:18 PM
 #22136


Litecoin fading != "there will only be one" is starting to catch on

All the recent attention to the dangers of BTC's lack of privacy and fungibility have only highlighted the need for coins that offer those features.

Radical transparency certainly has its uses in certain places.  But so does radical opacity.

Hence today's brouhaha among the redditurds:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2zrdxz/withdrawals_halted_as_stolen_evolution_coins_make/

That's just a bunch of FUD. Tainting coins has not worked once in Bitcoins history.

You may define down, or otherwise minimize, as rigorously and deflectively as you like the term 'tainting.'

smooth and I prefer the functional definition, elucidated via praxis.

IE, if you wish to move your coins, but are prevented from doing so by consequence of some third parties' ostensible interest in them rather than technical obstacles, they are by the common understanding 'tainted.'

The nightmare scenario for you Old Whales is a whitelist, where by default movement of all non-permitted coins is forbidden.

Did you read the linked reddit discussion?  Peter Todd makes some good points in this area, albeit on the shaky grounds of the slippery slope trope.

i think BTC-e is temporarily deluded at best.

first, they have no clear way of proving which coins were stolen.  it makes no sense that the thieves would send stolen coins directly to BTC-e for sale w/o a few intermediate hops at least.  similarly, "mule" activity can only be suspected, not proved.  secondly, while i agree BTC-e has the right to choose to behave as they wish (it being a free mkt), the consequences of such actions will be to destroy their own business as internet of money (Bitcoin) will choose to route around them if their behavior persists.  thirdly, i doubt they're acting out of pure ethics; the behavior is suspicious as the owners have been anonymous from the beginning making this freezing of coins highly suspicious.  my bet is that they had some of their own coins on Evo and they're just trying to retrieve them.  thirdly, do you really think they will just freeze the coins and then destroy them?  hell no, they'll eventually have to decide to return them to their rightful owners, destroy them, or turn them over to some law enforcement agency (think DOJ).  in the first instance, those owners will then merrily go off and spend those coins freely as if nothing happened and recipients of those coins will do likewise.  in the second instance, destroying them would be an untenable act as the rightful owners (if they can even be identified) would scream bloody foul again destroying their customer base.  if they try to hold them "forever", suspicions will arise that they might eventually spend them themselves (BTC-e).  in the third instance of turning them over to DOJ or some gvt (and here's the real zinger) what do you think they would do with them?  Voila!  we already have 3 instances of exactly what the feds would do:  auction them off.  and this is where the ultimate hypocrisy comes from all this moral and legal parsing going on about this tainting issue.  when gvts believe they have the moral authority to do what's right for them and them only (auctioning and running off with the proceeds from "illegal activity") they undermine confidence in themselves from the viewpoint of the people.  i know that when i see these auctions going off on SR coins or the auction the Aussie authorities are planning, i think hypocrisy, ie theft.  this is why the Bitcoin community will ultimately give those tainted coins a pass and accept them in everyday trade.  if the gvt can do it, so can they.  this "pass" just takes time.  in 2 wks, this Evo thing will have blown over.  furthermore, if the community refuses to do this, it means the end of Bitcoin as what is paramount is the principle of fungibility.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 05:38:22 PM
 #22137


Thankfully my coins are clean so whitelisting for me would only be a disaster insofar as it would destroy any reason whatsoever for anyone to used Bitcoin and thus the solution (and my stash) would eventually die.  I'd either cash out before it dawned on people that Bitcoin was useless, or hope that a following system would start out where Bitcoin left off vis-a-vis a value base.  Probably some combination of both.



i'd bet you have a few of MyBitcoins theft in your stash:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=548508.0
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 05:48:28 PM
 #22138

A very nice article about bitcoin and gold virtues if (when?) the dollar collapses:

When the Dollar Collapses, which is better Money, Gold or Bitcoin?
Was satoshis intent to allow for a gold backed bitcoin

No

Quote
since there is a reason he chose 21 million units based on amount of gold oz estimated that will be mined?

and no.



I might be wrong, but thought there was some programming reason why there are 100 million sats in a bitcoin. That might also be why he chose 21 million total coins.

that was Vitalik in an article coupla years ago.  it was interesting.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 05:51:42 PM
 #22139

JR,

what's up with Odom leaving Monetas?
I only know one side of the story right now, so I can't really say.

Why aren't more people talking about this? OT was supposed to be huge for Bitcoin, it was Chris' baby for a long time now...

well i tried
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 06:02:14 PM
 #22140


Litecoin fading != "there will only be one" is starting to catch on

All the recent attention to the dangers of BTC's lack of privacy and fungibility have only highlighted the need for coins that offer those features.

Radical transparency certainly has its uses in certain places.  But so does radical opacity.

Hence today's brouhaha among the redditurds:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2zrdxz/withdrawals_halted_as_stolen_evolution_coins_make/

That's just a bunch of FUD. Tainting coins has not worked once in Bitcoins history.

That depends what you mean by worked. If the reports of a blockage of btc-e transactions are correct (I'm not really sure) then people were inconvenienced by the mere attempt to sort through tainted coins, whether or not that attempt was successful. As long as people believe BTC has taint then maybe that perception itself is a problem? This is not the first and won't be the last time we've heard about the concern.

there have been multiple attempts to taint BTC's over the years.  all have failed.  to be clear, i don't condone theft in any way, but the fact of the matter is that Bitcoin IS fungible for all the reasons i've stated above.  it has to be to survive.  just like USD's are fungible.  sure the gvt can issue warnings for certain serial #'s on dollar bills but that is a limited and a non-scalable act (probably purposely).  tainting just a few BTC would eventually taint the entire supply of existing BTC as demonstrated in Taras thread i linked to above.  it is scalable and therefore dangerous to Bitcoin.  tainting is not practical either as just a few hops obfuscates ownership quite effectively w/o extreme degrees of detective work:  http://trilema.com/2014/guidance-there-is-no-such-thing-as-bitcoin-taint/

any gvt that subscribes to the notion of tainting will only exclude themselves from the growing Bitcoin economy as there will always be gvts somewhere that will allow those coins through either b/c of better understanding of how distributed systems over the Internet work or b/c of greed.
Quote

In any case, I have to agree with iCEBREAKER that LTC is irrelevant and the more interesting question is other coins that are actually different from BTC in meaningful ways.

i disagree.  when the #2 cryptocurrency goes down that sends a big message.  this assumes of course that Bitcoin is "good enough" or that it can be adaptable in the future.
Pages: « 1 ... 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 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 ... 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!