Bitcoin Forum
November 19, 2017, 10:24:36 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [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 ... 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 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2009531 times)
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
April 02, 2015, 06:36:09 PM
 #22421

Mined coins (either new or fee based) have no history and are completely clean and untraceable. If you create a new pool ID and mine behind tor you are about as secure as I can imagine.
Not if Coinbase gets their way:

http://www.coindesk.com/coinbase-seeks-details-us-bitcoin-mining/

That's simply Coinbase being trapped by KYC laws. If these miners want to sell through coinbase then coinbase has to get documentation on the source of the coins.

Mined coins on P2P or a pool outside the US that are directly donate to snowden don't face this issue, because Snowden probably isn't going to utilize their services for very obvious reasons.

Even if you do mine on a US pool, unless you give them your real identity, it doesn't matter much what they tell coinbase. Last I checked, mining pools do not ask for any identifying information.

Of course, you may need to obscure your real IP address from the pool, but that's about it.

Where this is likely going is Coinbase declaring coins from pools that don't play ball to be "high risk" or alternately declaring all coins of unknown origin to be "high risk". High risk means they won't process transactions involving those coins (will require you to send them back or possibly just seize them) or will close your account if you try to do so.

I can see a situation fairly soon (if not now) where services like Coinbase, etc. will only deal in coins that are something of a closed loop between themselves, Bitpay, and a few others, meaning those services will be available only to customers for whom that is their entire use case for Bitcoin. The rest who trade coins outside "the system" will find themselves in a new version of unbanked.

This is not satoshi's Bitcoin any more.

There are several different types of Bitcoin clients. Header-only clients like MultiBit trust that the majority of mining power is honest for the purposes of enforcing network rules such as the 21 million BTC limit. Full clients do not trust miners in this way.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511130276
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511130276

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511130276
Reply with quote  #2

1511130276
Report to moderator
1511130276
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511130276

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511130276
Reply with quote  #2

1511130276
Report to moderator
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
April 02, 2015, 07:29:43 PM
 #22422

Mined coins (either new or fee based) have no history and are completely clean and untraceable. If you create a new pool ID and mine behind tor you are about as secure as I can imagine.
Not if Coinbase gets their way:

http://www.coindesk.com/coinbase-seeks-details-us-bitcoin-mining/

That's simply Coinbase being trapped by KYC laws. If these miners want to sell through coinbase then coinbase has to get documentation on the source of the coins.

Mined coins on P2P or a pool outside the US that are directly donate to snowden don't face this issue, because Snowden probably isn't going to utilize their services for very obvious reasons.

Even if you do mine on a US pool, unless you give them your real identity, it doesn't matter much what they tell coinbase. Last I checked, mining pools do not ask for any identifying information.

Of course, you may need to obscure your real IP address from the pool, but that's about it.

Where this is likely going is Coinbase declaring coins from pools that don't play ball to be "high risk" or alternately declaring all coins of unknown origin to be "high risk". High risk means they won't process transactions involving those coins (will require you to send them back or possibly just seize them) or will close your account if you try to do so.

I can see a situation fairly soon (if not now) where services like Coinbase, etc. will only deal in coins that are something of a closed loop between themselves, Bitpay, and a few others, meaning those services will be available only to customers for whom that is their entire use case for Bitcoin. The rest who trade coins outside "the system" will find themselves in a new version of unbanked.

This is not satoshi's Bitcoin any more.

And this is exactly what I was arguing a few weeks ago that will probably happen, where the governments of the world can attack bitcoin by requiring traceable coins or possibly even 3rd party approved wallets that green address everything.

Yes people can operate outside of that, but no established business will accept coins from non-compliant address or send to non-compliant addresses, for the simple fact that the government would shut them down. And sure you could transfer your green coins out of that sub-system to non-compliant addresses or tumblers, but if doing so is illegal and easily traceable to you, then you really can't.

I think this is a very real and possible future for bitcoin. Now the flip side is complete government traceability of money will go a long way towards identifying real corruption in government agencies, etc. But it will also make it easier to seize assets from individuals/businesses at will.

The one positive outcome of such a scenario though is (provided mining remains distributed and outside of government control) then at least the 21M cap will exist and governments will be forced back onto a sound money standard. And after the coming fiat explosion the public just might demand that too.
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile
April 02, 2015, 08:59:38 PM
 #22423

did pantera just launch the paypal killer

 Huh

https://aligncommerce.com/

Whoah, I get it. I get what's going on here. They're backdooring Bitcoin into the mainstream.

Connect the dots:

1) No mention of Bitcoin on Align's website, except in the press section headlines, even though they use it. Only ever mention "the blockchain" and "blockchain technology."

2) Somehow this has escaped mention on /r/Bitcoin and elsewhere, even though it's gigantic news. They've deliberately not associated with "Bitcoin" overtly. It seems at first strange, because they could have had a bunch of easy customers from the Bitcoin community, as well as its support. Think: Overstock's Bitcoin acceptance launch where they got a bit of a sales boost. But it makes perfect sense when you realize they're gunning higher. The old paradigm is to offer service for the Bitcoin community; the new paradigm is to offer services that use Bitcoin and include no reference to it, because customers don't need to understand it, know how to secure it, or deal with it at all.

2) The recent trend of, "We don't know about this Bitcoin thing, but blockchain technology is the future" is turned on its head by Align's strategy. What was a sort of backhanded dismissal becomes a Trojan horse. Bitcoin quietly becomes the payment rails for better bank wires, stigma intact but irrelevant because no one knows they're using Bitcoin.

3) The general sense among some thinkers in the space that "when Bitcoin succeeds it'll be because people don't even know they're using it."

The implications for investment are obvious, but users of Align's service are completely removed from that. Investing in Bitcoin, to them, would be like investing in Cisco because they like buying books on Amazon.com. But Cisco still did very well because it was needed for the backbone infrastructure and investors recognized that.
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile
April 02, 2015, 09:04:04 PM
 #22424

I can see a situation fairly soon (if not now) where services like Coinbase, etc. will only deal in coins that are something of a closed loop between themselves, Bitpay, and a few others, meaning those services will be available only to customers for whom that is their entire use case for Bitcoin. The rest who trade coins outside "the system" will find themselves in a new version of unbanked.

In that scenario, Coinbase would find themselves a relatively useless niche company, a bit like AOL. They would be the ones cut out of the greater loop of the burgeoning Internet of Money. You can posit that regulators would jump on board this and restrict the US Bitcoin economy to that little niche, but it'd be like if they did the same with AOL in 1995. The vast possibilities of the Internet would have moved to other countries, leaving the US behind. How long would that have lasted? How long can they take the pain of seeing that tax revenue stream grow overseas? Smiley
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 02, 2015, 09:22:58 PM
 #22425

did pantera just launch the paypal killer

 Huh

https://aligncommerce.com/

Whoah, I get it. I get what's going on here. They're backdooring Bitcoin into the mainstream.

Connect the dots:

1) No mention of Bitcoin on Align's website, except in the press section headlines, even though they use it. Only ever mention "the blockchain" and "blockchain technology."

2) Somehow this has escaped mention on /r/Bitcoin and elsewhere, even though it's gigantic news. They've deliberately not associated with "Bitcoin" overtly. It seems at first strange, because they could have had a bunch of easy customers from the Bitcoin community, as well as its support. Think: Overstock's Bitcoin acceptance launch where they got a bit of a sales boost. But it makes perfect sense when you realize they're gunning higher. The old paradigm is to offer service for the Bitcoin community; the new paradigm is to offer services that use Bitcoin and include no reference to it, because customers don't need to understand it, know how to secure it, or deal with it at all.

2) The recent trend of, "We don't know about this Bitcoin thing, but blockchain technology is the future" is turned on its head by Align's strategy. What was a sort of backhanded dismissal becomes a Trojan horse. Bitcoin quietly becomes the payment rails for better bank wires, stigma intact but irrelevant because no one knows they're using Bitcoin.

3) The general sense among some thinkers in the space that "when Bitcoin succeeds it'll be because people don't even know they're using it."

The implications for investment are obvious, but users of Align's service are completely removed from that. Investing in Bitcoin, to them, would be like investing in Cisco because they like buying books on Amazon.com. But Cisco still did very well because it was needed for the backbone infrastructure and investors recognized that.

sounds like the Coin.ph model except for businesses only.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 02, 2015, 10:00:43 PM
 #22426

Ripple, Jed, and Bitstamp back in the news:

$1 Million Legal Fight Ensnares Ripple, Bitstamp and Jed McCaleb

http://www.coindesk.com/bitstamp-court-1-million-dispute-ripple-jed-mccaleb/
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 02, 2015, 11:04:30 PM
 #22427

Grinding higher.

 This one could hurt.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
April 02, 2015, 11:08:17 PM
 #22428

I can see a situation fairly soon (if not now) where services like Coinbase, etc. will only deal in coins that are something of a closed loop between themselves, Bitpay, and a few others, meaning those services will be available only to customers for whom that is their entire use case for Bitcoin. The rest who trade coins outside "the system" will find themselves in a new version of unbanked.

In that scenario, Coinbase would find themselves a relatively useless niche company, a bit like AOL. They would be the ones cut out of the greater loop of the burgeoning Internet of Money. You can posit that regulators would jump on board this and restrict the US Bitcoin economy to that little niche, but it'd be like if they did the same with AOL in 1995. The vast possibilities of the Internet would have moved to other countries, leaving the US behind. How long would that have lasted? How long can they take the pain of seeing that tax revenue stream grow overseas? Smiley

Bear in mind that AOL ended up buying a large media company and is still around (recently or soon to be spun off into a standalone company again, I'm not sure which), so that is not necessarily an outcome that would be considered a failure. They didn't stay on the leading edge of technology (though that was never really their model anyway).

In fact the analogy between AOL and Coinbase is fairly close. Both were created to make a new technology more accessible to the masses in a watered down form.


ssmc2
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1092


View Profile
April 02, 2015, 11:21:35 PM
 #22429

http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2015/04/02/how-bitcoin-will-end-world-poverty/

Posted by Steve Forbes himself.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 02, 2015, 11:34:12 PM
 #22430


there's that blockchain again!
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
April 03, 2015, 12:03:01 AM
 #22431

did pantera just launch the paypal killer

 Huh

https://aligncommerce.com/

Whoah, I get it. I get what's going on here. They're backdooring Bitcoin into the mainstream.

Connect the dots:

1) No mention of Bitcoin on Align's website, except in the press section headlines, even though they use it. Only ever mention "the blockchain" and "blockchain technology."

2) Somehow this has escaped mention on /r/Bitcoin and elsewhere, even though it's gigantic news. They've deliberately not associated with "Bitcoin" overtly. It seems at first strange, because they could have had a bunch of easy customers from the Bitcoin community, as well as its support. Think: Overstock's Bitcoin acceptance launch where they got a bit of a sales boost. But it makes perfect sense when you realize they're gunning higher. The old paradigm is to offer service for the Bitcoin community; the new paradigm is to offer services that use Bitcoin and include no reference to it, because customers don't need to understand it, know how to secure it, or deal with it at all.

2) The recent trend of, "We don't know about this Bitcoin thing, but blockchain technology is the future" is turned on its head by Align's strategy. What was a sort of backhanded dismissal becomes a Trojan horse. Bitcoin quietly becomes the payment rails for better bank wires, stigma intact but irrelevant because no one knows they're using Bitcoin.

3) The general sense among some thinkers in the space that "when Bitcoin succeeds it'll be because people don't even know they're using it."

The implications for investment are obvious, but users of Align's service are completely removed from that. Investing in Bitcoin, to them, would be like investing in Cisco because they like buying books on Amazon.com. But Cisco still did very well because it was needed for the backbone infrastructure and investors recognized that.

Once again I agree with you on most points.

This and Abra Global are two beautiful ways of abstracting Bitcoin out of the picture for the benefit of commercial and mass consumer adoption.

They seem to have a great team and equally impressive backers.

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile
April 03, 2015, 12:19:11 AM
 #22432

I can see a situation fairly soon (if not now) where services like Coinbase, etc. will only deal in coins that are something of a closed loop between themselves, Bitpay, and a few others, meaning those services will be available only to customers for whom that is their entire use case for Bitcoin. The rest who trade coins outside "the system" will find themselves in a new version of unbanked.

In that scenario, Coinbase would find themselves a relatively useless niche company, a bit like AOL. They would be the ones cut out of the greater loop of the burgeoning Internet of Money. You can posit that regulators would jump on board this and restrict the US Bitcoin economy to that little niche, but it'd be like if they did the same with AOL in 1995. The vast possibilities of the Internet would have moved to other countries, leaving the US behind. How long would that have lasted? How long can they take the pain of seeing that tax revenue stream grow overseas? Smiley

Bear in mind that AOL ended up buying a large media company and is still around (recently or soon to be spun off into a standalone company again, I'm not sure which), so that is not necessarily an outcome that would be considered a failure. They didn't stay on the leading edge of technology (though that was never really their model anyway).

In fact the analogy between AOL and Coinbase is fairly close. Both were created to make a new technology more accessible to the masses in a watered down form.

I could buy that scenario. Since there's such a massive gulf between pure Bitcoin and pure Fed money, we might end up with several shades of gray trying to operate simultaneously for a while.
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile
April 03, 2015, 12:25:46 AM
 #22433

This and Abra Global are two beautiful ways of abstracting Bitcoin out of the picture for the benefit of commercial and mass consumer adoption.

Wow, another one I haven't heard of, also with no Bitcoin branding. Could 2015 be the year Bitcoin goes sort of invisible?
ssmc2
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1092


View Profile
April 03, 2015, 12:31:38 AM
 #22434


Yeah I'm beginning to wonder if it's intentional or if they really don't grasp the connection. If the latter, then it truly shows how early days we are and when the undeniable realization does hit, well, hyperbitcoinization here we come.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 03, 2015, 12:40:22 AM
 #22435


Yeah I'm beginning to wonder if it's intentional or if they really don't grasp the connection. If the latter, then it truly shows how early days we are and when the undeniable realization does hit, well, hyperbitcoinization here we come.

I keep saying most people investing in cryptocurrencies are going to lose money. It's more than trivial and is because Bitcoin is uniquely complex. There's alot of components to grok at one time and most people aren't equipped to do so especially since the most important component involves sound money. Having been a gold bug really helps.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
April 03, 2015, 02:46:15 AM
 #22436


Where this is likely going is Coinbase declaring coins from pools that don't play ball to be "high risk" or alternately declaring all coins of unknown origin to be "high risk". High risk means they won't process transactions involving those coins (will require you to send them back or possibly just seize them) or will close your account if you try to do so.

IIRC Greg Maxwell himself mentioned that Coinbase closed his account.  I think I recall him mentioning it on this thread, or at least this forum.  I don't believe that they appropriated his BTC, but there would be very little to stop them if they were instructed to do by the regulators for whatever reason.

The most plausible reason for Coinbase to do take this action is that Maxwell's coins were mixed, probably with coinjoin which he mostly authored I think.  Certainly the guy has every reason to hodl a boat-load of BTC which he obtained through completely honest means.

I doubt that Coinbase is under any more obligation to tell anyone why they his account than Wells Fargo was when they canceled my bank account.  That is to say, none.  They told me straight up that they had no intention of telling me in writing why my account was canceled, though they did verbally tell me that it was due to my activities with Coinbase.  Coinbase was utterly un-interested in the details which surprised me slightly since they were implicated by name and one would think that such an action if it became a trend could impact their business.

Upshot:  Your projections of the possible future are somewhat off in terms of timing.  The future was already here.  There is room for things to become significantly worse, though, and they probably will.


I can see a situation fairly soon (if not now) where services like Coinbase, etc. will only deal in coins that are something of a closed loop between themselves, Bitpay, and a few others, meaning those services will be available only to customers for whom that is their entire use case for Bitcoin. The rest who trade coins outside "the system" will find themselves in a new version of unbanked.

This is not satoshi's Bitcoin any more.

I suspect that a participant in the Bitcoin ecosystem who is willing to lift the rose-colored classes on occasion and generally keep his eye on the ball will be rewarded for doing so.  At least if they have something non-trivial on the line.  As Gavin guides us gently closer to the alligator's mouth there will be times when it makes sense to take certain evasive actions.


Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1638



View Profile
April 03, 2015, 02:50:05 AM
 #22437

...
This and Abra Global are two beautiful ways of abstracting Bitcoin out of the picture for the benefit of commercial and mass consumer adoption.
...

Fine on hand, but on the other it's really annoying when people just say "blockchain technology" because it lets people think that there's a purpose/value to blockchain technology without an independent valuable on-chain asset.

So I suppose we could just start calling the bitcoin blockchain something which cannot rationally apply to anything else. Like: "Secure Blockchain" or something.... eg: "Abra and Align Commerce both utilize the breakthrough Secure Blockchain as rails for cheap and instant global payments."

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
Cryptoasset rankings and metrics for investors: http://onchainfx.com
vokain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736


View Profile
April 03, 2015, 02:51:32 AM
 #22438


Where this is likely going is Coinbase declaring coins from pools that don't play ball to be "high risk" or alternately declaring all coins of unknown origin to be "high risk". High risk means they won't process transactions involving those coins (will require you to send them back or possibly just seize them) or will close your account if you try to do so.

IIRC Greg Maxwell himself mentioned that Coinbase closed his account.  I think I recall him mentioning it on this thread, or at least this forum.  I don't believe that they appropriated his BTC, but there would be very little to stop them if they were instructed to do by the regulators for whatever reason.

The most plausible reason for Coinbase to do take this action is that Maxwell's coins were mixed, probably with coinjoin which he mostly authored I think.  Certainly the guy has every reason to hodl a boat-load of BTC which he obtained through completely honest means.

I doubt that Coinbase is under any more obligation to tell anyone why they his account than Wells Fargo was when they canceled my bank account.  That is to say, none.  They told me straight up that they had no intention of telling me in writing why my account was canceled, though they did verbally tell me that it was due to my activities with Coinbase.  Coinbase was utterly un-interested in the details which surprised me slightly since they were implicated by name and one would think that such an action if it became a trend could impact their business.

Upshot:  Your projections of the possible future are somewhat off in terms of timing.  The future was already here.  There is room for things to become significantly worse, though, and they probably will.

I can see a situation fairly soon (if not now) where services like Coinbase, etc. will only deal in coins that are something of a closed loop between themselves, Bitpay, and a few others, meaning those services will be available only to customers for whom that is their entire use case for Bitcoin. The rest who trade coins outside "the system" will find themselves in a new version of unbanked.

This is not satoshi's Bitcoin any more.

I suspect that a participant in the Bitcoin ecosystem who is willing to lift the rose-colored classes on occasion and generally keep his eye on the ball will be rewarded for doing so.  At least if they have something non-trivial on the line.  As Gavin guides us gently closer to the alligator's mouth there will be times when it makes sense to take certain evasive actions.



Worse is here:

[2015-03-27] Evolution Marketplace Collapse Violates Bitcoin Fungibility


http://www.coindesk.com/bonafide-raises-850k-build-reputation-system-bitcoin/
"Moyer, who started his career doing signals intelligence for the army and later for the NSA, used cash as an analogy for the way bitcoin is right now pretty much anonymous [but right now pretty much not at all].

He said:

“You know if I bring you a million dollars of cash there is something wrong. The reason is, you have no way of knowing where that money comes from [but you definitely do with Bitcoin :malicious grin:].”"



         ▄█▄  ▄▄▄▄
          ▀ ▄██████▄
    ▄▄▄   ▄███▀▀███
  ▄█████▄ ▀█▀ ███▄ ▀▀
 ███▀  ▀██▄    ████▄   
 █▀ ▄██▄ ▀█▀ ▄██▀ ▀█▀ ▄██
  ▄██▀     ▄██▀     ▄██▀
 ██▀ ▄█▄ ▄██▀ ▄█▄  ██▀ ▄▄
      ▀███▀    ▀██▄  ▄██▀
     ▄▄ ▀██▄ ▄█▄ ▀█████▀
     ███▄▄██▀   ▀▀
      ▀██████▀
        ▀▀▀▀   ██▀

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


▄███▄    ▄███▄
███  ██▄ █▀▀▄
████████  ███▀
██▀ ▄███       
████████▄▄  ▄█▀
 ██████▀▀██▀▀
  ▀███▀▄▄   ▄
   ▀██▄██ ▄█▀
     ▀▀██▀▀
FULLY
ANONYMOUS

━━━━━
/

    ██▄▄              ▄▄██
   █▀  ▀█▄ ▄▄▄▄████▄██▀  ▀█
  █▀   ▄███▀▀▀       █▄   ▀█
 █▀   ▄███▄ ▄▄█▄▄     █▄   ▀█
██▄  ▄████████████▄▄  █▄  ▄██
  ▀▀██▀███████████████▄███▀▀
      ▀█▄█▀███████████▀▀
        ▀███▀███████▀
           ▀▀▀▀██▀▀
INSTANT
TRANSFER

━━━━
/

     ▄████▄
 ▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▀██▀ ▀█  ▀█ ███▀
 ██ ▀ █ ▀▄█ ███
▄██▄█▄█▄███▄███▄
▀██████████████▀
 ▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
     ▀████▀
API FOR YOUR
PROJECTS

━━━━

  █
  █
  █
████
  █
████
  █
████
  █
  █
  █
PARTNER PROGRAM
TOR MIRROR
MIX WALLET
.FAQ
ANN THREAD
TELEGRAM
rocks
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1149


View Profile
April 03, 2015, 04:07:09 AM
 #22439

...
This and Abra Global are two beautiful ways of abstracting Bitcoin out of the picture for the benefit of commercial and mass consumer adoption.
...

Fine on hand, but on the other it's really annoying when people just say "blockchain technology" because it lets people think that there's a purpose/value to blockchain technology without an independent valuable on-chain asset.

So I suppose we could just start calling the bitcoin blockchain something which cannot rationally apply to anything else. Like: "Secure Blockchain" or something.... eg: "Abra and Align Commerce both utilize the breakthrough Secure Blockchain as rails for cheap and instant global payments."

I like that suggestion.

It seems to me that when most people say they are interested in the "blockchain technology" but not BTC, they are focused on the protocol and ledger aspects of the blockchain and not on the distributed security mechanism of the blockchain. These are two separate things.

It is perfectly possible to have a Google blockchain or a FED blockchain where the 3rd party provides security and maintenance for their own blockchain. These blockchain chains would still have the same protocol, ability for direct transactions, machine to machine micro-payments, etc. They would however lack the distributed security mechanism of bitcoin and rely on trust with the 3rd party. People who say bitcoin's value is the blockchain and not BTC seem to be OK with this scenario.

Bitcoin's blockchain has both "the blockchain protocol" and "the blockchain distributed security mechanism" (which requires the token to have independent value).

We call this "the blockchain" today, but it's really two separate concepts and I think that is what is commonly missed in the general public. If you separate them conceptually, and convince people that the blockchain's distributed security mechanism is valuable and desirable also, then it becomes easier to discuss why the token has to have value. If that person doesn't need a distributed security mechanism and instead trusts the FED, then for them it is just the protocol that has value.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
April 03, 2015, 04:21:25 AM
 #22440

...
This and Abra Global are two beautiful ways of abstracting Bitcoin out of the picture for the benefit of commercial and mass consumer adoption.
...

Fine on hand, but on the other it's really annoying when people just say "blockchain technology" because it lets people think that there's a purpose/value to blockchain technology without an independent valuable on-chain asset.

So I suppose we could just start calling the bitcoin blockchain something which cannot rationally apply to anything else. Like: "Secure Blockchain" or something.... eg: "Abra and Align Commerce both utilize the breakthrough Secure Blockchain as rails for cheap and instant global payments."

I like that suggestion.

It seems to me that when most people say they are interested in the "blockchain technology" but not BTC, they are focused on the protocol and ledger aspects of the blockchain and not on the distributed security mechanism of the blockchain. These are two separate things.

It is perfectly possible to have a Google blockchain or a FED blockchain where the 3rd party provides security and maintenance for their own blockchain. These blockchain chains would still have the same protocol, ability for direct transactions, machine to machine micro-payments, etc. They would however lack the distributed security mechanism of bitcoin and rely on trust with the 3rd party. People who say bitcoin's value is the blockchain and not BTC seem to be OK with this scenario.

Bitcoin's blockchain has both "the blockchain protocol" and "the blockchain distributed security mechanism" (which requires the token to have independent value).

We call this "the blockchain" today, but it's really two separate concepts and I think that is what is commonly missed in the general public. If you separate them conceptually, and convince people that the blockchain's distributed security mechanism is valuable and desirable also, then it becomes easier to discuss why the token has to have value. If that person doesn't need a distributed security mechanism and instead trusts the FED, then for them it is just the protocol that has value.

Other applications attempting to use a block chain data structure are merely creating an alternative type of db. One that is arguably less efficient unless centralized at which point it becomes questionable whether the use of a block chain is preferable.

Bitcoin's data base is unique in that the information it transmits is scarce and a liquid market exists for it.

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
Pages: « 1 ... 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 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 ... 1558 »
  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!