Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 06:11:14 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 ... 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 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1806902 times)
inca
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 06:50:03 AM
 #22661

Somewhat related to my post above, on this blockchain-without-bitcoin business:

There are several things going on here:

1) Bitcoin's blockchain data-structure with POW-voting was created to allow a completely permissionless network.

2) We think that the permissionless quality is desirable for money (and more general global record-of-authority use), in that it makes the money unconfiscatable and uncensorable.

3) We tolerate the practical inelegances of blockchain systems because of #2.

4) One *can* create a blockchain in a permissioned environment and therefore eliminate the native unit of account, since the native unit is only technically necessary to create the incentive for the permissionless aspect to be credible. But then by definition ("permissioned env"), you don't have #2, so we're talking about something *completely* different than bitcoin.

5) #4 is essentially a linear advance in database tech. Cool, but totally without any of the ramifications of bitcoin (global currency, open platform for innovation, etc). Hyperledger, Eris, and Ripple all pretty much fall into this category, and it's totally different than bitcoin. We shouldn't even consider it all that related.


Excellent succinct post.
1481263874
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481263874

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481263874
Reply with quote  #2

1481263874
Report to moderator
1481263874
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481263874

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481263874
Reply with quote  #2

1481263874
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481263874
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481263874

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481263874
Reply with quote  #2

1481263874
Report to moderator
1481263874
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481263874

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481263874
Reply with quote  #2

1481263874
Report to moderator
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 07:07:39 AM
 #22662

In terms of economic incentives toward SC bleeding value out of MC, which appears to be a major misgiving with SCs; it has already happened with alts less so now (but I think it will accelerate again when a bull phase returns) and also with counterparty, mastercoin and bitshares that are in essence one-way pegged assets.

So we already have it in the protocol to create 1-way pegs, you can't stop that and they have shown how they siphon value out of the main chain, e.g. mastercoin has been many multiples of its btc 'cost' at times. In all probability, making a 2-way peg facility available that makes it more efficient to go in and out of the MC makes it less likely than it currently is for value in total to exit the MC via super successful 1-way pegged assets. Therefore in that analysis, as the protocol currently exists it is more vulnerable than one allowing for 2-way pegs. You could consider it as the 2-way peg closing the economic value loophole for an attack with very successful 1-way pegged assets ... shhhhh. After a successful soft-fork allowing for 2-way pegged assets any entity proposing 1-way pegged assets will be viewed skeptically and economically disadvantaged by the market perception of losing interoperability with the MC. The market will prefer 2-way pegged assets over 1-way pegged every time, and that is a net benefit to the total value proposition of bitcoin surely.

That is an interesting way to look at it, thanks

so we have supposedly all these one way 2.0's siphoning value out of the MC, so i have an even better idea:  we'll make a change to the protocol to make it even easier to facilitate a thousand more at least.  but it'll be better b/c the value can come back if it wants to!

In a SC the value cannot be permanently lost since it is still in the same circulatory system and the pressure (value) can be efficiently transferred around.

Comparing a diode to a copper wire is not controversial; one allows current in one direction only, the other both. Or a non-return valve to a tap. I'm not here to convince you btw, but you do seem to be making it harder than it needs to be.

smooth
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1246



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 07:57:24 AM
 #22663

In terms of economic incentives toward SC bleeding value out of MC, which appears to be a major misgiving with SCs; it has already happened with alts less so now (but I think it will accelerate again when a bull phase returns) and also with counterparty, mastercoin and bitshares that are in essence one-way pegged assets.

So we already have it in the protocol to create 1-way pegs, you can't stop that and they have shown how they siphon value out of the main chain, e.g. mastercoin has been many multiples of its btc 'cost' at times. In all probability, making a 2-way peg facility available that makes it more efficient to go in and out of the MC makes it less likely than it currently is for value in total to exit the MC via super successful 1-way pegged assets. Therefore in that analysis, as the protocol currently exists it is more vulnerable than one allowing for 2-way pegs. You could consider it as the 2-way peg closing the economic value loophole for an attack with very successful 1-way pegged assets ... shhhhh. After a successful soft-fork allowing for 2-way pegged assets any entity proposing 1-way pegged assets will be viewed skeptically and economically disadvantaged by the market perception of losing interoperability with the MC. The market will prefer 2-way pegged assets over 1-way pegged every time, and that is a net benefit to the total value proposition of bitcoin surely.

That is an interesting way to look at it, thanks

so we have supposedly all these one way 2.0's siphoning value out of the MC, so i have an even better idea:  we'll make a change to the protocol to make it even easier to facilitate a thousand more at least.  but it'll be better b/c the value can come back if it wants to!

In a SC the value cannot be permanently lost since it is still in the same circulatory system and the pressure (value) can be efficiently transferred around.

Comparing a diode to a copper wire is not controversial; one allows current in one direction only, the other both. Or a non-return valve to a tap. I'm not here to convince you btw, but you do seem to be making it harder than it needs to be.

The value of the currency unit is not lost but the value of the "system" consisting of the main chain plus the currency unit may be degraded if an alternative chain becomes dominant. The main chain would exist only for the purposes of mining distribution, and then once distribution is negligible or complete, not at all.

I see nothing particularly wrong with this, as it is an "upgrade path" but I think cypherdoc sees it as dilutive of the original Bitcoin system (which he would rather see improved-in-place rather than replaced).
ranlo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 09:12:19 AM
 #22664

In terms of economic incentives toward SC bleeding value out of MC, which appears to be a major misgiving with SCs; it has already happened with alts less so now (but I think it will accelerate again when a bull phase returns) and also with counterparty, mastercoin and bitshares that are in essence one-way pegged assets.

So we already have it in the protocol to create 1-way pegs, you can't stop that and they have shown how they siphon value out of the main chain, e.g. mastercoin has been many multiples of its btc 'cost' at times. In all probability, making a 2-way peg facility available that makes it more efficient to go in and out of the MC makes it less likely than it currently is for value in total to exit the MC via super successful 1-way pegged assets. Therefore in that analysis, as the protocol currently exists it is more vulnerable than one allowing for 2-way pegs. You could consider it as the 2-way peg closing the economic value loophole for an attack with very successful 1-way pegged assets ... shhhhh. After a successful soft-fork allowing for 2-way pegged assets any entity proposing 1-way pegged assets will be viewed skeptically and economically disadvantaged by the market perception of losing interoperability with the MC. The market will prefer 2-way pegged assets over 1-way pegged every time, and that is a net benefit to the total value proposition of bitcoin surely.

That is an interesting way to look at it, thanks

so we have supposedly all these one way 2.0's siphoning value out of the MC, so i have an even better idea:  we'll make a change to the protocol to make it even easier to facilitate a thousand more at least.  but it'll be better b/c the value can come back if it wants to!

In a SC the value cannot be permanently lost since it is still in the same circulatory system and the pressure (value) can be efficiently transferred around.

Comparing a diode to a copper wire is not controversial; one allows current in one direction only, the other both. Or a non-return valve to a tap. I'm not here to convince you btw, but you do seem to be making it harder than it needs to be.

The value of the currency unit is not lost but the value of the "system" consisting of the main chain plus the currency unit may be degraded if an alternative chain becomes dominant. The main chain would exist only for the purposes of mining distribution, and then once distribution is negligible or complete, not at all.

I see nothing particularly wrong with this, as it is an "upgrade path" but I think cypherdoc sees it as dilutive of the original Bitcoin system (which he would rather see improved-in-place rather than replaced).


People look at things the wrong way. Let's use a real-world example to show it:

Gold was a form of money. Silver was its lesser counterpart.
Fiat was created, based on gold. Now fiat is the main currency, while gold/silver are investment vehicles.

All of these have value. They are all convertible between one another. Just because fiat took over doesn't mean the others were destroyed/worthless.

I think BTC is the same way. I have very little doubts that it will be taken over by other currencies. But I think it will remain a main investment vehicle and therefore still have its use/value. It just won't be what we use for day-to-day transacting.

Unichange.me
Unique · Universal · Uniting


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



















Earn Devcoins by Writing
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
April 09, 2015, 09:23:26 AM
 #22665

People look at things the wrong way. Let's use a real-world example to show it:

Gold was a form of money. Silver was its lesser counterpart.
Fiat was created, based on gold. Now fiat is the main currency, while gold/silver are investment vehicles.

All of these have value. They are all convertible between one another. Just because fiat took over doesn't mean the others were destroyed/worthless.

I think BTC is the same way. I have very little doubts that it will be taken over by other currencies. But I think it will remain a main investment vehicle and therefore still have its use/value. It just won't be what we use for day-to-day transacting.
Let's take a bunch of loosely-correlated facts, without any examination of context or cause-and-effect relationships, and hope the process of extrapolating conclusions from all this returns results more accurate than a random number generator.
ranlo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 09:55:00 AM
 #22666

People look at things the wrong way. Let's use a real-world example to show it:

Gold was a form of money. Silver was its lesser counterpart.
Fiat was created, based on gold. Now fiat is the main currency, while gold/silver are investment vehicles.

All of these have value. They are all convertible between one another. Just because fiat took over doesn't mean the others were destroyed/worthless.

I think BTC is the same way. I have very little doubts that it will be taken over by other currencies. But I think it will remain a main investment vehicle and therefore still have its use/value. It just won't be what we use for day-to-day transacting.
Let's take a bunch of loosely-correlated facts, without any examination of context or cause-and-effect relationships, and hope the process of extrapolating conclusions from all this returns results more accurate than a random number generator.

Deal. My result came out to be "42." Yours?

Unichange.me
Unique · Universal · Uniting


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



















Earn Devcoins by Writing
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 11:34:14 AM
 #22667

Cypher, just curious if you've seen this and what your thoughts are...

http://prestonbyrne.com/2015/04/08/blockchain-without-bitcoin-is-now-a-thing/

I read that whole spiel. Totally transparent effort to create a fuss where there is none.

TL;DR: "You actually can do some sort-of-blockchain-like things that are potentially interesting without having a monetary token, if you do it centralized or basically centralized. For actual decentralized applications, well, they can be done but the onus is on YOU to make the impossible possible so I'm just going to handwave that away."

--

You can separate "Bitcoin from the blockchain" if you're flexible enough with your definition of the word "blockchain" and you use it build something completely different than Bitcoin without any of the decentralized aspects that make it so special and uniquely useful. But at that point you're more just trying to leverage a buzzword than doing anything that warrants mention alongside Bitcoin.
nanobrain
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756


Dumb broad


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 11:47:18 AM
 #22668

You boys need to go and play in the fresh air for a while.

nothing to see here
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 11:50:17 AM
 #22669

In terms of economic incentives toward SC bleeding value out of MC, which appears to be a major misgiving with SCs; it has already happened with alts less so now (but I think it will accelerate again when a bull phase returns) and also with counterparty, mastercoin and bitshares that are in essence one-way pegged assets.

So we already have it in the protocol to create 1-way pegs, you can't stop that and they have shown how they siphon value out of the main chain, e.g. mastercoin has been many multiples of its btc 'cost' at times. In all probability, making a 2-way peg facility available that makes it more efficient to go in and out of the MC makes it less likely than it currently is for value in total to exit the MC via super successful 1-way pegged assets. Therefore in that analysis, as the protocol currently exists it is more vulnerable than one allowing for 2-way pegs. You could consider it as the 2-way peg closing the economic value loophole for an attack with very successful 1-way pegged assets ... shhhhh. After a successful soft-fork allowing for 2-way pegged assets any entity proposing 1-way pegged assets will be viewed skeptically and economically disadvantaged by the market perception of losing interoperability with the MC. The market will prefer 2-way pegged assets over 1-way pegged every time, and that is a net benefit to the total value proposition of bitcoin surely.

That is an interesting way to look at it, thanks

so we have supposedly all these one way 2.0's siphoning value out of the MC, so i have an even better idea:  we'll make a change to the protocol to make it even easier to facilitate a thousand more at least.  but it'll be better b/c the value can come back if it wants to!

In a SC the value cannot be permanently lost since it is still in the same circulatory system and the pressure (value) can be efficiently transferred around.

Comparing a diode to a copper wire is not controversial; one allows current in one direction only, the other both. Or a non-return valve to a tap. I'm not here to convince you btw, but you do seem to be making it harder than it needs to be.

try grafting on an additional persons circulatory system to yours.  see if your heart can handle the extra load.  it can't as it is in equilibrium and its capacity is fine tuned for your body only.

i'm making this harder?  eye of the beholder.  i'd say the Blockstream ppl are the ones making this hard.  especially when it comes to expanding the block size.  i've even heard one of them wanting to let Bitcoin bump up against the 1MB limit just to "see what happens".  a cynic would say it's b/c of their for profit bid on the SC concept altho i'll give 'em a pass on their face value arguments about "dangers" to doing so.

if anything, as a vocal Sound Money advocate, you'd think i'd be opposed to increasing the block size to steer Bitcoin towards being a gold like reserve currency which should, in theory, drive its exchange value to the Moon.  instead, i'm all for innovation and am willing to compromise with the ppl who envision Bitcoin as a payment network which can only be accomplished by lifting the 1MB limit.  that's my compromise for this project as that is how firmly i believe that innovation ought to occur on MC, not SC's.  

edit:  btw, i didn't see your comment on the exchange graphs i posted above showing that Bitcoin is, in fact, suppressing XCP, Bit-X, and MC
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 11:59:56 AM
 #22670

In terms of economic incentives toward SC bleeding value out of MC, which appears to be a major misgiving with SCs; it has already happened with alts less so now (but I think it will accelerate again when a bull phase returns) and also with counterparty, mastercoin and bitshares that are in essence one-way pegged assets.

So we already have it in the protocol to create 1-way pegs, you can't stop that and they have shown how they siphon value out of the main chain, e.g. mastercoin has been many multiples of its btc 'cost' at times. In all probability, making a 2-way peg facility available that makes it more efficient to go in and out of the MC makes it less likely than it currently is for value in total to exit the MC via super successful 1-way pegged assets. Therefore in that analysis, as the protocol currently exists it is more vulnerable than one allowing for 2-way pegs. You could consider it as the 2-way peg closing the economic value loophole for an attack with very successful 1-way pegged assets ... shhhhh. After a successful soft-fork allowing for 2-way pegged assets any entity proposing 1-way pegged assets will be viewed skeptically and economically disadvantaged by the market perception of losing interoperability with the MC. The market will prefer 2-way pegged assets over 1-way pegged every time, and that is a net benefit to the total value proposition of bitcoin surely.

That is an interesting way to look at it, thanks

so we have supposedly all these one way 2.0's siphoning value out of the MC, so i have an even better idea:  we'll make a change to the protocol to make it even easier to facilitate a thousand more at least.  but it'll be better b/c the value can come back if it wants to!

In a SC the value cannot be permanently lost since it is still in the same circulatory system and the pressure (value) can be efficiently transferred around.

Comparing a diode to a copper wire is not controversial; one allows current in one direction only, the other both. Or a non-return valve to a tap. I'm not here to convince you btw, but you do seem to be making it harder than it needs to be.

The value of the currency unit is not lost but the value of the "system" consisting of the main chain plus the currency unit may be degraded if an alternative chain becomes dominant. The main chain would exist only for the purposes of mining distribution, and then once distribution is negligible or complete, not at all.

I see nothing particularly wrong with this, as it is an "upgrade path" but I think cypherdoc sees it as dilutive of the original Bitcoin system (which he would rather see improved-in-place rather than replaced).


i can't see how the value of the currency unit is not lost when passing thru to a SC.  the combo of unit + MC is what secures its value so w/o the original hashing power of the MC, the unit ceases to have equivalent value.  plus, all the risk of moving the unit over to the other side of a high friction 2wp that prevents seamless passage for at least 2d and is based on an spv lookback proof.

yes, that is my fear, that SC's dilute the value of the MC and thus the entire Bitcoin system.  one of the major purposes of SC's is to enable all sorts of other speculative asset trading.  i think that takes away from Bitcoin as an alternative form of money.  remember that the fiat money crisis is the major problem we have today and is what is enabling all the trickle down problems throughout the economy.  this is why all the "BC-only" crowd are working hard to get you to ignore Bitcoin "the currency".
sporket
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:01:46 PM
 #22671

...
try grafting on an additional persons circulatory system to yours.  see if your heart can handle the extra load. ...

Bitcoin's got a bum liver, renal failure & has been bled out on top of all this.  Some additional plumbing is its only hope Sad

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:06:36 PM
 #22672

...
try grafting on an additional persons circulatory system to yours.  see if your heart can handle the extra load. ...

Bitcoin's got a bum liver, renal failure & has been bled out on top of all this.  Some additional plumbing is its only hope Sad

-

since you're so into images, NLC, tell me who needed an emergency transfusion?:

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:07:51 PM
 #22673

crap, i'm getting on planes all day.  seem to get into these discussions at these times...
Meuh6879
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:17:57 PM
 #22674

Bitcoin's got a bum liver, renal failure & has been bled out on top of all this.  Some additional plumbing is its only hope Sad



Well, you can use an other illustration ...  Cool


French ... but not so much   ---===---   P2P ... it's people at the end   ---===---   P2Pool (10,9 GH/s).
Comment miner des bitcoins ? Un tutoriel est là : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1114415.0
Bitcoin change everything ... an explain of this fact : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joITmEr4SjY
sporket
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:21:23 PM
 #22675

...
since you're so into images, NLC, tell me who needed an emergency transfusion?:
[giant pic]

OMG, that really is something, Cypher!  Looks like USD is just absolute crap!

And yet...

USD price continues to rise vis-a-vis BTC Sad
BTC is even shittier shit than USD Huh
To fail so hard...
Cheesy
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:47:05 PM
 #22676

...
since you're so into images, NLC, tell me who needed an emergency transfusion?:
[giant pic]

OMG, that really is something, Cypher!  Looks like USD is just absolute crap!

And yet...

USD price continues to rise vis-a-vis BTC Sad
BTC is even shittier shit than USD Huh
To fail so hard...
Cheesy

Dude, I can get 244 of them for one measly bitcoin! Can you imagine that!
sporket
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:48:28 PM
 #22677

^Not for long Cheesy
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:50:55 PM
 #22678

^Not for long Cheesy

I know, I know.

I'll be able to get a whole lot Moar!
sporket
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:57:04 PM
 #22679

^A lifetime of organic solvent abuse is catching up to you, cypher.
Please head down to the hospital while you can still do it under your own steam Smiley

...
try grafting on an additional persons circulatory system to yours.  see if your heart can handle the extra load. ...

Bitcoin's got a bum liver, renal failure & has been bled out on top of all this.  Some additional plumbing is its only hope Sad

Spaceman_Spiff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile
April 09, 2015, 12:58:53 PM
 #22680

try grafting on an additional persons circulatory system to yours.  see if your heart can handle the extra load.  it can't as it is in equilibrium and its capacity is fine tuned for your body only.
Actually (though I don't know if anyone has ever done this on a human), this works fine in mice.  Look up 'parabiosis'.
Pages: « 1 ... 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 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 ... 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!