Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 08:51:54 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 ... 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 [1297] 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1805453 times)
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 09:42:23 PM
 #25921

...I don't buy his "computer model" explanation though. Wink

You probably lack appropriate domain knowledge to form an accurate assessment?

Have you not reviewed his record of correct predictions? It is essentially flawless since the 1980s if you understand his predictions are conditional and price and time are separate predictions.

You are most possibly right. I probably lack of the appropriate knowledge; nevertheless I have (as stated) said that he "passed one test", which (clarifying further for those who misunderstood) that his "model" is proven to be working. What I'm not sure about is that it's based on a computer model ie: a relational database mining s/w that includes every single economic data out there, that is able through calculations to extract an accurate prediction within a chaotic model.

To put it into perspective, as a theoretical physicist, I rest assure you that such a model is defined as "unpredictable". If you know more on the matter, I'd be honoured if you satiated my curiosity and obliterate my ignorance. I can certify that I'm more than capable to understand (even though it will take some more time than most geniuses in here) subjects from IT to QM (nevertheless, I stopped a while ago, being productive on the 1st one). Thanks in advance for your help.

I will come back to this after some sleep.

1481100714
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481100714

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481100714
Reply with quote  #2

1481100714
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481100714
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481100714

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481100714
Reply with quote  #2

1481100714
Report to moderator
1481100714
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481100714

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481100714
Reply with quote  #2

1481100714
Report to moderator
1481100714
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481100714

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481100714
Reply with quote  #2

1481100714
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 09:42:35 PM
 #25922

of course not.  as long as you continue to constrain it to 1MB.

You missed the technical point. Start was referring to "won't run".

i'm pretty sure he meant "start competing".

Because you aren't a programmer. Szabo is.

first off, Szabo didn't tweet that.  Oleganza did.  the word "start" is juxtaposed btwn 2 forms of the word "compete".  it means "start competing". 

second, even a non-programmer such as myself realizes that Oleganza would never claim Bitcoin won't even "start running".  it IS running currently.  he would have said something like it can't "scale".
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 09:45:04 PM
 #25923

from today.  TPTB and Armstrong think in lockstep about Summers:

We are simply drowning with people in charge who have no real world experience. According to the former US Treasury Secretary and Harvard economist Larry Summers “the world suffers from a savings surplus and therefore threatens to fall into a secular stagnation.” He looks at the world through fogged glasses – not even a rose colored pair. He claims that now for decades to come we will have to adjust accordingly to slower economic growth and increasing economic and social problems. The reason for this is that in some countries such as China and Germany, people saved too much, rather than consume or to invest. Therefore, they exported their savings abroad and thus led to an oversupply of savings, for there is no sufficient demand. Summers’ solution –  the cash-free economy.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong_economics_blog

He won't publish my "21 Inc" revelation. I emailed him 3 times.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 09:50:34 PM
 #25924

Besides, pwuille, nullc, lukejr, and petertodd don't need my help bending you over and administering corrective spankings.  They're already doing a great job of that.

They make the same points I made in this thread. Why? Because we are all expert programmers and understand the myriad of (often interlocking and conflicting) details that eye doctors and junior programmers don't.

Btw those linked points by core devs make  the case for the need for a scalable design for crypto-currency.

everyone should read those 3 links.  i have the most upvotes of the community; votes which include those of programmers and those who disagree with me as it is a net difference.

i used to be intimidated engaging those with a programming background.  somehow i thought that anything they said would be backed up by some computer simulation or research data i didn't have access to.  or some basic computer knowledge that i had not been trained in.  after all, in my profession before anyone dares spout any claims there has to be a double blinded comprehensive treatment control study done over a prolonged period of time that needs to prove statistical significance that one has done or can point to have been done.

i've learned, most disappointedly, that this is not the case for most coders and programmers.  what they claim or tout to be fact is simply a logic test.  armchair logic.  like the Peter Todd's of the world and TPTB_need_war.  they don't do any testing or simulations of any kind.  they think that their logic is somehow superior to non coders.  and they think simply by applying logic they can understand how Bitcoin will perform.  well, they have mostly all been wrong.  very few of them saw it.  and not TPTB_need_war.  he needs to explain how someone like me, a non coder, figured this out before he did.  granted, i am pretty good with computers and even better now since 2011.  but i will tell you, it was mostly my knowledge around economics, trading, and game theory which allowed me to figure out that Bitcoin had so much promise.  but what is clear from TPTB's comments is that he totally rejects that.  that is called arrogance or hubris.  or more likely obfuscation from a plant.  please re-read how bizarre his posts truly are.  it's baffling.  

Disrespecting programmers isn't going to gain our admiration. Programming is all about logic.

No we don't think we can only apply logic to know how Bitcoin will perform without having real world test data to include in our logic. Did you entirely miss Gregory's points on this matter  Huh

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 09:58:06 PM
 #25925

of course not.  as long as you continue to constrain it to 1MB.

You missed the technical point. Start was referring to "won't run".

i'm pretty sure he meant "start competing".

Because you aren't a programmer. Szabo is.

first off, Szabo didn't tweet that.  Oleganza did.  the word "start" is juxtaposed btwn 2 forms of the word "compete".  it means "start competing".  

second, even a non-programmer such as myself realizes that Oleganza would never claim Bitcoin won't even "start running".  it IS running currently.  he would have said something like it can't "scale".

Oleg is a programmer too. Szabo retweeted it thus presumably agreeing with it.

At Visa scale it would not run decentralized any more. Meaning it would not run on their home computers any more.

I know what he meant because I think as a programmer does.

Programmers are precise and mean what they say. A period mean end this statement.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 09:59:20 PM
 #25926

of course not.  as long as you continue to constrain it to 1MB.

You missed the technical point. Start was referring to "won't run".

i'm pretty sure he meant "start competing".

Because you aren't a programmer. Szabo is.

first off, Szabo didn't tweet that.  Oleganza did.  the word "start" is juxtaposed btwn 2 forms of the word "compete".  it means "start competing".  

second, even a non-programmer such as myself realizes that Oleganza would never claim Bitcoin won't even "start running".  it IS running currently.  he would have said something like it can't "scale".

Oleg is a programmer too. Szabo retweeted it thus presumably agreeing with it.

At Visa scale it would not run decentralized any more. Meaning it would not run on their home computers any more.

I know what he meant because I think as a programmer does.

but i don't think you are a programmer.  i think you're Armstrong.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:01:46 PM
 #25927

but i don't think you are a programmer.  i think you're Armstrong.

You are losing your sanity dude. It is really pitiful to watch you go on this delusional tirade. Me not a programmer, hahaha.

Btw, Armstrong is a very skilled programmer.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:05:43 PM
 #25928

but i don't think you are a programmer.  i think you're Armstrong.

You are losing your sanity dude. It is really pitiful to watch you go on this delusional tirade. Me not a programmer, hahaha.

Btw, Armstrong is a very skilled programmer.

there you go again.

every attribute you seem to have, he seems to have.  every attribute he seems to have, you seem to have.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:07:32 PM
 #25929

every attribute you seem to have, he seems to have.  every attribute he seems to have, you seem to have.

His left eye was losing vision. My right eye is 90% blinded. Whoops.

This is really comical. Are you under stress because of the court case? You are acting strange.

I suggested you get on Skype so you can see me on web cam. But you refused.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:18:35 PM
 #25930

every attribute you seem to have, he seems to have.  every attribute he seems to have, you seem to have.

His left eye was losing vision. My right eye is 90% blinded. Whoops.

This is really comical. Are you under stress because of the court case? You are acting strange.

I suggested you get on Skype so you can see me on web cam. But you refused.

pm'd
solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:21:05 PM
 #25931

Game over, Frap.doc.


FYI, Nick Szabo retweeted (and added to his favorites):
https://twitter.com/oleganza/status/605117508971053057
"@oleganza: If Bitcoin was ever competing with Paypal or Visa, it would not even start. It competes with gold and central banks."


Thus Saith The LORD.  Amen!

of course not.  as long as you continue to constrain it to 1MB.

Cypherdoc is correct.

Nick Szabo and Oleg Andreev are both wrong. I don't care what their credentials are, in this matter they are not thinking clearly.

If Bitcoin does not compete with Paypal and Visa then it will NEVER compete with gold and central banks.

The reason is that physical presence matters. Gold is physical and has only two serious rival metals: platinum and silver. CB fiat is made physical by government power: legal tender for printed cash and debt-money backed by taxation and guns (although through incompetence, fiat is proving a failed experiment).

Bitcoin also has a physical presence: its ecosystem of users, companies, on-line services and large mining network. Take those away and it becomes just another Worldcoin, Yacoin, Litecoin or Auroracoin.

Bitcoin, the software can be copied many times, and its principles can be adapted in new ways e.g. NXT and Monero.

There is no scarcity for a digital currency unless that scarcity is backed by a physical presence, an ecosystem.

Capping the Bitcoin network at 1MB blocks is an assumption that enough of an ecosystem has been established that this particular instance of digital currency cannot be overtaken by a larger ecosystem, a larger physical presence, by one of the alternatives. This is a huge assumption which is not viable because the Bitcoin ecosystem footprint in the world economy is miniscule. Only when volumes approach Visa-scale can people sit back and consider that Bitcoin is seriously competing with gold and central banks. Even then, it can't remain standing still.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:23:26 PM
 #25932

...I don't buy his "computer model" explanation though. Wink

You probably lack appropriate domain knowledge to form an accurate assessment?

Have you not reviewed his record of correct predictions? It is essentially flawless since the 1980s if you understand his predictions are conditional and price and time are separate predictions.

You are most possibly right. I probably lack of the appropriate knowledge; nevertheless I have (as stated) said that he "passed one test", which (clarifying further for those who misunderstood) that his "model" is proven to be working. What I'm not sure about is that it's based on a computer model ie: a relational database mining s/w that includes every single economic data out there, that is able through calculations to extract an accurate prediction within a chaotic model.

To put it into perspective, as a theoretical physicist, I rest assure you that such a model is defined as "unpredictable". If you know more on the matter, I'd be honoured if you satiated my curiosity and obliterate my ignorance. I can certify that I'm more than capable to understand (even though it will take some more time than most geniuses in here) subjects from IT to QM (nevertheless, I stopped a while ago, being productive on the 1st one). Thanks in advance for your help.

I will come back to this after some sleep.

Before i sleep, some links:

https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aarmstrongeconomics.com+hidden+order

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg10890931#msg10890931

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=365141.msg9566419#msg9566419



See also his entropy model for a stochastic momentum model.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:24:34 PM
 #25933

every attribute you seem to have, he seems to have.  every attribute he seems to have, you seem to have.

His left eye was losing vision. My right eye is 90% blinded. Whoops.

This is really comical. Are you under stress because of the court case? You are acting strange.

I suggested you get on Skype so you can see me on web cam. But you refused.

pm'd

Next day. I will sleep.

TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:27:36 PM
 #25934

Game over, Frap.doc.


FYI, Nick Szabo retweeted (and added to his favorites):
https://twitter.com/oleganza/status/605117508971053057
"@oleganza: If Bitcoin was ever competing with Paypal or Visa, it would not even start. It competes with gold and central banks."


Thus Saith The LORD.  Amen!

of course not.  as long as you continue to constrain it to 1MB.

Cypherdoc is correct.

Nick Szabo and Oleg Andreev are both wrong. I don't care what their credentials are, in this matter they are not thinking clearly.

They are not incorrect about it won't run decentralized.

of course not.  as long as you continue to constrain it to 1MB.

You missed the technical point. Start was referring to "won't run".

i'm pretty sure he meant "start competing".

Because you aren't a programmer. Szabo is.

first off, Szabo didn't tweet that.  Oleganza did.  the word "start" is juxtaposed btwn 2 forms of the word "compete".  it means "start competing".  

second, even a non-programmer such as myself realizes that Oleganza would never claim Bitcoin won't even "start running".  it IS running currently.  he would have said something like it can't "scale".

Oleg is a programmer too. Szabo retweeted it thus presumably agreeing with it.

At Visa scale it would not run decentralized any more. Meaning it would not run on their home computers any more.

I know what he meant because I think as a programmer does.

Programmers are precise and mean what they say. A period mean end this statement.

vokain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610


V.V.V.V.V.


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:27:58 PM
 #25935

Game over, Frap.doc.


FYI, Nick Szabo retweeted (and added to his favorites):
https://twitter.com/oleganza/status/605117508971053057
"@oleganza: If Bitcoin was ever competing with Paypal or Visa, it would not even start. It competes with gold and central banks."


Thus Saith The LORD.  Amen!

of course not.  as long as you continue to constrain it to 1MB.

Cypherdoc is correct.

Nick Szabo and Oleg Andreev are both wrong. I don't care what their credentials are, in this matter they are not thinking clearly.

If Bitcoin does not compete with Paypal and Visa then it will NEVER compete with gold and central banks.

The reason is that physical presence matters. Gold is physical and has only two serious rival metals: platinum and silver. CB fiat is made physical by government power: legal tender for printed cash and debt-money backed by taxation and guns (although through incompetence, fiat is proving a failed experiment).

Bitcoin also has a physical presence: its ecosystem of users, companies, on-line services and large mining network. Take those away and it becomes just another Worldcoin, Yacoin, Litecoin or Auroracoin.

Bitcoin, the software can be copied many times, and its principles can be adapted in new ways e.g. NXT and Monero.

There is no scarcity for digital currency unless that scarcity is backed by a physical presence, an ecosystem.

Capping the Bitcoin network at 1MB blocks is an assumption that enough of an ecosystem has been established that this particular instance of digital currency cannot be overtaken by a larger ecosystem, a larger physical presence, by one of the alternatives. This is a huge assumption which is not viable because the Bitcoin ecosystem footprint in the world economy is miniscule. Only when volumes approach Visa-scale can people sit back and consider that Bitcoin is seriously competing with gold and central banks. Even then, it can't remain standing still.

How does velocity of money in gold and between central banks compare to the velocity of money with PayPal and Visa, either in volume or transactional bandwidth?

...مكتوب
Escape the plutocrats’ zanpakutō, Flower in the Mirror, Moon on the Water: brave “the ascent which is rough and steep” (Plato).
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:32:56 PM
 #25936

If Bitcoin does not compete with Paypal and Visa then it will NEVER compete with gold and central banks.

The reason is that physical presence matters. Gold is physical and has only two serious rival metals: platinum and silver. CB fiat is made physical by government power: legal tender for printed cash and debt-money backed by taxation and guns (although through incompetence, fiat is proving a failed experiment).

Bitcoin also has a physical presence: its ecosystem of users, companies, on-line services and large mining network. Take those away and it becomes just another Worldcoin, Yacoin, Litecoin or Auroracoin.

Bitcoin, the software can be copied many times, and its principles can be adapted in new ways e.g. NXT and Monero.

There is no useful scarcity for a digital currency unless that scarcity is backed by a physical presence, an ecosystem.

Capping the Bitcoin network at 1MB blocks is an assumption that enough of an ecosystem has been established that this particular instance of digital currency cannot be overtaken by a larger ecosystem, a larger physical presence, by one of the alternatives. This is a huge assumption which is not viable because the Bitcoin ecosystem footprint in the world economy is miniscule. Only when volumes approach Visa-scale can people sit back and consider that Bitcoin is seriously competing with gold and central banks. Even then, it can't remain standing still.

Possibly correct but irrelevant because they said it won't start (won't run) on their home computers if you move to VISA scale.

But if it requires centralization to reach mass, then it won't compete with CBs any more as it will be controlled by the State.

Dilemma. Check mate. Failure. Bitcoin is fundamental flawed.

(you guys have very slow logic. I figured this out 100 pages back and you still haven't gotten the point)

explorer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:36:57 PM
 #25937

but i don't think you are a programmer.  i think you're Armstrong.

You are losing your sanity dude. It is really pitiful to watch you go on this delusional tirade. Me not a programmer, hahaha.

Btw, Armstrong is a very skilled programmer.

there you go again.

every attribute you seem to have, he seems to have.  every attribute he seems to have, you seem to have.

Martin Armstrong ' s  writing typically includes numerous spelling and grammatical errors that we don't see with Anonymint et AL.  MA'S speech and writing are patterned very much the same, while very unlike Anonymint's  consistent writing style.  I try not to stick my oar into this swirling pool of egos and  childish arguments but sometimes I guess I like to waste time too!
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:37:02 PM
 #25938

every attribute you seem to have, he seems to have.  every attribute he seems to have, you seem to have.

His left eye was losing vision. My right eye is 90% blinded. Whoops.

This is really comical. Are you under stress because of the court case? You are acting strange.

I suggested you get on Skype so you can see me on web cam. But you refused.

pm'd

Next day. I will sleep.

i'm not interested in talking.  one quick glance to verify you're not Armstrong.
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:38:55 PM
 #25939

every attribute you seem to have, he seems to have.  every attribute he seems to have, you seem to have.

His left eye was losing vision. My right eye is 90% blinded. Whoops.

This is really comical. Are you under stress because of the court case? You are acting strange.

I suggested you get on Skype so you can see me on web cam. But you refused.

pm'd

Next day. I will sleep.

i'm not interested in talking.  one quick glance to verify you're not Armstrong.

I don't have Skype installed at this location. I have to travel to other location.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
June 07, 2015, 10:41:55 PM
 #25940

If Bitcoin does not compete with Paypal and Visa then it will NEVER compete with gold and central banks.

The reason is that physical presence matters. Gold is physical and has only two serious rival metals: platinum and silver. CB fiat is made physical by government power: legal tender for printed cash and debt-money backed by taxation and guns (although through incompetence, fiat is proving a failed experiment).

Bitcoin also has a physical presence: its ecosystem of users, companies, on-line services and large mining network. Take those away and it becomes just another Worldcoin, Yacoin, Litecoin or Auroracoin.

Bitcoin, the software can be copied many times, and its principles can be adapted in new ways e.g. NXT and Monero.

There is no useful scarcity for a digital currency unless that scarcity is backed by a physical presence, an ecosystem.

Capping the Bitcoin network at 1MB blocks is an assumption that enough of an ecosystem has been established that this particular instance of digital currency cannot be overtaken by a larger ecosystem, a larger physical presence, by one of the alternatives. This is a huge assumption which is not viable because the Bitcoin ecosystem footprint in the world economy is miniscule. Only when volumes approach Visa-scale can people sit back and consider that Bitcoin is seriously competing with gold and central banks. Even then, it can't remain standing still.

Possibly correct but irrelevant because they said it won't start (won't run) on their home computers if you move to VISA scale.

But if it requires centralization to reach mass, then it won't compete with CBs any more as it will be controlled by the State.

Dilemma. Check mate. Failure. Bitcoin is fundamental flawed.

(you guys have very slow logic. I figured this out 100 pages back and you still haven't gotten the point)

you're still wrong.  both as a programmer stuck on "start" and with your economic assessment.
Pages: « 1 ... 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 [1297] 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 ... 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!