Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 11:25:04 PM *
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 ... 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 [1485] 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1807342 times)
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 05:23:26 PM
 #29681

interesting tactics employed by /u/mmeijeri et al in this thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fhik9/mike_hearn_outlines_the_most_compelling_arguments/

initially, all his comments got downvoted (seen down lower the thread) as the pro increase concensus set in.  then, he takes the tactic of sub-commenting (spamming) the top comment to push all his downvoted comments downwards so as to discourage casual readers from making it all the way down to the bottom where the real content is.  couple that with some support that came in with upvoting him and he suddenly looks like he's carrying the day in terms of sentiment.

Desperate to keep up the appearance of this being a balanced debate, when in fact the opposite is true.

I'm sorry but you "community" retards and your hubris are really a sight to behold.

Of course Reddit is not home to a balanced debate, it is filled to the brim with ignorant partisanism, fear mongering and general disingenuous pitchfork branding.

If you are looking for "balanced debate" look no further than the next message on the mailing list linked in OP.

People willing to have reasonable discussions have long realized that reddit is just another shill populist playground. Stop confusing this echo chamber with anything resembling "consensus".

Welcome to my community, your opinions are valued your tone and attitude something unrelated, on your recommendation I read the next comment, it sounds like reddit noise without the spelling mistakes and HTML formatting, still void of content.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
1481325904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481325904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481325904
Reply with quote  #2

1481325904
Report to moderator
1481325904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481325904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481325904
Reply with quote  #2

1481325904
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481325904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481325904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481325904
Reply with quote  #2

1481325904
Report to moderator
1481325904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481325904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481325904
Reply with quote  #2

1481325904
Report to moderator
1481325904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481325904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481325904
Reply with quote  #2

1481325904
Report to moderator
inca
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 05:24:22 PM
 #29682

This lad just scored a home run. Poor frap.doc, if you read this and don't realize you were led astray, away from your "sound money" theories by false gods of "more adoption", "cheap stuff for everyone"...

Quote
It is important to understand that units of a settlement network represent money, they are money. If settlement is achieved, then those units represent a monetary base. In our existing system, cash and central bank credit represent this base layer of money and, as such, the settlement layer.

On the other hand, saying something is a payment network simply means it's units represent credit -- i.e, temporary placeholders for money. So when you send someone money using a credit card, the reason it happens so quickly is because the network is promising to settle later. That isn't to say that credit units don't have value, just that their value derives from the fact that, ultimately, they can be exchanged for more trustworthy forms of value.

So the goal of a payment network is really to provide utility. If the utility fails, people move to another payment network. The goal of a settlement networks, on the other hand, is provide confidence/trust. If confidence fails, the currency collapses.

In the current financial system, central banks represent the settlement layer, whereas companies like Visa represent payment network layers. No one really cares that Visa is a company, its power centralized, because its role is to provide utility. But that central banks -- also centralized institutions -- control the settlement layer, i.e., control base money, is deeply troubling to many people because the role of the settlement layer is to provide confidence and trust (and it is becoming increasingly hard to trust a tiny handful of unelected people).

Some people think the success of Bitcoin is going to come from its utility and they tend to favor increasing the block size. The problem is that in increasing that utility, you are also weakening the settlement layer of Bitcoin by increasing mining centralization and eroding trust. They don't see a problem because they are thinking of Bitcoin solely in terms of utility, like Visa.

But if Bitcoin is going to become a global money, then its settlement layer is far more important than its utility, assuming utility functions -- like the number of transactions the network can handle -- can be handled/processed by third parties. In the same way Visa doesn't erode confidence in the dollar simply because it is a third party company independent of central banks and governments, companies that provide more utility to the Bitcoin network won't erode confidence in it either. All that is important for confidence is the base money, the settlement layer, in the same way that confidence in fiat currencies depends on confidence in government and central banks. We don't expect governments and central banks to provide the utility of payment networks, just to provide confidence and trust that gives the underlying currency value.

Bitcoin's power is really going to come from confidence in the network, specifically in its decentralized nature. I know many people have begun to question how important decentralization is, but they don't tend to impress me as really understanding how essential trust is to money, they take it for granted. (Or they don't think the goal of Bitcoin should be to be a money.)

Without decentralization, for a money to retain value the central authority controlling that money must be trusted, which is precisely why all money today is (at least theoretically) controlled by the state (governments are the institutional power we trust most). A currency whose trust foundation is not dependent on a human institution, however, is intrinsically more trustworthy than even the state. Nevertheless, if decentralization fails and centralization occurs, then Bitcoin becomes vulnerable as those centralized powers can be easily targeted. If it becomes vulnerable, confidence erodes and people return to wanting state-run money, perhaps now in the form of Fed-coin.
As faith in central banks and institutional/human controlled money wanes and fades in the 21st century, I believe block chains are going to replace central banks. But cryptocurrencies that are controlled by an institution -- whose code can be changed by dictate because mining is over centralized -- will suffer the same loss of confidence that central banks face. The 21st century is the century of decentralized power, not of top-down institutional power of the 20th century model.

Bitcoin cannot succeed on the basis of utility alone for the simple reason that that utility can be replicated by other institutions. Its success depends on its ability to do what even imitation coins cannot. Fedcoin, IMFcoin, whatever institution you like can ultimately make a Bitcoin replacement with all the same utility. What they can't make is a coin that gets its trust layer from no institution.
Put simply, if Bitcoin isn't decentralized, then it will be replaced by a centralized cryptocurrency whose central authority we trust (more than whoever is running Bitcoin). If it is decentralized then the financial system is slowly going to migrate to it because it is inherently more trustworthy as a settlement layer.

The reason Bitcoin succeeds is not because of utility alone. The reason Bitcoin succeeds is because the settlement layer, the foundation of money, cannot be replicated by institutional power, and that is for the simple reason that Bitcoin is post-institutional. It is not controlled by any power, it is decentralized, and this makes it inherently more trustworthy. So its deep value comes from this decentralization, and it is this decentralization that ultimately makes it competitive and potentially the foundation for a new global financial system!

Every effort should be being made into increasing this decentralization . . . instead we are doing just the opposite.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fhik9/mike_hearn_outlines_the_most_compelling_arguments/

How does scaling bitcoin separate the store of value bitcoin holds from it's function as a payment network? The two are inseparable and go hand in hand.

How can bitcoin retain it's function as a base store of value when it loses its active userbase to other block chains?

Ps. Don't be rude
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 05:26:09 PM
 #29683

Arthur Levitt on the optimistic view and Bitcoin starting at 51 min:

http://www.bloomberg.com/podcasts/masters-in-business/
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 05:33:00 PM
 #29684

This lad just scored a home run. Poor frap.doc, if you read this and don't realize you were led astray, away from your "sound money" theories by false gods of "more adoption", "cheap stuff for everyone"...

Quote
It is important to understand that units of a settlement network represent money, they are money. If settlement is achieved, then those uni to it because it is inherently more trustworthy as a settlement layer.

...snip...

Every effort should be being made into increasing this decentralization . . . instead we are doing just the opposite.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fhik9/mike_hearn_outlines_the_most_compelling_arguments/

It's important to know why money becomes money in the first place, you can't put the settlement network idea befor the idea of a university accepted money and expect it to be adopted without mapping out the economic incentives that would facilitate it.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 05:40:08 PM
 #29685

This lad just scored a home run. Poor frap.doc, if you read this and don't realize you were led astray, away from your "sound money" theories by false gods of "more adoption", "cheap stuff for everyone"...

Quote
It is important to understand that units of a settlement network represent money, they are money. If settlement is achieved, then those uni to it because it is inherently more trustworthy as a settlement layer.

...snip...

Every effort should be being made into increasing this decentralization . . . instead we are doing just the opposite.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fhik9/mike_hearn_outlines_the_most_compelling_arguments/

It's important to know why money becomes money in the first place, you can't put the settlement network idea befor the idea of a university accepted money and expect it to be adopted without mapping out the economic incentives that would facilitate it.

You need to read the post again because clearly there is something you didn't understand.


"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
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 05:44:22 PM
 #29686

How does scaling bitcoin separate the store of value bitcoin holds from it's function as a payment network? The two are inseparable and go hand in hand.

How can bitcoin retain it's function as a base store of value when it loses its active userbase to other block chains?

Ps. Don't be rude

Disclaimer : raising the block size is not about scaling Bitcoin.

The idea is not to separate the two. The logic is you need a strong monetary base on top of which you can build any kind of desired payment network.

How can bitcoin retain it's function as a base store of value when it loses its decentralization?

Btw, can we stop lieing to people with this "active" userbase non-sense. We all know you and everyone here sit on our Bitcoin stash like dragons on their hoard. The use of Bitcoin as a "payment network" at this point is laughably marginal. And that's certainly not because of the block size limit.

"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
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 06:03:02 PM
 #29687

This lad just scored a home run. Poor frap.doc, if you read this and don't realize you were led astray, away from your "sound money" theories by false gods of "more adoption", "cheap stuff for everyone"...

Quote
It is important to understand that units of a settlement network represent money, they are money. If settlement is achieved, then those uni to it because it is inherently more trustworthy as a settlement layer.

...snip...

Every effort should be being made into increasing this decentralization . . . instead we are doing just the opposite.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fhik9/mike_hearn_outlines_the_most_compelling_arguments/

It's important to know why money becomes money in the first place, you can't put the settlement network idea befor the idea of a university accepted money and expect it to be adopted without mapping out the economic incentives that would facilitate it.

You need to read the post again because clearly there is something you didn't understand.



No, it's you who don't understand.

It's fair to claim that every single person in the world over the age of say 4 has heard of gold and knows is valuable. What do you think the comparable figures are  for Bitcoin? Probably 20% have heard of it if we're lucky and only maybe <0.01% who think it's valuable.

Good luck with forming a settlement layer on top of that.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 06:39:09 PM
 #29688

This lad just scored a home run. Poor frap.doc, if you read this and don't realize you were led astray, away from your "sound money" theories by false gods of "more adoption", "cheap stuff for everyone"...

Quote
It is important to understand that units of a settlement network represent money, they are money. If settlement is achieved, then those uni to it because it is inherently more trustworthy as a settlement layer.

...snip...

Every effort should be being made into increasing this decentralization . . . instead we are doing just the opposite.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fhik9/mike_hearn_outlines_the_most_compelling_arguments/

It's important to know why money becomes money in the first place, you can't put the settlement network idea befor the idea of a university accepted money and expect it to be adopted without mapping out the economic incentives that would facilitate it.

You need to read the post again because clearly there is something you didn't understand.



No, it's you who don't understand.

It's fair to claim that every single person in the world over the age of say 4 has heard of gold and knows is valuable. What do you think the comparable figures are  for Bitcoin? Probably 20% have heard of it if we're lucky and only maybe <0.01% who think it's valuable.

Good luck with forming a settlement layer on top of that.

A settlement layer will form because the largest layers of wealth and capital in our world are not deterred by financial restrictions but by regulatory friction. Our society will benefit much more by reducing the latter than by forcing a cheap payment network inside a rotten centralized system.


Quote from: brg444
A huge amounts of capital will move into the currency because it is the only one in the world with a mathematically enforced limited supply, uninterdictable transactions, and unfreezable assets. The unique immutable ledger in existence.

Bitcoin is best used to store value out of the hands of state governments policies, taxes and inflation. Are you suggesting there is no demand for this utility?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fhik9/mike_hearn_outlines_the_most_compelling_arguments/ctozsuy

Do you remember our little sidechain debate where you accused me of wanting to turn Bitcoin into a WoW marketplace? That's pretty much what you're trying to do here. Meanwhile I am supporting your previous stance of focusing Bitcoin to meet demand of the biggest value markets in the world: forex and commodities.

"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
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 06:46:56 PM
 #29689

How does scaling bitcoin separate the store of value bitcoin holds from it's function as a payment network? The two are inseparable and go hand in hand.

How can bitcoin retain it's function as a base store of value when it loses its active userbase to other block chains?

Ps. Don't be rude

Disclaimer : raising the block size is not about scaling Bitcoin.

The idea is not to separate the two. The logic is you need a strong monetary base on top of which you can build any kind of desired payment network.

How can bitcoin retain it's function as a base store of value when it loses its decentralization?

Btw, can we stop lieing to people with this "active" userbase non-sense. We all know you and everyone here sit on our Bitcoin stash like dragons on their hoard. The use of Bitcoin as a "payment network" at this point is laughably marginal. And that's certainly not because of the block size limit.

The nature of bitcoin is that if mining becomes too centralized and the miners decide on an unpopular fork, the users can just ignore them (well, we will need some miners, and in the worst case we might have to manually drop the difficulty to keep things running with less hashpower).

As long as the user base disagrees with the change, they don't have to follow along.  More users is more decentralized.  The miners only have as much power as we grant them, and we can take it away if necessary.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 06:53:02 PM
 #29690

The nature of bitcoin is that if mining becomes too centralized and the miners decide on an unpopular fork, the users can just ignore them (well, we will need some miners, and in the worst case we might have to manually drop the difficulty to keep things running with less hashpower).

As long as the user base disagrees with the change, they don't have to follow along.  More users is more decentralized. The miners only have as much power as we grant them, and we can take it away if necessary.

The fact that you and a couple others try to smash this idea inside everyone's head does not make it more true. If you mean more nodes then granted but more users != more nodes.

When did miners decide on a fork anyway?

I don't see how your comments address any of mine and others' concerns. It seems you're basically saying "if Bitcoin becomes too centralized then we'll just switch to something else"... That's not a very productive argument...

"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
Jdj1727
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 337


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 07:32:39 PM
 #29691

I think has BTC has greater return potential than gold. But, holding some physical gold/silver is always a good a idea.
sgbett
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 08:37:16 PM
 #29692

The nature of bitcoin is that if mining becomes too centralized and the miners decide on an unpopular fork, the users can just ignore them (well, we will need some miners, and in the worst case we might have to manually drop the difficulty to keep things running with less hashpower).

As long as the user base disagrees with the change, they don't have to follow along.  More users is more decentralized. The miners only have as much power as we grant them, and we can take it away if necessary.

...
When did miners decide on a fork anyway?
...


When the fork includes code that waits for a majority condition before triggering the production of blocks that the minority will reject as invalid.

Once the majority are running the new version and the condition is triggered then they will start mining those blocks, and the new blockchain becomes longer. Anyone that doesn't then get with the programme is effectively mining an alt coin.

Thats how miners decide. If they all stick with version N-1 blocks then version N blocks never happen.

http://haschinabannedbitcoin.com
Full Node: http://46.51.193.129 (BU)
"A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution" - Satoshi Nakamoto
thezerg
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 08:50:44 PM
 #29693

One great feature of bitcoin is that the payment network IS the settlement network.  To see this feature be deliberately broken is disheartening esp. Since the argument is so weak.  The author of that long post does not seem to understand this.

Centralization fears apply equally to LN. Worse, LN services are probably money transmitters from a legal perspective.

Nodes have no power.  We've already lost the centralization battle to the extent that mining pools are centralized. No govt is gping to pressure full nodes.  They will pressure miners.  So its ok to have full nodes in data centers.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 08:56:00 PM
 #29694

One great feature of bitcoin is that the payment network IS the settlement network.  To see this feature be deliberately broken is disheartening esp. Since the argument is so weak.  The author of that long post does not seem to understand this.

Centralization fears apply equally to LN. Worse, LN services are probably money transmitters from a legal perspective.

Nodes have no power.  We've already lost the centralization battle to the extent that mining pools are centralized. No govt is gping to pressure full nodes.  They will pressure miners.  So its ok to have full nodes in data centers.

precisely this.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
August 02, 2015, 08:58:48 PM
 #29695

How does scaling bitcoin separate the store of value bitcoin holds from it's function as a payment network? The two are inseparable and go hand in hand.

How can bitcoin retain it's function as a base store of value when it loses its active userbase to other block chains?

Did you miss the part where the distinction between a credit-based payment network (Visa/Paypal) vs a value-based settlement layer (Bitcoin/gold) was explained?  Go back and read it again.  Keep doing that until you understand.

Of course marginal users will be gradually pushed off BTC's MotherChain as their tiny crapflood/gambling tx fees fail to remain competitive.  But you are acting as if there is some binary function whereby 100% of BTC users will instantly move to LTC or Monero.  That's called a false dilemma and it's a stupid way to think.  Plus it ignores the high probability small tx will find space on sidechains and/or LN.

Get a clue.  Your whining about how every tx in the universe absolutely must be on MainChain or else Bitcoin Will Die, Because Evil Altcoins, is ridiculous.

Here's what you need to know:

Quote
http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-July/009728.html
Quote
On July 29, 2015 7:15:49 AM EDT, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev:
>Consider this:  the highest Bitcoin tx fees can possibly go is perhaps
>a
>little higher than what our competition charges. Too much higher than
>that,
>and people will just say, you know what .... I'll make a bank transfer.
>It's cheaper and not much slower, sometimes no slower at all.

I respectfully disagree with this analysis. The implication is that bitcoin is merely one of a number of payment technologies. It's much more than that. It's sound money, censorship resistance, personal control over money, programmable money, and more. Without these attributes it's merely a really inefficient way to do payments.

Given these advantages, there is no reason to believe the marginal cost of a transaction can't far surpass that of a PayPal or bank transfer. I personally would pay several multiples of the competitors' fees to continue using bitcoin.

Sure, some marginal use cases will drop off with greater fees, but that's normal and expected. These will be use cases where the user doesn't care about bitcoin's advantages. We must be willing to let these use cases go anyway, because we unfortunately don't have room on chain for everything anyone might want to do.

Therefore, bitcoin tx fees can go much higher than the competition.

Remember how Satoshi referenced the banking crisis in his early work? The 2008 banking crisis was about a lot of things, but high credit card and paypal fees wasnt one of them. There's more going on here than just payments. Any speculative economic analysis would do better to include this fact.

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
notme
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 09:08:04 PM
 #29696

The nature of bitcoin is that if mining becomes too centralized and the miners decide on an unpopular fork, the users can just ignore them (well, we will need some miners, and in the worst case we might have to manually drop the difficulty to keep things running with less hashpower).

As long as the user base disagrees with the change, they don't have to follow along.  More users is more decentralized. The miners only have as much power as we grant them, and we can take it away if necessary.

The fact that you and a couple others try to smash this idea inside everyone's head does not make it more true. If you mean more nodes then granted but more users != more nodes.

This is the first time I've said it... how is that "smashing this idea inside everyone's head"?

Quote
When did miners decide on a fork anyway?

The fear of centralization is that miners will decide on a fork that goes against the principles of bitcoin.  Isn't that what your afraid of?

Quote
I don't see how your comments address any of mine and others' concerns. It seems you're basically saying "if Bitcoin becomes too centralized then we'll just switch to something else"... That's not a very productive argument...

A plurarlity of miners can decide on a fork, but if the users (individual and business) don't agree with the change, they can continue with the old rules.  This leaves the miners on an unused fork and they will quickly figure out that they are the ones who have switched to something else.

I'm saying "if bitcoin becomes too centralized when it comes to mining, the miners still have to answer to the user base."  Getting every bitcoin accepting business (or at the very least the exchanges and the payment processors) to accept your fork is a prerequisite of a successful fork.  These entities add to the decentralization of consensus.  Excluding them is illogical.

https://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
While no idea is perfect, some ideas are useful.
12jh3odyAAaR2XedPKZNCR4X4sebuotQzN
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 10:45:15 PM
 #29697

interesting tactics employed by /u/mmeijeri et al in this thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3fhik9/mike_hearn_outlines_the_most_compelling_arguments/

initially, all his comments got downvoted (seen down lower the thread) as the pro increase concensus set in.  then, he takes the tactic of sub-commenting (spamming) the top comment to push all his downvoted comments downwards so as to discourage casual readers from making it all the way down to the bottom where the real content is.  couple that with some support that came in with upvoting him and he suddenly looks like he's carrying the day in terms of sentiment.

Desperate to keep up the appearance of this being a balanced debate, when in fact the opposite is true.

I'm sorry but you "community" retards and your hubris are really a sight to behold.

Of course Reddit is not home to a balanced debate, it is filled to the brim with ignorant partisanism, fear mongering and general disingenuous pitchfork branding.

If you are looking for "balanced debate" look no further than the next message on the mailing list linked in OP.

People willing to have reasonable discussions have long realized that reddit is just another shill populist playground. Stop confusing this echo chamber with anything resembling "consensus".

Its actually kinda fun watching you get pounded with down votes over there. Keep up the good work. Kid.
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1512


Crypto is the separation of Power and State.


View Profile WWW
August 02, 2015, 11:30:57 PM
 #29698

Its actually kinda fun watching you get pounded with down votes over there. Keep up the good work. Kid.

Enjoy your fallacious appeals to popularity all you like.

No amount of "Likes" will reverse the simple truth:

Quote

LOL rekt

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
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 11:37:05 PM
 #29699

Its actually kinda fun watching you get pounded with down votes over there. Keep up the good work. Kid.

Enjoy your fallacious appeals to popularity all you like.

No amount of "Likes" will reverse the simple truth:

Quote

LOL rekt

don't you find yourself lame as hell quoting someone who's also getting pounded with downvotes?  and of all ppl, Troll davout-bc himself?   you're hurting your own case  Cheesy


davout-bc -6 points 9 hours ago

Why do you want to increase at all?

And for your convenience, here is the previous argument in its quantitative version: "it's easy to build (1..N) good payment networks network on top of (1) good settlements network, the opposite isn't true".

In other words: "you can build a visa on top of sound money, you can't build sound money on top of visa"

brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 11:48:00 PM
 #29700

don't you find yourself lame as hell quoting someone who's also getting pounded with downvotes?  and of all ppl, Troll davout-bc himself?   you're hurting your own case  Cheesy

The only thing "lame as hell" is lending any credibility to reddit.

At this point I can only imagine you are trolling.

"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 ... 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 [1485] 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 ... 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!