Bitcoin Forum
October 16, 2018, 03:36:59 PM *
News: Make sure you are not using versions of Bitcoin Core other than 0.17.0 [Torrent], 0.16.3, 0.15.2, or 0.14.3. More info.
 
   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 ... 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 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2028264 times)
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 500

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 06, 2015, 08:30:04 PM
 #29901

Just happen to be reading Hayek right now and this quote seems strangely relevant to our situation:

Quote
To allay these suspicions and to harness to its cart the strongest of all political motives - the craving for freedom - socialism began increasingly to make use of the promise of a "new freedom". (...) It was to bring "economic freedom" without which the political freedom already gained was "not worth having." (...)

To the great apostles of political freedom the word had mean freedom from coercion, freedom from the arbitrary power of other men, release from the ties which left the individual no choice but obedience to the orders of a superior to whom he was attached. The new freedom promised however, was to be freedom from necessity, release from the compulsion of the circumstances which inevitably limit the range of choice of all of us, although for some very much more than for others. Before man could be truly free, the "despotism of physical want" had to be broken, the "restraints of the economic system" relaxed. (...)

What the promise really amounted to was that the great existing disparities in the range of choice of different people were to disappear. The demand for the new freedom was thus only another name for the old demand for an equal distribution of wealth.

Now it might be a stretch but if we can make a parallel with the block size debate, large blocks stinks of "new freedom".

"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
1539704219
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539704219

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539704219
Reply with quote  #2

1539704219
Report to moderator
1539704219
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539704219

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539704219
Reply with quote  #2

1539704219
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1539704219
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539704219

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539704219
Reply with quote  #2

1539704219
Report to moderator
1539704219
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1539704219

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1539704219
Reply with quote  #2

1539704219
Report to moderator
Adrian-x
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 06, 2015, 10:41:57 PM
 #29902

this is whom yall chose to place your faith in  Huh

http://i.imgur.com/FvIQ9Dh.png

I don't put faith in any developers, I choose to review what they have made and then support or ignore what is. There is no faith here, I dont trust any of them, I from time to time agree strongly with what they say, or disagree for that matter.

Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 12:48:46 AM
 #29903

It's all the rage these days:

Logically, all of that suggests that Bitcoin has replaced gold as the safe haven of choice in times of trouble.

http://m.nasdaq.com/article/has-bitcoin-replaced-gold-as-the-new-safe-haven-cm505737
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 12:52:58 AM
 #29904

2 Nasdaq gold articles on the same day?:

NASDAQ Expert: Bitcoin has not replaced gold, but may be useful during the next recession.

http://www.coinfox.info/news/2638-nasdaq-expert-bitcoin-has-not-replaced-gold-but-may-be-useful-during-the-next-recession
shane
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 01:18:09 AM
 #29905

so which is better for investmen ?
sell gold buy bitcoin ?
or
sell bitcoin and buy gold  ?

Huh

Sell both. Hold dollars. As long as King Dollar is on the throne pretty much everything else is fighting a losing battle. Eventually that will reverse, but not yet.


Thank's for your suggestion
but I think I will sell my Gold and start to invest at bitcoin Smiley

.next-generation social media service.
██   based on blockchain technology ██
                      ▄▄█▄ ▀▄▄
                   ▄███████  ███▄▄
               ▄█████▀▀ ████  ▀█████▄▄
           ▄▄█████▀    ▄ ▀███▄   ▀▀█████▄
       ▄▄█████▀       ██▄ ▀███▄      ▀▀█████▄
      ▐███▀▀        ▄█████  ████         ▀███▌
      ▐███         ████▀███▄ ▀███         ███▌
      ▐███        ████  ▀███▄ ▀███▄       ███▌
      ▐███      ▄███▀ ▄█  ███▌ ▐███▌      ███▌
      ▐███     ▄███▀ ████  ▀██▓  ████     ███▌
      ▐███    ████  ███▀  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████▄   ███▌
      ▐███   ████ ▄███▀ ▄██████████████▄  ███▌
      ▐██▀ ▄███▀ ▄███▒                    ███▌
      ▐█▀ ▄███▀ █████████████████████████████▌
         ████  ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
        ▀█████▄▄                    ▄▄█████▀
           ▀▀█████▄▄             ▄█████▀▀
               ▀▀█████▄▄     ▄▄████▀▀
                   ▀▀█████▄█████▀
                       ▀████▀
.

     ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄ ▄▄▄   ▄▄▄  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
     ██▀▀▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀██ ▐██▀▀▀▀██ ▐██▀▀▀▀▀ ███▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀███▀▀▀▀███▀ ████▄ ███ ███▀▀▀▀▀
     ███▄▄▄▄ ███   ▐██▌▐██▄  ▐██ ▐██████  ███▄▄▄▄▄   ██▌    ▓██  █████▄███ ██▌ ▄▄▄▄▄
     ██▀▀▀▀  ███   ▐██▌▐███▀███▀ ▐██        ▀▀▀▀██▌  ██▌    ▓██  ███ █████ ██▌   ███
     ██▌     ▀████████ ▐██   ██▌ ▐███████░████████   ██▌   █████ ███  ▀███ ▀████████
Twitter
Facebook
Youtube
Telegram [EN]
Telegram [KOR]
Medium
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960
Merit: 1002


View Profile
August 07, 2015, 01:39:06 AM
 #29906

so which is better for investmen ?
sell gold buy bitcoin ?
or
sell bitcoin and buy gold  ?

Huh

Sell both. Hold dollars. As long as King Dollar is on the throne pretty much everything else is fighting a losing battle. Eventually that will reverse, but not yet.


Thank's for your suggestion
but I think I will sell my Gold and start to invest at bitcoin Smiley
usd is about half way up its bull trend.. after that who knows

★☆★Syscoin - Decentralized Marketplace and Multisig Platform
Pay with Bitcoin, ZCash and many more
For more visit Syscoin.org  ★☆★
chriswilmer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008
Merit: 1000


View Profile WWW
August 07, 2015, 01:46:40 AM
 #29907

Thank you to everyone for your acknowledgement of my paper--it is satisfying to see something you've worked hard on begin to make an impact in the discussion!  Like I said earlier, it was really just a formalization of some of the ideas we've been discussing here over the past months.    

I'm very happy with how the paper was received.  Between public and private comments (and Peter Todd calling it pseudo science) several aspects of the paper were challenged, and now I'm further convinced that the model and results are both useful and valid.  I think the most accurate criticism of the paper was that I should have spent more effort discussing the inter/intra communication issues (the "you don't orphan you're own block" point).1 Hopefully, I'll have time to work on this in the fall.  

I exchanged emails with Greg Maxwell over several aspects of the paper that he questioned.  One point he did make, that I admit is valid but do not personally see as an issue, is that the most profitable "configuration" according to the results from the paper is a single "super pool" made up of ALL the network's hashing power (which would be centralizing).  This would minimize the propagation impedance.  While I agree that this is true, it seems like just another way of looking at the 51% problem.  We already know that if one entity controls a huge amount of hash power they can do nasty things and gain certain advantages.  But it would be nice to find a way to explain why this shouldn't happen with more rigour than the "game theory" or "anti-fragile" fallback positions…


The experiment with the $10 bounties produced a mixed result.  On the one hand, I think it got people who normally wouldn't read such a paper more involved in the discussion, but on the other hand (like brg444 pointed out) it may have made the thread less readable.  I ended up paying out $90 to catch several small errors.  The error I was most pleased to catch was Noosterdam's "innumerate" versus "enumerate."  I think I've been using these words interchangeably my entire life but they actually mean very different things!


1Note that the math is valid nonetheless, as this just affects the propagation delay which was accounted for in the model.  

I can't think of any economic disincentives against centralizing, independent of the block size issue and propagation. You always get economies of scale (e.g., you produce one mask for every new ASIC, but that mask let's you order 10 thousand or 10 million chips depending on your budget/scale... lots of other examples too like data center staff come to mind).

EXCEPT, the game theory arguments. The bitcoins you mine are likely to be worth less simply because people won't like the idea of you having all of the control. Even if people didn't mind that you had 100% control, they would certainly mind if you abused your power.

Am I missing something? I can't think of a single way to design a system where it is economically advantageous to move away from centralization (where we are intentionally neglecting the possibility that bitcoins might be worth more in a more decentralized environment).
tabnloz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 961
Merit: 1000


View Profile
August 07, 2015, 01:51:42 AM
 #29908

For mine, growth since 2010 is like a malnourished child; looks superficially well fed but on closer inspection...

Globally, growth has been tepid and beneath "projections" (see Fed, IMF, EU extensions into the future: all since 08 have been way off mark).

Part of the growth has come from a combination of factors:

- 'directed' speculation from ZIRP

- currency wars (stealing growth from others)

- foreign capital searching for a safe haven and / or yield

- Lax political policies that encourage foreign dollars...UK, Canada, Australia have laughable unenforced foreign investment laws. Chinese and Middle Eastern money has been buying plenty of real estate, land, visas etc

This is not to say some countries haven't benefitted or recovered in some way. The US has a lower unemployment rate but a higher part time workforce. The UK has a booming real estate sector but stagnant wage growth. Both also have rising wealth inequality. Canada & Australia, providing the resources to the trillion dollar Chinese infrastructure build out have seen massive booms as commodity prices skyrocketed. Real estate in these places has also been on a massive melt up even as manufacturing & retail sectors died the slow death of one trick pony economies. Further high base interest rates contributed here by opening up to the carry trade. But now as commodity prices have collapsed so too have their currencies, IR's. Unemployment rates are marginally rising and consumer sentiment are at Great Recession lows.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2660
Merit: 1005


View Profile
August 07, 2015, 02:19:43 AM
 #29909

The economy has been growing since 2010.

The economy has been growing since 2010.

OMG, it keeps getting more hilarious each time you say it.  Tell us another one!   Cheesy Grin Cheesy Grin Cheesy

(Frap.doc, please replace the battery in your sarcasm detector.   Wink)

EDIT:

http://i.imgur.com/QePtpts.jpg

#REKT

These idiots and their arguments/assertions remind me of this toy I used to have as a kid:



The same car can be #REKT over and over again with the minor effort of clipping the doors back on.  Even as a kid of 7 I got bored with the repetition after half an hour or so.  Cypherdoc, for instance, never seems to tire of such entertainment.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 02:34:03 AM
 #29910

This has always been my vision; take over the Forex markets. Are we going to let Bitcoin do this or not?:

http://www.fxstreet.com/analysis/daily-interviews/2015/08/06/03/
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 255


View Profile
August 07, 2015, 04:49:58 AM
 #29911

But only 250.000(sic!) adresses are active ... https://blockchain.info/charts/n-unique-addresses. In january the number dropped to 116.000.

I don't understand why upthread comments say that you are only quoting data for one wallet. The above data is for all addresses on the block chain. Duh!    Roll Eyes

I think it is very likely that Bitcoin adoption has stalled.

And it is very likely that active use is much less than a million users.

There are likely a million+ users who hold balances though.

I wouldn't worry about it. We are heading into a low price below $100 for Spring 2016, because the $usd is coming so strong due to the contagion in Europe, China, and developing markets. Commodities are declining.

Next year we will bottom and see the interest in private assets grow again, but it will be driven more by anti-government sentiment (due to expropriation in the EU) and thus anonymous coins will receive much more interest than Bitcoin.

Hi klee. Thanks for that.

however, i was hoping for a chart resembling this, with gold charted in.



cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 07:03:49 AM
 #29912

continuing the plunge:

Zarathustra
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1106
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 07:06:45 AM
 #29913

We are heading into a low price below $100 for Spring 2016, because the $usd is coming so strong due to the contagion in Europe, China, and developing markets.

This prediction will fail.
Wexlike
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 975
Merit: 1000


View Profile
August 07, 2015, 11:24:33 AM
 #29914

We are heading into a low price below $100 for Spring 2016, because the $usd is coming so strong due to the contagion in Europe, China, and developing markets.

This prediction will fail.

I think TBTB is over exaggerating the effect of a strong dollar regarding bitcoin. While it's true, that the euro will lose purchasing power compared to the dollar, bitcoin will function as a safe heaven to store wealth when europe starts crashing. For example, for me it's much easier to transfer euro to bitcoin than euro to dollar. Also I am in controle of my wealth and I am out of reach of the banks and the state.
jmw74
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 236
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 07, 2015, 01:13:34 PM
 #29915

Am I missing something? I can't think of a single way to design a system where it is economically advantageous to move away from centralization (where we are intentionally neglecting the possibility that bitcoins might be worth more in a more decentralized environment).

Heat dissipation, possibly.

A huge mining datacenter will produce a lot of heat, and may not be able to make efficient use of it.

Whereas, a million individuals with ASICs in their hot water heater, may be able to utilize close to 100% of the heat. Then their marginal cost to run the miner is close to zero. The difficulty would rise to make the marginal revenue close to zero also, but it would still be an advantage to decentralized mining.
ssmc2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428
Merit: 1021


View Profile
August 07, 2015, 01:26:13 PM
 #29916

We are heading into a low price below $100 for Spring 2016, because the $usd is coming so strong due to the contagion in Europe, China, and developing markets.

This prediction will fail.

First it was this Fall, now it's next Spring.  Roll Eyes
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 02:02:33 PM
 #29917

Am I missing something? I can't think of a single way to design a system where it is economically advantageous to move away from centralization (where we are intentionally neglecting the possibility that bitcoins might be worth more in a more decentralized environment).

Heat dissipation, possibly.

A huge mining datacenter will produce a lot of heat, and may not be able to make efficient use of it.

Whereas, a million individuals with ASICs in their hot water heater, may be able to utilize close to 100% of the heat. Then their marginal cost to run the miner is close to zero. The difficulty would rise to make the marginal revenue close to zero also, but it would still be an advantage to decentralized mining.

very good pt.  also, those small asics will dissipate the heat much more efficiently even if they can't utilize it.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 02:08:14 PM
 #29918

EXCEPT, the game theory arguments. The bitcoins you mine are likely to be worth less simply because people won't like the idea of you having all of the control. Even if people didn't mind that you had 100% control, they would certainly mind if you abused your power.

Am I missing something?

i don't think you are:

[–]cypherdoc2 0 points 2 hours ago

It wouldn't die because Bitcoin owners have an almost infinite reason to defend the network; the potential for Bitcoin to Moon as a result of its fixed monetary supply.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3g3qje/serious_if_the_block_size_limit_was_removed_why/ctuotpg
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 02:53:24 PM
 #29919

Am I missing something? I can't think of a single way to design a system where it is economically advantageous to move away from centralization (where we are intentionally neglecting the possibility that bitcoins might be worth more in a more decentralized environment).

Heat dissipation, possibly.

A huge mining datacenter will produce a lot of heat, and may not be able to make efficient use of it.

Whereas, a million individuals with ASICs in their hot water heater, may be able to utilize close to 100% of the heat. Then their marginal cost to run the miner is close to zero. The difficulty would rise to make the marginal revenue close to zero also, but it would still be an advantage to decentralized mining.

very good pt.  also, those small asics will dissipate the heat much more efficiently even if they can't utilize it.


rofl, keep dreamin.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 03:01:02 PM
 #29920

yeah baby, In Sync!  i loved those guys, btw:

Pages: « 1 ... 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 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 ... 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!