Bitcoin Forum
December 11, 2017, 02:28:21 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 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 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 [1555] 1556 1557 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2021955 times)
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:00:08 AM
 #31081

Thank you for answering my question.

Now that you said "No!", how do you think their business model will work if they do not have a financial incentive to keep certain users off the block chain?

How do they make their money if they are in fact a for-profit company?

It's been repeated ad nauseum that their business model is similar to RedHat or any other companies that built entreprise class software on top of open source platforms and offer a variety of consulting services.

but does that profit depend upon side chains becoming a reality and/or the max block size staying relatively small or at 1MB?

ad nauseum where? lol I haven;t seen any recent discussion of their business model in depth.

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

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████æ   
  ,████²█████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       Ñ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████Ñ         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ²██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                   ²²²                 
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.        SMOOTHIE'S HEALTH AND FITNESS JOURNAL          History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
1513002501
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513002501

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513002501
Reply with quote  #2

1513002501
Report to moderator
1513002501
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513002501

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513002501
Reply with quote  #2

1513002501
Report to moderator
1513002501
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513002501

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513002501
Reply with quote  #2

1513002501
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513002501
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513002501

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513002501
Reply with quote  #2

1513002501
Report to moderator
1513002501
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513002501

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513002501
Reply with quote  #2

1513002501
Report to moderator
1513002501
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513002501

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513002501
Reply with quote  #2

1513002501
Report to moderator
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:01:16 AM
 #31082

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/20618/blockstream-starts-development-lightning-network/

They didnt originate it, but it will become their core (pun intended) focus.

 Roll Eyes

Yes. Tell me more about your intricate knowledge of their business plans.

You're aware they have a total of ONE developer working on LN out of a total of more than a dozen?

So you are a blockstream insider then? Figures.

Why would I be privy to such detail? I don't broadcast the breakdown of the development resources in my business.

Seems you are too since you know so much about their "core focus"

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3gmkak/the_blockstream_business_plan/ctzwety?context=3

I'm sorry, but what part of that cosy exchange with Rusty would lead me to believe you are not a blockstream shill?  Huh Huh

You asked for details about my knowledge of Blockstream development resources, I pointed you to my source.

Are you cypherdoc cousin by any chance? Is your next step to issue a BTC bounty to try and dox me and my personal life to "prove I'm a blockstream shill".

I'm just a regular dude trying to kick some sense into your head and calling out the bullshit I read

"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
smoothie
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2072


LEALANA Monero Physical Silver Coins


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:03:16 AM
 #31083

Simply put:

Sidechains will have security issues.

Any side chain of bitcoin will likely have less security in terms of hash.

Not sure how viable that option would be given the possibility of miners pointing their pools at a side chain just to dick around with it and mess up people's assets on the side chain.

 Huh

You went from implying conflict of interest and nefarious actions to simply bashing sidechains because according to your reputable technical expertise "they're not secure".




Answer me this:

Where does the additional hashing power come from to secure any side chain to make it equally secure to bitcoin's current security?


And I was merely pointing out how SC's will not be as secure as bitcoin.

BTW please answer my question on how Blockstream makes its money if it is a for-profit company.

Thanks  Grin Grin Grin

No one claimed it can be as equally secure as Bitcoin but it can get pretty darn close. The beautiful thing about sidechains is they offer a wide range of security models that can be leveraged for various degrees of decentralization and trustlessness.

About the hashing power, if merged mining is implemented then miners will have financial incentive to process and secure transactions occurring on a sidechain. It isn't a stretch to believe that a particularly popular and useful sidechain (improve privacy for example) could see close to 100% of the miners merge-mine the chain.

So then you concede that the goal of using side chains is to effectively divert users to a less secure block chain to increase capacity?

I highly doubt 100% of miners would merge-mine the side chain.

From your knowledge how are they proposing to improve privacy for example?


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

            ,╓p@@███████@╗╖,           
        ,p████████████████████N,       
      d█████████████████████████b     
    d██████████████████████████████æ   
  ,████²█████████████████████████████, 
 ,█████  ╙████████████████████╨  █████y
 ██████    `████████████████`    ██████
║██████       Ñ███████████`      ███████
███████         ╩██████Ñ         ███████
███████    ▐▄     ²██╩     a▌    ███████
╢██████    ▐▓█▄          ▄█▓▌    ███████
 ██████    ▐▓▓▓▓▌,     ▄█▓▓▓▌    ██████─
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓█,,▄▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
           ▐▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▌          
    ▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓─  
     ²▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓╩    
        ▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀       
           ²▀▀▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▀▀`          
                   ²²²                 
███████████████████████████████████████

. ★☆ WWW.LEALANA.COM        My PGP fingerprint is A764D833.        SMOOTHIE'S HEALTH AND FITNESS JOURNAL          History of Monero development Visualization ★☆ .
LEALANA  PHYSICAL MONERO COINS 999 FINE SILVER.
 
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:05:51 AM
 #31084

Thank you for answering my question.

Now that you said "No!", how do you think their business model will work if they do not have a financial incentive to keep certain users off the block chain?

How do they make their money if they are in fact a for-profit company?

It's been repeated ad nauseum that their business model is similar to RedHat or any other companies that built entreprise class software on top of open source platforms and offer a variety of consulting services.

but does that profit depend upon side chains becoming a reality and/or the max block size staying relatively small or at 1MB?

ad nauseum where? lol I haven;t seen any recent discussion of their business model in depth.

Oh really  Roll Eyes So you've missed the dozens of reddit threads and hundreds of pages discussing this very issue here?

That profit does depend on side chains becoming a reality but that's kind of backwards since sidechains ARE a reality, just not under the optimal security models they'd like to attain (SPV Proof). As gavinFanClub mentioned sidechains can be operated as we speak using federated servers which is perfectly fine for a private, corporate sidechain for example.

As for your repeated insistence on their reliance on a small block size. Maybe read this a couple times until it sinks in:

If my understanding is correct the proofs used in their concept to move coins between chains are in fact competing with transactions for space in blocks so it makes absolutely no sense to propose they profit from undue advantage by restricting block growth.

"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
sAt0sHiFanClub
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2015, 09:13:29 AM
 #31085


You asked for details about my knowledge of Blockstream development resources, I pointed you to my source.

Are you cypherdoc cousin by any chance? Is your next step to issue a BTC bounty to try and dox me and my personal life to "prove I'm a blockstream shill".

I'm just a regular dude trying to kick some sense into your head and calling out the bullshit I read

I've moderated the language in my post. Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like.

However, as good as you feel the blockstream proposal is ( and I dont deny it has merit) , it still indicates a problematic conflict of interest between bitcoin core members who will directly profit from blockstream and their role in advancing the best case for Bitcoin and its community.

We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:15:16 AM
 #31086

So then you concede that the goal of using side chains is to effectively divert users to a less secure block chain to increase capacity?

I highly doubt 100% of miners would merge-mine the side chain.

From your knowledge how are they proposing to improve privacy for example?

You can't be that dense  Cheesy

I've spent the last couple posts explaining that sidechains are not exactly about "increasing capacity" (scaling)...

The fact that you "highly doubt" something brings no value or argument to the discussion.

As for improved privacy, more on the subject here: https://github.com/ElementsProject/elementsproject.github.io/blob/master/confidential_values.md


"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: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:18:22 AM
 #31087


You asked for details about my knowledge of Blockstream development resources, I pointed you to my source.

Are you cypherdoc cousin by any chance? Is your next step to issue a BTC bounty to try and dox me and my personal life to "prove I'm a blockstream shill".

I'm just a regular dude trying to kick some sense into your head and calling out the bullshit I read

I've moderated the language in my post. Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like.

However, as good as you feel the blockstream proposal is ( and I dont deny it has merit) , it still indicates a problematic conflict of interest between bitcoin core members who will directly profit from blockstream and their role in advancing the best case for Bitcoin and its community.

Mike Hearn is a board advisor at Circle and Gavin is under MIT payroll. Developers need to get paid too you know. By all account most developers are under a certain conflict of interest (think of Garzik also at Bitpay). Assuming they are "problematic" is your own opinion.

"Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like." Just make sure it has some merit..

"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
sAt0sHiFanClub
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2015, 09:21:42 AM
 #31088


That profit does depend on side chains becoming a reality but that's kind of backwards since sidechains ARE a reality, just not under the optimal security models they'd like to attain (SPV Proof). As gavinFanClub mentioned sidechains can be operated as we speak using federated servers which is perfectly fine for a private, corporate sidechain for example.


If you are going to rely on federated servers, why not just use the Factom model? Factom uses federated servers in a similar, but much more elegant design.

One that works with bitcoin as it currently is.

We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624



View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:26:19 AM
 #31089

Thank you for answering my question.

Now that you said "No!", how do you think their business model will work if they do not have a financial incentive to keep certain users off the block chain?

How do they make their money if they are in fact a for-profit company?

It's been repeated ad nauseum that their business model is similar to RedHat or any other companies that built entreprise class software on top of open source platforms and offer a variety of consulting services.

but does that profit depend upon side chains becoming a reality and/or the max block size staying relatively small or at 1MB?

I don't think it does necessarily if you accept that they aren't sure where they are going to make money other than providing enterprise services in the Bitcoin marketplace. That may be sidechains, or lightning (apparently not part of the original plan but now it is), or it could be something else. Sidechains, in particular, might have nothing whatsoever to do with the block size (other than perhaps benefiting from a larger one), if they add value by adding features or being a private (in house) or consortium application.

Quote
ad nauseum where? lol I haven;t seen any recent discussion of their business model in depth.

Agree.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:27:44 AM
 #31090


That profit does depend on side chains becoming a reality but that's kind of backwards since sidechains ARE a reality, just not under the optimal security models they'd like to attain (SPV Proof). As gavinFanClub mentioned sidechains can be operated as we speak using federated servers which is perfectly fine for a private, corporate sidechain for example.


If you are going to rely on federated servers, why not just use the Factom model? Factom uses federated servers in a similar, but much more elegant design.

One that works with bitcoin as it currently is.

...because what Factom is attempting to do (data layer on top of Bitcoin) is not in any way similar to what sidechains can achieve (inter-operability between blockchains using units deriving scarcity from main Bitcoin blockchain)

maybe worth it to watch the video here to be better informed : http://www.blockstream.com/developers/

"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
sAt0sHiFanClub
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2015, 09:30:06 AM
 #31091


You asked for details about my knowledge of Blockstream development resources, I pointed you to my source.

Are you cypherdoc cousin by any chance? Is your next step to issue a BTC bounty to try and dox me and my personal life to "prove I'm a blockstream shill".

I'm just a regular dude trying to kick some sense into your head and calling out the bullshit I read

I've moderated the language in my post. Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like.

However, as good as you feel the blockstream proposal is ( and I dont deny it has merit) , it still indicates a problematic conflict of interest between bitcoin core members who will directly profit from blockstream and their role in advancing the best case for Bitcoin and its community.

Mike Hearn is a board advisor at Circle and Gavin is under MIT payroll. Developers need to get paid too you know. By all account most developers are under a certain conflict of interest (think of Garzik also at Bitpay). Assuming they are "problematic" is your own opinion.

"Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like." Just make sure it has some merit..


So your new is argument is "They are all doing it, so why can't we??"  Huh

Not winning any meritorious badges with that one.  Grin

We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:33:16 AM
 #31092


You asked for details about my knowledge of Blockstream development resources, I pointed you to my source.

Are you cypherdoc cousin by any chance? Is your next step to issue a BTC bounty to try and dox me and my personal life to "prove I'm a blockstream shill".

I'm just a regular dude trying to kick some sense into your head and calling out the bullshit I read

I've moderated the language in my post. Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like.

However, as good as you feel the blockstream proposal is ( and I dont deny it has merit) , it still indicates a problematic conflict of interest between bitcoin core members who will directly profit from blockstream and their role in advancing the best case for Bitcoin and its community.

Mike Hearn is a board advisor at Circle and Gavin is under MIT payroll. Developers need to get paid too you know. By all account most developers are under a certain conflict of interest (think of Garzik also at Bitpay). Assuming they are "problematic" is your own opinion.

"Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like." Just make sure it has some merit..


So your new is argument is "They are all doing it, so why can't we??"  Huh

Not winning any meritorious badges with that one.  Grin

Nop.

The argument is there is nothing wrong with conflict-of-interest per say when stated. They do not necessarily imply wrongdoing.

More interestingly I happens that as it stands I know more about the potential conflict-of-interest of Blockstream developers than I know about Gavin's or Mike's.

"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
sAt0sHiFanClub
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2015, 09:34:45 AM
 #31093


 sidechains can achieve inter-operability between blockchains using units deriving scarcityvalue from main Bitcoin blockchain


ftfy. Finally you get it.



We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624



View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:36:36 AM
 #31094


You asked for details about my knowledge of Blockstream development resources, I pointed you to my source.

Are you cypherdoc cousin by any chance? Is your next step to issue a BTC bounty to try and dox me and my personal life to "prove I'm a blockstream shill".

I'm just a regular dude trying to kick some sense into your head and calling out the bullshit I read

I've moderated the language in my post. Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like.

However, as good as you feel the blockstream proposal is ( and I dont deny it has merit) , it still indicates a problematic conflict of interest between bitcoin core members who will directly profit from blockstream and their role in advancing the best case for Bitcoin and its community.

Mike Hearn is a board advisor at Circle and Gavin is under MIT payroll. Developers need to get paid too you know. By all account most developers are under a certain conflict of interest (think of Garzik also at Bitpay). Assuming they are "problematic" is your own opinion.

"Of course you're entitled to hold any opinion you like." Just make sure it has some merit..


So your new is argument is "They are all doing it, so why can't we??"  Huh

Not winning any meritorious badges with that one.  Grin

Nop.

The argument is there is nothing wrong with conflict-of-interest per say when stated. They do not necessarily imply wrongdoing.

Are you stating you don't have any?

Quote
More interestingly I happens that as it stands I know more about the potential conflict-of-interest of Blockstream developers than I know about Gavin's or Mike's.

How is that? You said Mike is on Circle's board (I don't know what else he does for work, I'm going to guess you probably do though). That's a pretty obvious affiliation and transparent potential COI. Gavin works for a non-profit research institution. You can read out of that whatever you like, but in any case it's not hidden at all.

brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:51:26 AM
 #31095

Are you stating you don't have any?

Quote
More interestingly I happens that as it stands I know more about the potential conflict-of-interest of Blockstream developers than I know about Gavin's or Mike's.

How is that? You said Mike is on Circle's board (I don't know what else he does for work, I'm going to guess you probably do though). That's a pretty obvious affiliation and transparent potential COI. Gavin works for a non-profit research institution. You can read out of that whatever you like, but in any case it's not hidden at all.

 Cheesy

The often repeated suggestion here that I am somehow a company shill or industry insiders or w/e is so outrageously funny to me. I consider myself the exact opposite of someone you'd expect to be interested in cryptocurrency. I have no technical background, barely any formal economic education. None of my friends give a rats ass about it and there is absolutely no local community where I live. I've said before the closest ties you can stick on me about Blockstream is that I live about 2 hours away from their corporate office. Other than that I'm just any regular 25 year old college dropout, if you care to know  Grin

Anyway...Yes I'm stating I have no such thing as a conflict of interest. I am not professionally involved in anything resembling crypto and have never had contact with any industry person other than twitter, reddit and this forum.

As for your other question. The reason I stated we know more about Blockstream's potential conflict-of-interest is that the community pitchfork forced their hands into divulging non-negligible aspects of their financial remuneration and general contractual arrangements. I have no such details about Gavin & Mike's financial ties.


"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: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 09:54:58 AM
 #31096


 sidechains can achieve inter-operability between blockchains using units deriving scarcityvalue from main Bitcoin blockchain


ftfy. Finally you get it.

It is up to the user to decide on what to do with his bitcoins. If a sidechain succeeds at attracting trust out of the mainchain it will surely be because it offers a valuable service. I don't see what is wrong with this seeing as they intend to build these systems in the most secure and trustless way achievable.

Of course stupid people will do stupid things. Buyers beware and all that but ultimately it is my opinion that sidechains will do fantastic things for the ecosystem.

"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
sAt0sHiFanClub
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490


Warning: Confrmed Gavinista


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2015, 10:37:08 AM
 #31097


 sidechains can achieve inter-operability between blockchains using units deriving scarcityvalue from main Bitcoin blockchain


ftfy. Finally you get it.

It is up to the user to decide on what to do with his bitcoins. If a sidechain succeeds at attracting trust out of the mainchain it will surely be because it offers a valuable service. I don't see what is wrong with this seeing as they intend to build these systems in the most secure and trustless way achievable.

Of course stupid people will do stupid things. Buyers beware and all that but ultimately it is my opinion that sidechains will do fantastic things for the ecosystem.

No disagreement from me on those points.

But I dont see the point of supporting the deliberate ongoing hobbling of bitcoin with an arbitrary limit, while at the same time advocating a different solution that itself will require a more far reaching change in bitcoin to work correctly.

We must make money worse as a commodity if we wish to make it better as a medium of exchange
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 10:45:00 AM
 #31098


 sidechains can achieve inter-operability between blockchains using units deriving scarcityvalue from main Bitcoin blockchain


ftfy. Finally you get it.

It is up to the user to decide on what to do with his bitcoins. If a sidechain succeeds at attracting trust out of the mainchain it will surely be because it offers a valuable service. I don't see what is wrong with this seeing as they intend to build these systems in the most secure and trustless way achievable.

Of course stupid people will do stupid things. Buyers beware and all that but ultimately it is my opinion that sidechains will do fantastic things for the ecosystem.

No disagreement from me on those points.

But I dont see the point of supporting the deliberate ongoing hobbling of bitcoin with an arbitrary limit, while at the same time advocating a different solution that itself will require a more far reaching change in bitcoin to work correctly.

Part of my position is that I don't consider Bitcoin to be hobbled in anyway as it stands. Blocks are averaging at most half of the actual limit absent of spam attacks. I also happen to not trust Gavin or Hearn at all and consider their proposition as divisive and absolutely counter-productive.

I would also disagree that the changes required to make sidechains operate within Bitcoin are "far reaching". I understand that merged-mining is a source of debate but the script code in itself is not the source of any potential harm to the system AFAIK.

"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 18, 2015, 10:50:06 AM
 #31099

Like I said, it's about to get unbearable for larger miners:

https://m.facebook.com/MiningBitcoinCz/posts/846144602138294
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
August 18, 2015, 10:57:29 AM
 #31100

Like I said, it's about to get unbearable for larger miners:

https://m.facebook.com/MiningBitcoinCz/posts/846144602138294

Good morning doc!

Would you please do us the service to explain your hyperbole?

A pool with 2% of the hashrate will make it "unbearable" for who? how?

"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 ... 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 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 [1555] 1556 1557 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!