Bitcoin Forum
December 02, 2016, 08:19:57 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 ... 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 [421] 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1803328 times)
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128



View Profile
May 27, 2014, 05:23:37 AM
 #8401

this has been a bad weekend for news on Bitcoin 2.0 projects.  we all know about Ripple now.  Mastercoin allegedly has problems with Willett selling out (not confirmed by me), and now we have Bitshares:

http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/beyond-bitcoin-1-nxt-asset-exchange-and-bitshares-technical-update

listen carefully to Larimer describe how, just last week, he's had to redo the entire implementation of how tx's are handled within his protocol.  simple inputs and outputs structure like in Bitcoin have been discarded for database tables which will be required for every asset tracked by the Bitshare protocol.  blocks require "delegate" (read centralized) nodes to sign off and approve tx's.  apparently he had severe forking problems with his original code and lack of a mechanism to develop consensus.  

while listening to the podcast it dawned on me how centralized these Bitcoin 2.0 projects have become in the sense of depending on a core group of known devs who have a vested interest.  he even says that if something happened to him while the protocol had a problem there would be no one to really fix it.  that's bad.

Satoshi was wise to remain anonymous.  by leaving and turning the code management over to a distributed group of devs who don't have a vested interest in Bitcoin, other than whatever BTC they may have bought on the free market, he fortified the Bitcoin dev process from gov't pressure.  all the Bitcoin 2.0 projects have dev teams whose personal financial success depends on the success of their product.  if the devs themselves ever get attacked by gov't their project would be finished by the mere fact that most of them have awarded themselves an upfront disproportionate share of the equity.

i am beginning to believe that blockchain technology may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as money.  you heard it here first.  i know what Satoshi said about scripting language and the potential to do more things like smart contracts et al but he said those things in a forum post and almost as an afterthought.  he also could be wrong about growing these products out from the blockchain from an economic and technical standpoint.  the masses don't care about these things, at least right now.  i think they just want their money to be safe.  here in the US, the arguably wealthiest country in the world, only a small % own things like stocks or bonds let alone assurance contracts or derivatives.

i think it's an interesting thought that blockchain technology may only ever be used to protect Bitcoin as money.  if i'm right, all that money directed at alt projects has yet to flow back to Bitcoin.

wow, cypher. I'm sure you're aware of the boldness of the claim you make. (EDIT: if you scratch the "may", that is)

You don't back it up substantially (or do you?), so I'm not convinced (at all, to be honest). I'll try to keep it in the back of my head with an open mind, though and look for indications or reasoning that support it.

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
1480709997
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480709997

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480709997
Reply with quote  #2

1480709997
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480709997
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480709997

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480709997
Reply with quote  #2

1480709997
Report to moderator
1480709997
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480709997

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480709997
Reply with quote  #2

1480709997
Report to moderator
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
May 27, 2014, 05:33:17 AM
 #8402

this has been a bad weekend for news on Bitcoin 2.0 projects.  we all know about Ripple now.  Mastercoin allegedly has problems with Willett selling out (not confirmed by me), and now we have Bitshares:

http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/beyond-bitcoin-1-nxt-asset-exchange-and-bitshares-technical-update

listen carefully to Larimer describe how, just last week, he's had to redo the entire implementation of how tx's are handled within his protocol.  simple inputs and outputs structure like in Bitcoin have been discarded for database tables which will be required for every asset tracked by the Bitshare protocol.  blocks require "delegate" (read centralized) nodes to sign off and approve tx's.  apparently he had severe forking problems with his original code and lack of a mechanism to develop consensus.  

while listening to the podcast it dawned on me how centralized these Bitcoin 2.0 projects have become in the sense of depending on a core group of known devs who have a vested interest.  he even says that if something happened to him while the protocol had a problem there would be no one to really fix it.  that's bad.

Satoshi was wise to remain anonymous.  by leaving and turning the code management over to a distributed group of devs who don't have a vested interest in Bitcoin, other than whatever BTC they may have bought on the free market, he fortified the Bitcoin dev process from gov't pressure.  all the Bitcoin 2.0 projects have dev teams whose personal financial success depends on the success of their product.  if the devs themselves ever get attacked by gov't their project would be finished by the mere fact that most of them have awarded themselves an upfront disproportionate share of the equity.

i am beginning to believe that blockchain technology may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as money.  you heard it here first.  i know what Satoshi said about scripting language and the potential to do more things like smart contracts et al but he said those things in a forum post and almost as an afterthought.  he also could be wrong about growing these products out from the blockchain from an economic and technical standpoint.  the masses don't care about these things, at least right now.  i think they just want their money to be safe.  here in the US, the arguably wealthiest country in the world, only a small % own things like stocks or bonds let alone assurance contracts or derivatives.

i think it's an interesting thought that blockchain technology may only ever be used to protect Bitcoin as money.  if i'm right, all that money directed at alt projects has yet to flow back to Bitcoin.
I have a prediction - after all the Bitcoin 2.0 projects are dead, Open-Transactions is going to be around doing everything those projects promised to deliver, precisely because they are just building useful financial cryptography tools and not trying to create a competing currency.

The reason you haven't heard much about them is because, unlike projects that have an alt to pump, they're being more careful about who they take on as investors and are focusing more on building software correctly than building it quickly.
rpietila
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386


Crypto Kingdom (Creator)


View Profile
May 27, 2014, 06:06:21 AM
 #8403

I think alts amplify Bitcoin potential.

but only as testing grounds.  anything worthwhile should be assimilated into Bitcoin when possible. 

the larger issue, as indicated by impulse above, is how do any of the alts implement a distribution mechanism that comes close to what Satoshi did?  he set a very high standard of what are now considered best practices in this new virtual currency world.  i'm thinking it's impossible unless you're willing to do the entire development model for free and somehow keep yourself anonymous.  but then at that point why wouldn't you just develop/enhance the market leader itself, Bitcoin, which stands to be the ultimate winner?

Monero is an example of a coin that is trying to do exactly that. The devs don't hold a privileged position, there is no premine, the coin hit exchanges last week when less than 5% were mined. It takes forever to mine the rest of the coins (80% in 4 years but exponential decay).

The ways to build a monster position are - mining with multiple CPUs, - buying in the exchanges, - making markets. All these are beneficial activities for the coin. Due to high inflation, pumping is difficult/impossible (new mining alone acts as a dampener on pumps). All in all a nice coin, aiming to have real anonymity with CryptoNote coin mixing, and my first altcoin investment ever Smiley

lebing
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274


Bitcoin: The honey badger of currencies


View Profile
May 27, 2014, 06:46:44 AM
 #8404

I think alts amplify Bitcoin potential.

but only as testing grounds.  anything worthwhile should be assimilated into Bitcoin when possible. 

the larger issue, as indicated by impulse above, is how do any of the alts implement a distribution mechanism that comes close to what Satoshi did?  he set a very high standard of what are now considered best practices in this new virtual currency world.  i'm thinking it's impossible unless you're willing to do the entire development model for free and somehow keep yourself anonymous.  but then at that point why wouldn't you just develop/enhance the market leader itself, Bitcoin, which stands to be the ultimate winner?

Monero is an example of a coin that is trying to do exactly that. The devs don't hold a privileged position, there is no premine, the coin hit exchanges last week when less than 5% were mined. It takes forever to mine the rest of the coins (80% in 4 years but exponential decay).

The ways to build a monster position are - mining with multiple CPUs, - buying in the exchanges, - making markets. All these are beneficial activities for the coin. Due to high inflation, pumping is difficult/impossible (new mining alone acts as a dampener on pumps). All in all a nice coin, aiming to have real anonymity with CryptoNote coin mixing, and my first altcoin investment ever Smiley

Sorry to derail the thread even further, but this seems just like darkcoin? What is the benefit of this over it?

Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
darlidada
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 666


View Profile
May 27, 2014, 06:53:41 AM
 #8405

I think alts amplify Bitcoin potential.

but only as testing grounds.  anything worthwhile should be assimilated into Bitcoin when possible. 

the larger issue, as indicated by impulse above, is how do any of the alts implement a distribution mechanism that comes close to what Satoshi did?  he set a very high standard of what are now considered best practices in this new virtual currency world.  i'm thinking it's impossible unless you're willing to do the entire development model for free and somehow keep yourself anonymous.  but then at that point why wouldn't you just develop/enhance the market leader itself, Bitcoin, which stands to be the ultimate winner?

Monero is an example of a coin that is trying to do exactly that. The devs don't hold a privileged position, there is no premine, the coin hit exchanges last week when less than 5% were mined. It takes forever to mine the rest of the coins (80% in 4 years but exponential decay).

The ways to build a monster position are - mining with multiple CPUs, - buying in the exchanges, - making markets. All these are beneficial activities for the coin. Due to high inflation, pumping is difficult/impossible (new mining alone acts as a dampener on pumps). All in all a nice coin, aiming to have real anonymity with CryptoNote coin mixing, and my first altcoin investment ever Smiley

Sorry to derail the thread even further, but this seems just like darkcoin? What is the benefit of this over it?

Untraceable payments, unlinkable transaction and blockchain analysis resistance. These are not promises. If you havent heard about the cryptonote technology, you can read the white paper there: https://cryptonote.org/
rpietila
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386


Crypto Kingdom (Creator)


View Profile
May 27, 2014, 07:06:08 AM
 #8406

Sorry to derail the thread even further, but this seems just like darkcoin? What is the benefit of this over it?

There has to be two things for an alt to have a snowball's chance to succeed:
- A real benefit over BTC, which is not implementable in BTC
- Slow public launch with no premine to distribute the coins fairly and widely, while keeping the network secure for years to come

MRO is the almost only altcoin ever to have a launch that qualifies. What a luck that it is one of only a few coins that fulfil the tech criterion also.

=> I bought MRO, but not darkcoin (it does not fill either, because of instamine, and problems in tech - even now it is down due to fork).

If ever a second coin comes that has real novelty value (copy of MRO of course does not count) and a good team and fair launch, I may buy it.

But true, this discussion is better in my new thread. Let's stop. Smiley

Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
May 27, 2014, 08:20:18 AM
 #8407

=> I bought MRO

But would you have still taken a speculative position in MRO if you could freely claim a share of a spin-off clone of Monero in proportion to your bitcoin holdings?

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
rpietila
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386


Crypto Kingdom (Creator)


View Profile
May 27, 2014, 08:37:32 AM
 #8408

=> I bought MRO

But would you have still taken a speculative position in MRO if you could freely claim a share of a spin-off clone of Monero in proportion to your bitcoin holdings?

I don't know, maybe maybe not. But that does not change the fact that:
a) if there's such a clone, I'll get my share for free anyway  Cheesy
b) MRO was the first coin that fulfilled my 2 criteria for a viable altcoin.

Besides imo a "speculative position" is something that is a larger % of the coin's eventual market cap than you have of Bitcoin's market cap. A hedge position is an equal percentage.

domob
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 936


View Profile WWW
May 27, 2014, 08:47:53 AM
 #8409

Sorry to derail the thread even further, but this seems just like darkcoin? What is the benefit of this over it?

There has to be two things for an alt to have a snowball's chance to succeed:
- A real benefit over BTC, which is not implementable in BTC
- Slow public launch with no premine to distribute the coins fairly and widely, while keeping the network secure for years to come

MRO is the almost only altcoin ever to have a launch that qualifies. What a luck that it is one of only a few coins that fulfil the tech criterion also.

You may also be interested in Namecoin.  IMHO, it also satisfies both your criteria.  It was launched already in 2011 (and was actually the first altcoin ever, I think), so not too much hype.  And it implements real technical additions over Bitcoin, unlikely to be added to Bitcoin.  (Even more unlikely than Bitcoin gaining strong anonymity, IMHO.)

Use your Namecoin identity as OpenID: https://nameid.org/
Donations: 1domobKsPZ5cWk2kXssD8p8ES1qffGUCm | NMC: NCdomobcmcmVdxC5yxMitojQ4tvAtv99pY
BM-GtQnWM3vcdorfqpKXsmfHQ4rVYPG5pKS | GPG 0xA7330737
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 27, 2014, 01:01:34 PM
 #8410

Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
rpietila
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386


Crypto Kingdom (Creator)


View Profile
May 27, 2014, 01:31:20 PM
 #8411

You may also be interested in Namecoin.  IMHO, it also satisfies both your criteria.  It was launched already in 2011 (and was actually the first altcoin ever, I think), so not too much hype.  And it implements real technical additions over Bitcoin, unlikely to be added to Bitcoin.  (Even more unlikely than Bitcoin gaining strong anonymity, IMHO.)

Namecoin has had enough time to prove that it is not going anywhere.

kjj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302



View Profile
May 27, 2014, 01:56:51 PM
 #8412

You may also be interested in Namecoin.  IMHO, it also satisfies both your criteria.  It was launched already in 2011 (and was actually the first altcoin ever, I think), so not too much hype.  And it implements real technical additions over Bitcoin, unlikely to be added to Bitcoin.  (Even more unlikely than Bitcoin gaining strong anonymity, IMHO.)

Namecoin has had enough time to prove that it is not going anywhere.

Which is fine, because it isn't intended to go anywhere.  Namecoin isn't a monetary coin.

p2pcoin: a USB/CD/PXE p2pool miner - 1N8ZXx2cuMzqBYSK72X4DAy1UdDbZQNPLf - todo
I routinely ignore posters with paid advertising in their sigs.  You should too.
rpietila
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386


Crypto Kingdom (Creator)


View Profile
May 27, 2014, 02:17:43 PM
 #8413

Namecoin isn't a monetary coin.

LMAO for non-monetary coins.

adamstgBit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904


Trusted Bitcoiner


View Profile WWW
May 27, 2014, 02:23:19 PM
 #8414

Namecoin isn't a monetary coin.

LMAO for non-monetary coins.

namecoin is useful as it allows a decentralized censorship resistant DNS .bit domains

its a cool alt coin thats been out for a long time.

I wouldn't speculate on namecoin, but i can see myself possibly buying a few to get a .bit domain


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 27, 2014, 02:51:04 PM
 #8415

Hey TeeBone,

You're lucky you weaseled out on our bet. Your immature response is precisely why I insisted on escrow. I had it all arranged with Melbustus.
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1554



View Profile
May 27, 2014, 03:10:29 PM
 #8416

...
I had it all arranged with Melbustus.


Confirmed.

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
But Bitcointalk & /r/bitcoin are heavily censored. bitco.in/forum, forum.bitcoin.com, and /r/btc are open.
Best info on Casascius coins: http://spotcoins.com/casascius
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
May 27, 2014, 04:14:26 PM
 #8417

If there was any question that Vitalik Buterin  doesn't understand Bitcoin economics, here it is:

The reason why having a fixed never-growing supply is undesirable is obvious: it encourages wealth concentration and creates a static community of holders without an effective way for new people to get in, and it means that the coin has no way to incentive any specific kind of activity in the long term.

http://blog.ethereum.org/2014/05/24/on-long-term-cryptocurrency-distribution-models/

Kinda sad really.  

FTFY.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 27, 2014, 04:18:23 PM
 #8418

If there was any question that Vitalik Buterin  doesn't understand Bitcoin economics, here it is:

The reason why having a fixed never-growing supply is undesirable is obvious: it encourages wealth concentration and creates a static community of holders without an effective way for new people to get in, and it means that the coin has no way to incentive any specific kind of activity in the long term.

http://blog.ethereum.org/2014/05/24/on-long-term-cryptocurrency-distribution-models/

Kinda sad really.  

FTFY.

no, Bitcoin is not just about understanding the technical aspects which he clearly does.

it's about understanding Bitcoin as a whole; the technical aspects plus the economic incentives involved.  if he fails to understand either one of those, he fails to understand Bitcoin.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
May 27, 2014, 04:19:19 PM
 #8419

breaking support like this on high volume is NOT good, Teebone:

Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022


View Profile
May 27, 2014, 04:26:48 PM
 #8420

no, Bitcoin is not just about understanding the technical aspects which he clearly does.

it's about understanding Bitcoin as a whole; the technical aspects plus the economic incentives involved.  if he fails to understand either one of those, he fails to understand Bitcoin.

Absolutely agree. I meant he doesn't (even) understand economics, which is a prerequisite for really understanding Bitcoin.
Pages: « 1 ... 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 [421] 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 ... 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!