Bitcoin Forum
November 19, 2024, 06:01:14 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
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 ... 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 [970] 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 ... 1557 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2032249 times)
prophetx
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1010


he who has the gold makes the rules


View Profile WWW
January 02, 2015, 10:44:58 PM
 #19381

Adam,

1.  what's your view on the maximum #SC's that can reasonably be MM'd by the Bitcoin mining network?  i'm not aware of any capable mining software in existence today that would allow multiple SC MM'ing besides the simple Namecoin experiment, which is a public service altcoin afaic.

2.  given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?

3.  we've already seen a 10x drop in the prices of mining hardware as a result of the stiff competition and profit crunch.  this is a natural cyclic effect of the game theory which drives competition for BTC rewards and tx fees.  you say that SC's can help these profits by helping to extend demand (possibly).  but the fact is, you're compensating for what is a natural result of the incentive structure as the rules are currently written.  you're changing the rules of the game, midstream, that changes the market assumptions behind mining.  i actually consider these extremely thin marginal profits to be in an exquisite balance today.  considering only the positives of this change while ignoring the possible negatives is naive as this is an extremely complex topic.

4.  51% attacks will be much more profitable and tempting with SC's, imo, as they don't risk destroying mining pools main source of income, the MC.  short selling the to be attacked SC on an exchange while stealing its scBTC at the same time could be quite a profitable scheme. 

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

what is an "SC" and an "MM"?
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 10:45:43 PM
 #19382

2.  given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?

What solo miners?


you know, the solo miners.  the one's who are left.

kinda like all the assumed dead addresses out there with coin.
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 10:47:44 PM
 #19383

Adam,

1.  what's your view on the maximum #SC's that can reasonably be MM'd by the Bitcoin mining network?  i'm not aware of any capable mining software in existence today that would allow multiple SC MM'ing besides the simple Namecoin experiment, which is a public service altcoin afaic.

2.  given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?

3.  we've already seen a 10x drop in the prices of mining hardware as a result of the stiff competition and profit crunch.  this is a natural cyclic effect of the game theory which drives competition for BTC rewards and tx fees.  you say that SC's can help these profits by helping to extend demand (possibly).  but the fact is, you're compensating for what is a natural result of the incentive structure as the rules are currently written.  you're changing the rules of the game, midstream, that changes the market assumptions behind mining.  i actually consider these extremely thin marginal profits to be in an exquisite balance today.  considering only the positives of this change while ignoring the possible negatives is naive as this is an extremely complex topic.

4.  51% attacks will be much more profitable and tempting with SC's, imo, as they don't risk destroying mining pools main source of income, the MC.  short selling the to be attacked SC on an exchange while stealing its scBTC at the same time could be quite a profitable scheme. 

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

what is an "SC" and an "MM"?

Sidechain dictionary:

SC=sidechain
MM=merge mining
MC=mainchain (Bitcoin blockchain)
scBTC=reanimated BTC on SC that have passed thru the 2wp
ZC=zerocoin or zerocash
TC=Truthcoin
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 10:49:02 PM
 #19384

2.  given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?

What solo miners?


you know, the solo miners.  the one's who are left.

Okay fair point. "Unknown" is 18%, which is a lot higher than I remember. I guess that is mostly farms with their own private pools, not really what I think of as solo miners, but technically they are.

CryptAxe
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 100
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
January 02, 2015, 11:16:05 PM
 #19385

2.  given that individual miners have limited resources and technical skill, won't MM'ing force solo miners into pools where these skills and resources will be more centralized?

What solo miners?


you know, the solo miners.  the one's who are left.

Okay fair point. "Unknown" is 18%, which is a lot higher than I remember. I guess that is mostly farms with their own private pools, not really what I think of as solo miners, but technically they are.



They probably have their own stratum servers anyways, but its the closest to the old solo mining that there is

cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:17:35 PM
 #19386

https://twitter.com/cypherdoc2/status/551155168994414593
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:20:01 PM
 #19387

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
dakota neat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:21:49 PM
 #19388

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:27:38 PM
 #19389

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.
dakota neat
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 658
Merit: 500



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:32:46 PM
 #19390

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

Damn, don't be a tool. Who cares about the US?
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:33:39 PM
 #19391

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

That doesn't sound very promising

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
Odalv
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1000



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:34:17 PM
 #19392

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

 - you are using tooo much "if"s
 - you see MM as only solutions (we will have only few 2-3 100% MM SC (edit: if any :-))) => there are other better solutions than MM
LOBSTER
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:38:51 PM
 #19393

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

That doesn't sound very promising

Yes you are right. Not very promising and shady too!
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:44:47 PM
 #19394

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

That doesn't sound very promising

Yes you are right. Not very promising and shady too!

Lobster my man, this was honestly the first thing that crossed my mind on reading the paper. I don't know why it isn't being addressed

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349


Eadem mutata resurgo


View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:46:07 PM
 #19395

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

introducing regulatory/political drawbacks into a technology is sure to compromise its function and benefits to humanity.

would you have lawyers/politicians design/build 747's for you to cross the Atlantic in? design/build nuclear power stations to power your cities?

leave technology to the technologists unless you want bad outcomes.

money is a value information technology not a political tool, it needs to be the best technology it can be to maximally benefit humanity, not a compromised, politicised, perverted tool for oppression and dubious agendas.

cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:46:19 PM
 #19396

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

Damn, don't be a tool. Who cares about the US?

i neither approve or disapprove of this.  this is just my observation.  the reality of the matter is that US pools are in a very difficult situation.  BTCGuild and Eleuthria sold out b/c he wasn't about to go against possible US regulation as he didn't want to go to jail.
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:47:06 PM
 #19397

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

 - you are using tooo much "if"s
 - you see MM as only solutions (we will have only few 2-3 100% MM SC (edit: if any :-))) => there are other better solutions than MM

what are they besides federated servers?
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:48:11 PM
 #19398

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

Nobody cares about the fucking goverment. This is Crypto.

Adam,

5.  if a SC like Zerocoin/Zerocash gets declared illegal by the US gvt, legit pools that can't/won't participate in an illegal SC might have an actual incentive to attack it to destroy those users and their scBTC that are in fact using Zerocoin/Zerocash illegally.  given that no SC will ever have 100% MM, 51% attacks become much easier to execute.

That doesn't sound very promising

Yes you are right. Not very promising and shady too!

apparently not for LukeJr and Eligius!
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:48:49 PM
 #19399

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

introducing regulatory/political drawbacks into a technology is sure to compromise its function and benefits to humanity.

would you have lawyers/politicians design/build 747's for you to cross the Atlantic in? design/build nuclear power stations to power your cities?

leave technology to the technologists unless you want bad outcomes.

money is a value information technology not a political tool, it needs to be the best technology it can be to maximally benefit humanity, not a compromised, politicised, perverted tool for oppression and dubious agendas.

I see your point

Forgive my petulance and oft-times, I fear, ill-founded criticisms, and forgive me that I have, by this time, made your eyes and head ache with my long letter. But I cannot forgo hastily the pleasure and pride of thus conversing with you.
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
January 02, 2015, 11:50:31 PM
 #19400

Ok brothers I've read the sidechains whitepaper and I have a question.

What are the regulatory/political drawbacks or ramifications of introducing extra-anonymous features in a scBTC?

introducing regulatory/political drawbacks into a technology is sure to compromise its function and benefits to humanity.

would you have lawyers/politicians design/build 747's for you to cross the Atlantic in? design/build nuclear power stations to power your cities?

leave technology to the technologists unless you want bad outcomes.

money is a value information technology not a political tool, it needs to be the best technology it can be to maximally benefit humanity, not a compromised, politicised, perverted tool for oppression and dubious agendas.

marcus, in your opinion does that include SC's for Bitcoin?
Pages: « 1 ... 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 [970] 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 ... 1557 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!