Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[Reggie Middleton]

Pretty bold claims from Middleton, but I have tried it and it works, at least in a beta phase, not vapor phase or proof of concept phase, but beta phase.  You can trade all tickers that Cypherdoc mentions on here.  

I still don't understand how the tickers are fed into veritaseum to settle the bets. Can you explain that?

Saying "it works" without understanding how it works is short-sighted.

Twice or thrice I tried to find technical documentation (wading through all the promotional crap) and was stifled, so I assumed it is centralized bullshit.

That's not a fair presumption. Most tech dudes (and most people in general) use the financial system and have absolutely no idea how it works. Does that mean that your money doesn't spend? Veritaseum, from a capital perspective, is fully decentralized. It is the only automated system that I know of that is fully autonomous in that you keep your private keys private and on your client under your control. All transactions are peer to peer through the blockchain, and our server doesn't touch, house, hold, custody or control a single satoshi of your coin. Read http://veritaseum.com/index.php/homes/1-blog/128-will-new-vc-investment-trump-the-returns-of-the-early-movers-in-the-digital-currency-space-quite-possibly-let-me-show-you-how and http://veritaseum.com/index.php/homes/1-blog/94-bitcoin-1-0-vs-2-0-or-a-comparison-of-legacy-exchanges-veritaseum-s-ultracoin for the difference between centralized and decentralized systems.
As an aside, the vast majority of bitcoin traders don't seem to have a problem with centralized systems as they freely send their decentralized assets to fully centralized entities to house, trade and exchange. Just a little food for thought.

If it is really just a protocol, then by definition there is nothing to stop someone from bypassing your client and writing directly to the protocol, cutting out the Middleton-man.

I am assuming there is some proprietary lockin somewhere in there, but without code and technical documentation, why should I (or other hackers/geeks/tech dudes) consume my (our) time trying to understand the system using inefficient means of trying to deobfuscate what you ostensibly (at least last time I looked) want to obfuscate. I will take a quick glance at the links above, but if they don't get direct to the technical points (as what I saw on your website before) then I will not expend more time.

P.S. some of us do understand both economics and programming. That is not to say I have any insider or real-world WallStreet experience (thank the almighty for that blessing).

Edit: I glanced at the links. Reggie we know already all about the virtues and design of decentralized exchanges. We understand the use of a mutually trusted "Facilitator" (Escrow agent). We understand the need for decentralized, consensus data feeds (which you apparently don't yet have in your system). We do not need to read all that shit over and over again. When we ask for technical documentation, we mean precisely that and none of this marketing overhead. Some of us are much more aware than you may think. We are also thinking about these sorts of designs and markets too (believe me you were not any where close to being the first).

I do not understand how to expect to gain traction. You can leverage your reputation and connections in the financial sphere, but afaics you do not know how to interface with the tech dudes who are the core of the Bitcoin sphere. IMO, if you want us on board, this has to be a collaborative effort and open source system. And so then how do you make your ROI on this? Does this project have its own coin (I think not). The world is not going to adopt Reggie-wallet. Sorry. You will need an open protocol and another way to make your ROI.

Perhaps there is some way to leverage your strengths and the open source community, but afaics you haven't partnered with the right CTO to get it done. I see more of a closed-source, proprietary, marketing spin philosophy thus far.

Also you appear to be building a specific protocol for trading options. Ethereum (and CounterParty?) is in the space of creating a programmable block chain wherein there can be a free market competition amongst protocols. I suggested last year that Ethereum can never scale and the only solution is merge-minded chains for programmable chains.

Some of us are thinking much bigger and more open than you. You should not assume you are the next Google. I highly doubt it.

P.S. your calls on Apple and Google were obvious to me also (before I found out about you on Zerohedge). I had written similar predictions on http://esr.ibiblio.org perhaps before you did. My point is your very boastful marketing spins are out of proportion to the technical acumen display openly thus far. Perhaps your team are technical wizards, but I don't know.

You are awfully confrontational. Why is that? What boasting are you speaking of. I believe I have over 80 vindicated contrarian calls covering many industries and sovereign nations, going back to 2006. Is that what you consider boasting? If so, it's not - it's marketing, designed to inform those who don't know who I am (likely many in this forum) of what I've accomplished in the past. Now, on to your points.

Anyone can, with enough effort, reproduce anything that's done on Wall Street, yet somehow Wall Street thrives. The reasons are a) its often difficult without both capital resources and specialized knowledge b) its really just not worth it much of the time c) many don't know how.

We are a financial software company, thus our core audience are financial types, not "technical dudes" as you describe them. Goldman, Bitfinex, itBit, JP Morgan and Citi don't have technical documents on their site describing what they do and how they do it. They offer you a service and/or solution and you decide if you want to use it. For some reason, you are not comparing us to our competitors, you are comparing us to a technical concern. I don't believe that is fair.

As for understanding economics, that has little to do with what we have built. Financial engineering, valuation and markets knowledge are much, much more useful in understanding what we're doing than economics will ever be.

As for proprietary lock-in, we let you keep your keys, and the code is on your client. We provide a service, just like a financial institutions does. It's simply that since our service and code is based on autonomy, you are in control. The institutions that you are used to dealing with are heteronomous, hence they must usurp control to reap margin - two very, very different business models. You can guess which one I think is superior. Time will tell if enough of the world agrees with me.

Your assertions about who was the first to do this and that are totally unnecessary. For one, you have no idea when I started doing anything that I did. In addition, its a useless debate anyway. Who really cares who was first, second or third? Really. What actually matters is who has a usable product now, and will that product be able to blossom and grow into the future. Isn't this correct? Now, enough of the unwarranted challenges. I'm here to work with you guys.

If you want to work with me to improve the code, then by all means let's do it. The code is not open sourced for legal, business and logistical reasons, but I as founder am willing to have the community work on it, we just need the resources to manage such. Keep in mind that this is going significantly above what ALL of our competition is willing to, or has done thus far. As for our CTO, he is quite qualified. Very, very few CTOs can right competent legal contracts. Very few IP lawyers can architect and design competent legal code. Our CTO is ivy league trained in both fields and has 15 years experience in payments with some of the biggest names in the industry. I'm proud to have him on board as part of the project. We are more open than any derivatives concern that I know of. If I'm mistaken, then please point that out.

We don't trade options. You are mistaken. We deal in smart contracted, OTC, P2P swaps. I believe our system is more advanced than anything available on Counterparty and Ethereum, and more importantly it is up and running and working right now.

You said, "Some of us are thinking much bigger and more open than you. You should not assume you are the next Google. I highly doubt it.". Well, I love you too! :-)   May I suggest a more friendly, less insulting approach? I don't recall assuming anything of the sort.

[inca]

He is a troll, Reggie.

[Reggie Middleton]

Pretty bold claims from Middleton, but I have tried it and it works, at least in a beta phase, not vapor phase or proof of concept phase, but beta phase.  You can trade all tickers that Cypherdoc mentions on here.  

I still don't understand how the tickers are fed into veritaseum to settle the bets. Can you explain that?

Saying "it works" without understanding how it works is short-sighted.

Twice or thrice I tried to find technical documentation (wading through all the promotional crap) and was stifled, so I assumed it is centralized bullshit.

That's my assumption, too... until it's explained how it works and it works in a way I can trust (which I doubt, but I've been wrong before).

If it's Reggie typing in 50000 tickers every hour then there might be no "counterparty risk", but there's plenty of other risk.

EDIT: I PMed him, maybe he'll show up here and explain. If not, it hardens my assumption.

See slide 14 here https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1UxB33wp1rCncBtPbuzQbkS1SZg_fjCTNMqu-wZGii-o/pub?start=true&loop=false&delayms=10000&slide=id.g7b8415063_38

Thanks for chipping in! Your other post ("centralized oracle") confirmed my suspicion. I don't share TPTB_need_war's view that that fact makes veritaseum centralized bullshit, though. I suspect it might be a great system. I love the fact that it lives on the bitcoin blockchain and has no other token. I also love that there's no counterparty risk and in addition I'm guessing it ties up some bitcoins in contracts and I do like that, too.

About the "other risk": where is the oracle on your server getting the tickers from? I guess that process should be made transparent at some point so we can at least know how it could be manipulated.

Certainly the incentive is high for some rogue employee somewhere to falsify some ticker feed you're pulling for just long enough for a large bet to be settled in his favor, no? Clearly there's noone capable/willing to fix something like that after the fact.

Only the data feed is centralized, everything else is fully distributed, which is better than centralized (reference the first link that I put up which explains this). A decentralized data feed just wouldn't work and it would be taking a step backwards from the current legacy system unless and until we have more activity than the centralized exchanges. Securities data fees are commodity items, and very easy to corroborate, very difficult to get away with in terms of fraud and/or manipulation.
As for someone in my camp manipulating a data feed, he/she would have a hard time doing so (we get them from 3rd parties) and even a harder time concealing it, and even a harder time than that getting away with it (each client plus the server has the ability to audit, although that is not implemented yet). You'd have to somehow change a data feed, hack into 3 disparate systems to inject that false data feed (whose real feed is freely availalble to all) and then hope nobody notices.
As it stands now, I believe our system is safer than the status quo by a long shot.

I understand. Thanks again for clearing some things up.

For the second time I will try to get my hands dirty with this. I have the client installed and the wallet backed up. Now I need some newbie type of help. I checked veritaseum.com for documentation and found the quick start video. It's hard to dig through the promotional talk and I stopped midway for now.

Is there some kind of written documentation somewhere on how to use the client and formulate orders? Is there a support chat on irc or a bitcointalk thread? I don't want to spam this beauty here.

First of all, thanks for giving us a try. I personally appreciate it.

Look in the products menu at the top of the site for the following links (and more stuff):
 Quick start tutorial http://veritaseum.com/index.php/download/veritaseum-wallet/quick-start-tutorial
Trade modelling utility http://veritaseum.com/index.php/download/veritaseum-wallet/trade-modelling-utility

If you wish, I can walk you through a trade right here in this forum. It's actually very simple, it's just based on the general concept of a swap thus possibly quite different from what many are used to. Think in terms of buying one exposure and paying for it with another. Use tickers to describe each exposure you'd like to buy (receive) and sell (pay) and voila, you've created your first swap contract! Don't use time based tickers that contain dates (ex. options or futures). If you want a high leverage contract based on an underlying or an index, you can use a ticker to access that underlying or index directly (ex 10 year treasury) then use our leverage option to dial in as much gearing as your stomach can handle. Its digital, and its unlimited (theoretically up to 10,000x). This way you avoid theta and time decay issues inherent in options, as well has delta and gamma and sensitivity to volatility. As I mentioned to the guy in the previous post these are swaps, not options. Options are not well suited for bitcoin speculation due to their sensitivity to volatility and bitcoins extreme volatility.

The trade modelling utility is an excel spreadsheet that allows you to fully model any trade with expenses, sensitivity analysis, etc. Veritaseum is actually a very power platform that can allow you to create a structure that has exposure to up to 5 different assets simultaneously with leverage of several hundred times! As you may be able to ascertain, this can be very difficult to do in your head! At the same time you can do a simple buy Apple for USD trade or short BTC for USD (or EUR or EURGBP pair, etc.).

If you are going to explicitly trade forex, you must use "=x" to indicate your desire to have that ticker represent a forex symbol. For instance, "USD=x" is the symbol for US dollars, while "USD" is the ticker for ProShares Ultra Semiconductors (USD) -NYSEArca. With ~45,000 of so tickers to choose from, you have to be rather exact. The client will attempt to validate the tickers for you, but it can't tell that you meant USD currency vs USD leveraged ETF without the correct input. I mention this because this is a mistake that I assume is being made.

[Reggie Middleton]

Pretty bold claims from Middleton, but I have tried it and it works, at least in a beta phase, not vapor phase or proof of concept phase, but beta phase.  You can trade all tickers that Cypherdoc mentions on here.  

I still don't understand how the tickers are fed into veritaseum to settle the bets. Can you explain that?

Saying "it works" without understanding how it works is short-sighted.

Twice or thrice I tried to find technical documentation (wading through all the promotional crap) and was stifled, so I assumed it is centralized bullshit.

That's my assumption, too... until it's explained how it works and it works in a way I can trust (which I doubt, but I've been wrong before).

If it's Reggie typing in 50000 tickers every hour then there might be no "counterparty risk", but there's plenty of other risk.

EDIT: I PMed him, maybe he'll show up here and explain. If not, it hardens my assumption.

See slide 14 here https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1UxB33wp1rCncBtPbuzQbkS1SZg_fjCTNMqu-wZGii-o/pub?start=true&loop=false&delayms=10000&slide=id.g7b8415063_38

Thanks for chipping in! Your other post ("centralized oracle") confirmed my suspicion. I don't share TPTB_need_war's view that that fact makes veritaseum centralized bullshit, though. I suspect it might be a great system. I love the fact that it lives on the bitcoin blockchain and has no other token. I also love that there's no counterparty risk and in addition I'm guessing it ties up some bitcoins in contracts and I do like that, too.

About the "other risk": where is the oracle on your server getting the tickers from? I guess that process should be made transparent at some point so we can at least know how it could be manipulated.

Certainly the incentive is high for some rogue employee somewhere to falsify some ticker feed you're pulling for just long enough for a large bet to be settled in his favor, no? Clearly there's noone capable/willing to fix something like that after the fact.

Only the data feed is centralized, everything else is fully distributed, which is better than centralized (reference the first link that I put up which explains this). A decentralized data feed just wouldn't work and it would be taking a step backwards from the current legacy system unless and until we have more activity than the centralized exchanges. Securities data fees are commodity items, and very easy to corroborate, very difficult to get away with in terms of fraud and/or manipulation.
As for someone in my camp manipulating a data feed, he/she would have a hard time doing so (we get them from 3rd parties) and even a harder time concealing it, and even a harder time than that getting away with it (each client plus the server has the ability to audit, although that is not implemented yet). You'd have to somehow change a data feed, hack into 3 disparate systems to inject that false data feed (whose real feed is freely availalble to all) and then hope nobody notices.
As it stands now, I believe our system is safer than the status quo by a long shot.

I understand.

Are you sure you (and he) understand?

Reggie sidesteps the issue of transient (perhaps un-auditable) manipulation of data feeds in conjunction with high frequency trading manipulation.

One thing programmers know that n00bs don't, "the devil is in the details" and "you don't know the whole story until you dig into the coding (the top-down perspective may be altered in the process)".

Download the client and give it a try. It's a fully functional system and you can see that it runs cleanly.

It is probably impossible (short of reverse engineering or building an extensive test kit) to determine that it runs cleanly without seeing the source code, because for example how do we evaluate how it might work in extreme or panic market conditions, under DDoS or high-frequency trading attacks, etc..

Maybe you should clarify it for us "N00bs". Exactly what does HFT have to do with digital OTC swaps, particularly P2P swaps. For the life of me, I can't figure it out and as far as I know I believe I created them.

[Reggie Middleton]

We offer tokens for sale that allow you to consult with us to extend both our tech and our financial engineering see https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1FMyNvogofqojqG6nkIjgvvjAnsWs1qOtKUFExvtp_m0/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=10000 and use this link to purchase them http://veritaseum.com/index.php/buy-veritas/quick-start-guide. So, if access to the client code is something that a client really wants, I'm sure we can work something out.

I threw 1BTC at this when you first released it a little while back. Is this tradeable now? 

They are tradable directly now, we are looking for credible exchanges that will carry colored coins.

[justusranvier]

The reason we have to worry about miners producing "too large" blocks is because they don't pay for all the P2P network resources they use (neither do end users).

All the arguments we have about resource consumption are derived from that primary design flaw.

If we fix it, then we won't have to argue any more.

Any mechanism you envision must also incorporate the fact that if collusion and monopolistic strategies are viable, they will be deployed.

Miners and pools have an incentive to include as many txns as they can get paid for and scale up the resource requirements to drive small miners to pools. So the community got up in arms about GHash.io, so no problem just hide your ownership behind a Sybil attack on the pools (that is surely the case today) so the community is either ignorantly pacified or can play Whack-A-Mole.

Even if you made txns free or negative cost (miners pay spenders), the incentive of the prior paragraph remains.

There is fundamental design flaw here that can't be fixed without radical overhaul of the design of PoW.

Economic FUD appears to be the type most resistant to being discarded after having been falsified. That particular bit has been floating around for over a century despite being thoroughly debunked.

https://www.mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly-0

[cypherdoc]

But now (or Soon) is not the right time.  We need studies, simulations, and (most importantly) actual empirical feedback from persistent full blocks to best determine how and when to proceed with altering the 1mb parameter.

Wrong. We already know it will be a clusterfuck.

I venture my opinion from 30 years experience in IT, when it appears that you have zilch and should just speak to what you know about (Monero? Hashfast?)

http://gavinandresen.ninja/utxo-uhoh

good re-read.  and i'm pretty sure he changed that write-up.  initially, he claimed the entire UTXO was held in RAM but down in the Reddit comments for the thread several ppl pointed out that it was held on disk with a 100MB high speed cache.  so, bottom line, it doesn't necessarily appear that this is a problem except for maybe miners.  given that tx growth won't immediately go to 20MB/block, i think it's safe to say this space problem should be worked out in time.

I really think there is a fast and simple constraint on UTXO bloat which can be done:
Allowing the existing free transaction space to be used for tx which reduce UTXOs (i.e. negative delta) instead of being based upon the number of days destroyed, which was to encourage old coins being spent, something less important.

His would you respond to the criticism that you are decreasing  privacy this way?

[cypherdoc]

Gavin moving forward. Will you be left behind? :

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

[adamstgBit]

Gavin moving forward. Will you be left behind? :

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

[hdbuck]

Gavin moving forward. Will you be left behind? :

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

lol so now gavin is only considering mike's opinion. plus calling for lobbying ( big fat not-so-democratic word here ) from merchants and centralized businesses...

mymy.. USG get out of this body!

[adamstgBit]

Gavin moving forward. Will you be left behind? :

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

lol so now gavin is only considering mike's opinion. plus calling for lobbying ( ) from merchants and centralized businesses...

mymy.. USG get out of this body!

He has to lobby merchants and exchanges to accept the changes because of the decentralized nature of Bitcoin.

this is what i want to see, the will of the majority crush the minority

this IS what Bitcoin is all about.

Do It Do it, come on, Do it!

[cypherdoc]

sorry to disappoint everyone but i've always said:

"The geeks fail to understand that which they hath created".

[hdbuck]

Gavin moving forward. Will you be left behind? :

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

lol so now gavin is only considering mike's opinion. plus calling for lobbying ( ) from merchants and centralized businesses...

mymy.. USG get out of this body!

He has to lobby merchants and exchanges to accept the changes because of the decentralized nature of Bitcoin.

this is what i want to see, the will of the majority crush the minority

this IS what Bitcoin is all about.

Do It Do it, come on, Do it!

As always, the majority is often wrong and misguided. Because masses are far more easy to manipulate than individuals. So your majority can go screw themselves as they are used to. Im not following the sheeples.

Seriously bitcoin is NOT about lobbying, that filthy practice which is far from democratic and in direct opposition to a natural consensus.
Bitcoin is about freedom.
It certainly doesnt need lobbyists a la TBF to take over teh world and them wall street scammers.

Gavin seems pretty desperate here. Good.


edit: funny the irony of such a nice bitcoiner like you to consider bypassing the decentralized consensus of Bitcoin with some nasty self centered lobbyists.

[cypherdoc]

sidhujag & Pruden.  i hope you've been paying attention:

[cypherdoc]

"Welcome To The Contraction": Q1 GDP Drops By 0.7%, Corporate Profits Crash

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-29/welcome-contraction-q1-gdp-drops-07-corporate-profits-crash

[sickpig]

sorry to disappoint everyone but i've always said:

"The geeks fail to understand that which they hath created".

so since Gavin define himself as an "all-around geek", what's your way forward?

(by the way Peter Todd and Gavin will be on the next LetsTalkBitcoin episode, along
with Adam/Andreas/Stephanie to talk about bitcoin scalability.)

[HeliKopterBen]

Gavin moving forward. Will you be left behind? :

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

lol so now gavin is only considering mike's opinion. plus calling for lobbying ( ) from merchants and centralized businesses...

mymy.. USG get out of this body!

He has to lobby merchants and exchanges to accept the changes because of the decentralized nature of Bitcoin.

this is what i want to see, the will of the majority crush the minority

this IS what Bitcoin is all about.

Do It Do it, come on, Do it!

As always, the majority is often wrong and misguided. Because masses are far more easy to manipulate than individuals. So your majority can go screw themselves as they are used to. Im not following the sheeples.

Seriously bitcoin is NOT about lobbying, that filthy practice which is far from democratic and in direct opposition to a natural consensus.
Bitcoin is about freedom.
It certainly doesnt need lobbyists a la TBF to take over teh world and them wall street scammers.

Gavin seems pretty desperate here. Good.


edit: funny the irony of such a nice bitcoiner like you to consider bypassing the decentralized consensus of Bitcoin with some nasty self centered lobbyists.

It's not about lobbying or desperation.  This is why bitcoin works:

Because if we can't come to consensus here, the ultimate authority for
determining consensus is what code the majority of merchants and exchanges
and miners are running.

[hdbuck]

Gavin moving forward. Will you be left behind? :

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

lol so now gavin is only considering mike's opinion. plus calling for lobbying ( ) from merchants and centralized businesses...

mymy.. USG get out of this body!

He has to lobby merchants and exchanges to accept the changes because of the decentralized nature of Bitcoin.

this is what i want to see, the will of the majority crush the minority

this IS what Bitcoin is all about.

Do It Do it, come on, Do it!

As always, the majority is often wrong and misguided. Because masses are far more easy to manipulate than individuals. So your majority can go screw themselves as they are used to. Im not following the sheeples.

Seriously bitcoin is NOT about lobbying, that filthy practice which is far from democratic and in direct opposition to a natural consensus.
Bitcoin is about freedom.
It certainly doesnt need lobbyists a la TBF to take over teh world and them wall street scammers.

Gavin seems pretty desperate here. Good.


edit: funny the irony of such a nice bitcoiner like you to consider bypassing the decentralized consensus of Bitcoin with some nasty self centered lobbyists.

It's not about lobbying or desperation.  This is why bitcoin works:

Because if we can't come to consensus here, the ultimate authority for
determining consensus is what code the majority of merchants and exchanges
and miners are running.

this is pure fud. what then? bitcoin is doomed? bitcoin back to 0 because you cant buy you frappuccino at MK's coffee shop in tokyo? please.

[cypherdoc]

Gavin moving forward. Will you be left behind? :

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

lol so now gavin is only considering mike's opinion. plus calling for lobbying ( ) from merchants and centralized businesses...

mymy.. USG get out of this body!

He has to lobby merchants and exchanges to accept the changes because of the decentralized nature of Bitcoin.

this is what i want to see, the will of the majority crush the minority

this IS what Bitcoin is all about.

Do It Do it, come on, Do it!

As always, the majority is often wrong and misguided. Because masses are far more easy to manipulate than individuals. So your majority can go screw themselves as they are used to. Im not following the sheeples.

Seriously bitcoin is NOT about lobbying, that filthy practice which is far from democratic and in direct opposition to a natural consensus.
Bitcoin is about freedom.
It certainly doesnt need lobbyists a la TBF to take over teh world and them wall street scammers.

Gavin seems pretty desperate here. Good.


edit: funny the irony of such a nice bitcoiner like you to consider bypassing the decentralized consensus of Bitcoin with some nasty self centered lobbyists.

It's not about lobbying or desperation.  This is why bitcoin works:

Because if we can't come to consensus here, the ultimate authority for
determining consensus is what code the majority of merchants and exchanges
and miners are running.

this is pure fud. what then? bitcoin is doomed? bitcoin back to 0? please.

what he is saying is that the economic majority will determine Bitcoin's future.  it always has.  this isn't some pigeon-hole geek experiment confined to technical considerations only.  this has always been primarily an economic project enforced thru technical means.  where would all these geeks be w/o all the fiat money poured into this project since the beginning?  no_where.

the geeks, esp gmax and LukeJr, have tried to make this a tail wagging the dog project.  instead, Gavin understands that ultimately the dog needs to wag the tail.

[hdbuck]

Gavin moving forward. Will you be left behind? :

http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/

lol so now gavin is only considering mike's opinion. plus calling for lobbying ( ) from merchants and centralized businesses...

mymy.. USG get out of this body!

He has to lobby merchants and exchanges to accept the changes because of the decentralized nature of Bitcoin.

this is what i want to see, the will of the majority crush the minority

this IS what Bitcoin is all about.

Do It Do it, come on, Do it!

As always, the majority is often wrong and misguided. Because masses are far more easy to manipulate than individuals. So your majority can go screw themselves as they are used to. Im not following the sheeples.

Seriously bitcoin is NOT about lobbying, that filthy practice which is far from democratic and in direct opposition to a natural consensus.
Bitcoin is about freedom.
It certainly doesnt need lobbyists a la TBF to take over teh world and them wall street scammers.

Gavin seems pretty desperate here. Good.


edit: funny the irony of such a nice bitcoiner like you to consider bypassing the decentralized consensus of Bitcoin with some nasty self centered lobbyists.

It's not about lobbying or desperation.  This is why bitcoin works:

Because if we can't come to consensus here, the ultimate authority for
determining consensus is what code the majority of merchants and exchanges
and miners are running.

this is pure fud. what then? bitcoin is doomed? bitcoin back to 0? please.

what he is saying is that the economic majority will determine Bitcoin's future.  it always has.  this isn't some pigeon-hole geek experiment confined to technical considerations only.  this has always been primarily an economic project enforced thru technical means.  where would all these geeks be w/o all the fiat money poured into this project since the beginning?  no_where.

the geeks, esp gmax and LukeJr, have tried to make this a tail wagging the dog project.  instead, Gavin understands that ultimately the dog needs to wag the tail.

ultimately, gavin is USG's dog here.

seriously I am baffled that smart people like you here fail at grasping the situation regarding the US endoctrinement of the masses and manipulation of literally everything they could get a leverage with.

let it not be with Bitcoin. because decentralized consensus. thats what i signed for.

so ultimately, people will fight to get a (rare) piece of that secured and robust technology when the rest of the financial world will be on the hedge. so let it be decentralized man. no need friggin leaders. we already have enough of them.