Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[brg444]

that's b/c altcoins don't have the luxury of being MM'd by the Bitcoin miners.

the only chance SC's have to sell their whole concept is if Austin Hill can introduce a market distortion by convincing miners to MM.  you know, the "something for nothing" concept.

"market distortion"

 

surely you mean "profit incentive" right?

[1714181486]

1714181486

[1714181486]

1714181486

[cbeast]

I do want to ask though, does this mean you're bearish on Bitcoin now?

I had to sell some, Gavin talking about a fork not an evolution, and this this is devastating IMO.

Forks are the definition of evolution. Every species goes extinct. All of them. We are not the same species as our predecessors and our future progeny will not be the same species as us. Still, they trace a direct lineage. Forking the blockchain will allow a more adaptable Bitcoin that can survive the changing economic environment. Just because all the others who have tried failed, doesn't mean Gavin's version will fail. What will happen if nothing is done?

[tvbcof]

the guy is not known for his manners.  in fact, if i say one thing, you can be guaranteed he'll just say the opposite to disagree.

Not true.  We were both saying BTC was possibly a good buy in late 2011.  Just saying it in different tones, and possibly for different reasons.  My clairvoyance is not sufficient to speak authoritatively about the latter though.  You are pretty much right since that time though.  We disagree about more than we agree about to be sure.  And I do have a propensity to disagree (and often enough to be disagreeable.)

[solex]

I do want to ask though, does this mean you're bearish on Bitcoin now?

I had to sell some, Gavin talking about a fork not an evolution, and this this is devastating IMO.

Forks are the definition of evolution. Every species goes extinct. All of them. We are not the same species as our predecessors and our future progeny will not be the same species as us. Still, they trace a direct lineage. Forking the blockchain will allow a more adaptable Bitcoin that can survive the changing economic environment. Just because all the others who have tried failed, doesn't mean Gavin's version will fail. What will happen if nothing is done?

Apes losing their tail was a fork in the evolution of primates.

[cypherdoc]

another way to address your point is that a "theoretical" will never trump a "known".

we know MM is less secure than direct mining.  we don't know that a new untested "innovation" will exactly counter weigh the value of less security.

remember a week ago when you proposed that your anonymous sidechain would be so attractive it would effectively siphon all the BTC out of the mainchain 

now you are not so certain about "innovations" because they don't fit your argument ?

via a speculative attack.

point being, there are many scenarios here where problems could occur.

[cbeast]

I do want to ask though, does this mean you're bearish on Bitcoin now?

I had to sell some, Gavin talking about a fork not an evolution, and this this is devastating IMO.

Forks are the definition of evolution. Every species goes extinct. All of them. We are not the same species as our predecessors and our future progeny will not be the same species as us. Still, they trace a direct lineage. Forking the blockchain will allow a more adaptable Bitcoin that can survive the changing economic environment. Just because all the others who have tried failed, doesn't mean Gavin's version will fail. What will happen if nothing is done?

Apes losing their tail was a fork in the evolution of primates.

No. That's not the point and also not true.

[cypherdoc]

unfortunately, i gotta go for a few hours.

back later.

[brg444]

There is no 1:1 peg guarantee. If the SC is inflationary and appeals to a central bank more than Bitcoin they'll use that not BTC. And the minority who want BTC hard money will be eaten for breakfast.

you have lost all of the credibility you have here ever since you started spouting that nonsense. IMO

you have to realize that there is no incentive for someone to create GOVcoin as a sidechain so thus your argument is that the GOV altcoin is going to take BTC over. if that were to happen and if you truly believe that then I suggest you sell all of your BTCs because sidechains are NOT going to have an impact on whether this happens or not

[brg444]

another way to address your point is that a "theoretical" will never trump a "known".

we know MM is less secure than direct mining.  we don't know that a new untested "innovation" will exactly counter weigh the value of less security.

remember a week ago when you proposed that your anonymous sidechain would be so attractive it would effectively siphon all the BTC out of the mainchain 

now you are not so certain about "innovations" because they don't fit your argument ?

via a speculative attack.

point being, there are many scenarios here where problems could occur.

and the beauty of open-source is the mind share of all of the Bitcoin community can work together to mitigate these problem scenarios..

the obvious point here is you choose to focus on doomsday scenarios without ever considering the successful ones.

[brg444]

trying to say a new, untested "innovation" will exactly offset the discount the market will apply b/c of less security is naive.  that might only be true over a given time period during which that innovation is tested.

did you ever think that the sidechain will be tested and vetted by the community BEFORE it is launched for public use thus mitigating your concerns

[Adrian-x]

I think we all agree that Bitcoin is good enough right now and actually pretty close to being perfect as is. As I have mentionned above, its only shortcomings are in its transportive properties : confirmation times and inability to provide private transactions natively. This leads me to believe these two aspects are likely the only ones that who will lead to the creation of utility sidechains that are used as subsets of Bitcoin-money. In all honesty, is there anything more we need from Bitcoin, as a mean of exchange, than faster confirmation time and a privacy option? I don't think so.

Thousands of other sidechains will be created for different purposes but none will be competing with Bitcoin for its position as crypto-money. Some might try, but will realise they will be better off applying their competing idea to an actual altcoin.

Back to my two utility sidechains : these will never take over Bitcoin as they are effectively serving only a certain application or subset of money. Considering these two applications are using a BTC-peg as their transacting unit they are, barring some technicalities, a part of the Bitcoin network and closely tied to the native bitcoin unit, so much in fact that their 1:1 value will always gravitate toward each others and this correlation will become narrower as arbitrage comes into effect and time allows the technology to mature.

Bitcoin as is, is crippled. The perfect Bitcoin has a limit on supply not the number of transactions.
Other shortcomings are peripheral.

Confirmation times are optimized for block dissemination to maintain the preferred chain. (This is a feature not a bug)
Privacy is not anonymity, the goal should be privacy we have that in Bitcoin if you want it.

Your want for Bitcoin to change are better found in an alt, why change something that predates you?. Just adopt something better. If you think it's better and if the market agrees you were correct.

SC don't peg value they peg BTC the currency, and create an opotunity to create value on another blockchain.

Proponents of SC's 1 know this and intended to profit from it or 2 don't see it and blindly support the idea.

[Adrian-x]

Something is making the guy soil himself multiple times per day.  ...

That's insulting.  ...

No!  Really???

Give a real reason then not a personal attack.

[kodtycoon]

This thread was more interesting to read prior to SC discussion taking over...

[brg444]

Bitcoin as is, is crippled. The perfect Bitcoin has a limit on supply not the number of transactions.
Other shortcomings are peripheral.

Confirmation times are optimized for block dissemination to maintain the preferred chain. (This is a feature not a bug)
Privacy is not anonymity, the goal should be privacy we have that in Bitcoin if you want it.

Your want for Bitcoin to change are better found in an alt, why change something that predates you?. Just adopt something better. If you think it's better and if the market agrees you were correct.

SC don't peg value they peg BTC the currency, and create an opotunity to create value on another blockchain.

Proponents of SC's 1 know this and intended to profit from it or 2 don't see it and blindly support the idea.

Sidechains are the crutches that will allow it to serve all of its intended purposes.

I agree with your comment about confirmation times.

I'm not sure how you can say that privacy, on the model of the blockchain historical transaction registry and transparent ledger, is not aligned with the ability to make anonymous transactions.

I don't want Bitcoin to change, I already told you I believe it is as good as it gets (in the cryptocurrency world) from the standpoint of network, infrastructure, economic features and distribution.

Alts, while they may offer a particular desirable feature, do not come close to offering a value proposition similar to Bitcoin in regard to the features mentioned above.

I don't understand exactly what is wrong with wanting to incorporate a layer to Bitcoin so as to leverage its advantages while increasing its usability and features.

The value created on the utility sidechain is mirrored in BTC's value. I don't see how you can argue this.

[tvbcof]

Something is making the guy soil himself multiple times per day.  ...

That's insulting.  ...

No!  Really???

Give a real reason then not a personal attack.

Trolling trolls primarily in this particular case.   Edit:  What cyph's real problem is is actually kind of an interesting mystery to me at this point, but clearly from the content of his recent work he has one.  It's pretty obvious and other's have noted it too.

[Adrian-x]

There is no 1:1 peg guarantee. If the SC is inflationary and appeals to a central bank more than Bitcoin they'll use that not BTC. And the minority who want BTC hard money will be eaten for breakfast.

you have lost all of the credibility you have here ever since you started spouting that nonsense. IMO

you have to realize that there is no incentive for someone to create GOVcoin as a sidechain so thus your argument is that the GOV altcoin is going to take BTC over. if that were to happen and if you truly believe that then I suggest you sell all of your BTCs because sidechains are NOT going to have an impact on whether this happens or not

It's not my goal .

I want to build a blockchain that could support a nation-state putting its national currency and phasing out paper dollars.

[/quote]

Listen to the recording, the referenced text is an abbreviation. He isn't concerned with preserving Bitcoin but rather leveraging it.

[brg444]

Trolling trolls primarily in this particular case.   Edit:  What cyph's real problem is is actually kind of an interesting mystery to me at this point, but clearly from the content of his recent work he has one.  It's pretty obvious and other's have noted it too.

I'm pretty sure the problem is simply ego and inability to concede the inappropriateness of his inital stance.

[brg444]

Listen to the recording, the referenced text is an abbreviation. He isn't concerned with preserving Bitcoin but rather leveraging it.

 

5 minutes in :

"The KEY idea here is to protect the concept of digital scarcity and 21 million Bitcoin limit"

"We essentially set Bitcoin as a transactional currency for all innovation"

[tvbcof]

Trolling trolls primarily in this particular case.   Edit:  What cyph's real problem is is actually kind of an interesting mystery to me at this point, but clearly from the content of his recent work he has one.  It's pretty obvious and other's have noted it too.

I'm pretty sure the problem is simply ego and inability to concede the inappropriateness of his inital stance.

Not so sure.  Although the guy has always been 'active' shall we say, he has really bumped it up a notch for the sidechains thing.  My best guess is that he invested some of his stash into a venture which is predicated on Bitcoin going the Bitcoin Foundation direction (e.g., an alt or more likely a Coinbase clone, both of which will be reamed by functional sidechains) and is in a desperate panic right about now.  It wouldn't surprise me if he's flying all over the country in an attempt to ensure that he isn't the partner that takes the lions-share of the ass-reaming.

[iCEBREAKER]

Luke Jr. is that twat that spammed the blockchain with Catholic prayers no?

He did many many things and keeps confirming he's an asshole but the actual trigger to lose trust? Using his pool to kill and alt coin years ago without permission of the miners. If anyone in the world ever liked abusing power it's this guy right here.

LukeJr is bitcoin's official stress tester.

LukeJr is an eccentric fundamentalist reactionary, but that just makes me like him more.  Plus he's young and very bright.

At least he's upfront about his beliefs and WYSIWYG.  Attacking shitcoins like Coil, Mastercoin, and Counterparty is actually pretty lulzy stuff for a fundy!   

"Spam" is unsolicited commercial email, and has nothing to do with blockchain graffiti.  Just because you don't like the content, the Catholic stuff isn't any different than Satoshi and other early Bitcoiners' contributions. 

SatoshiDice, Mastercoin, and Counterpary's ongoing unwanted parasitic blockchain pollution is much more akin to spam than the harmless early graffiti.  You are probably just butthurt about the prayers because you hate Catholics.   

Now that the Pope has OK'd the Big Bang and evolution, both of you may suffer a little less cognitive dissonance and calm down a bit.