Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[brg444]

why wouldn't a new investor buy scZC on a fiat exchange?  why wouldn't a miner want to not only mine tx fees for scBTC as well as mine scZC block rewards + scZC tx fees?

don't say there is no one "using" scZC.  Bitcoin's price started out at $0 when no one was "using" it.  look what happened to it.

Why? Because it's essentially a new alt coin. How is the actual zerocoin doing? Any miners bothered merged mining it?

The new investor can either buy the scZC and expose himself to all the risks or buy BTC and use the scBTC zerocoin feature pegged 1:1 with the risk-free put.

Which one would you use?

Sidechains are there to create new applications/features that are not possible on the Bitcoin chain. There's no reason why you would create a sidecoin on top because it defeats the whole purpose of the 2wp.

[1713408843]

1713408843

[1713408843]

1713408843

[1713408843]

1713408843

[1713408843]

1713408843

[1713408843]

1713408843

[N12]

Bitcoin UP!

Surely this has something to do with Sidechains.

or in spite of.  for now.

You're worrying too much/overthinking it/seeing shadows IMO. If we had a couple more months without a new low, would you be as concerned?

[brg444]

why wouldn't a new investor buy scZC on a fiat exchange?  why wouldn't a miner want to not only mine tx fees for scBTC as well as mine scZC block rewards + scZC tx fees?

don't say there is no one "using" scZC.  Bitcoin's price started out at $0 when no one was "using" it.  look what happened to it.

A second problem is that such altchains, like Bitcoin, typically have their own native
cryptocurrency, or altcoin, with a floating price. To access the altchain, users must use a market to
obtain this currency, exposing them to the high risk and volatility associated with new currencies.
Further, the requirement to independently solve the problems of initial distribution and valuation,
while at the same time contending with adverse network effects and a crowded market, discourages
technical innovation while at the same time encouraging market games. This is dangerous not only
100 to those directly participating in these systems, but also to the cryptocurrency industry as a whole.
If the field is seen as too risky by the public, adoption may be hampered, or cryptocurrencies might
be deserted entirely (voluntarily or legislatively)

By creating a sidecoin booted on top of a sidechain you basically reintroduce this problem.

Do you see why when the option exist to enable different features BUT with a risk-averse 2wp, then automatically the market will congregate toward that option and ignore any similar attempt using sidecoins?

Unless of course you want to speculate on pump and dump shitcoins. That's not gonna stop some people from doing that but sidechains do not introduce that problem

[cypherdoc]

why wouldn't a new investor buy scZC on a fiat exchange?  why wouldn't a miner want to not only mine tx fees for scBTC as well as mine scZC block rewards + scZC tx fees?

don't say there is no one "using" scZC.  Bitcoin's price started out at $0 when no one was "using" it.  look what happened to it.

Why? Because it's essentially a new alt coin. How is the actual zerocoin doing? Any miners bothered merged mining it?

The new investor can either buy the scZC and expose himself to all the risks or buy BTC and use the scBTC zerocoin feature pegged 1:1 with the risk-free put.

Which one would you use?

Sidechains are there to create new applications/features that are not possible on the Bitcoin chain. There's no reason why you would create a sidecoin on top because it defeats the whole purpose of the 2wp.

if the scZC is priced at, let's say $0.006/scZC compared to $342/BTC, i would buy the coin with the greater upside (scZC) that has the same anonymity feature as scBTC since the SC has MM for security with actual direct mining from small miners defecting.

[NewLiberty]

Sidechains are there to create new applications/features that are not possible on the Bitcoin chain. There's no reason why you would create a sidecoin on top because it defeats the whole purpose of the 2wp.

Unless that is the reason.

[tvbcof]

Bitcoin UP!

Surely this has something to do with Sidechains.

I am wholly unimpressed by what I see in the charts this morning after the proclamations about some price increase.  At least I don't see it going down which is not uncommon when Cyph does one of these 'Bitcoin Up' things here.

The realistic possibility of sidechains does produce some hope for long term value of Bitcoin itself, though, so I would expect a reasonable possibility that the more knowledgeable potential participants are realizing this and making a move in.  Most likely they'll be waiting to see some tangible activities in the sidechains direction, and more than that, waiting to see if the Bitcoin Foundation (through Gavin) manages to spike Bitcoin by inserting exponential growth as a hard-fork.

[sickpig]

define this:  scZEROBTC

are you saying another SC would arise once removed from MC?

So we have two sidechains :

A sidechain using only 1:1 pegged unit. This unit offers whatever feature you want, faster tx or zerocoin type privacy.

A sidechain also using 1:1 pegged but issuing, for unknown reasons, a sidecoin. The sidecoin is not fungible with BTC or the scBTC. It has to create its own value. The problem with this chain is there is no interest for the user to use the sidecoin because : a. it offers no additional value than the scBTC on the same chain b. it offers no "risk-free put"

Which chain are people going to use?

why wouldn't a new investor buy scZC on a fiat exchange?  why wouldn't a miner want to not only mine tx fees for scBTC as well as mine scZC block rewards + scZC tx fees?

don't say there is no one "using" scZC.  Bitcoin's price started out at $0 when no one was "using" it.  look what happened to it.

You serious? Are you really comparing btc with this hypothetical scZC?

Btc incubation period was at least a decade long. The amount of innovation in the bitcoin project is huge, but more to the point the reasons why such an hypothetical  sidechain would die young are the same reasons why no other altcoin has already supplanted btc.

[brg444]

why wouldn't a new investor buy scZC on a fiat exchange?  why wouldn't a miner want to not only mine tx fees for scBTC as well as mine scZC block rewards + scZC tx fees?

don't say there is no one "using" scZC.  Bitcoin's price started out at $0 when no one was "using" it.  look what happened to it.

Why? Because it's essentially a new alt coin. How is the actual zerocoin doing? Any miners bothered merged mining it?

The new investor can either buy the scZC and expose himself to all the risks or buy BTC and use the scBTC zerocoin feature pegged 1:1 with the risk-free put.

Which one would you use?

Sidechains are there to create new applications/features that are not possible on the Bitcoin chain. There's no reason why you would create a sidecoin on top because it defeats the whole purpose of the 2wp.

if the scZC is priced at, let's say $0.006/scZC compared to $342/BTC, i would buy the coin with the greater upside (scZC) that has the same anonymity feature as scBTC since the SC has MM for security with actual direct mining from small miners defecting.

 

Miners do not mergemine shitchain.

You're so dishonest in your arguments it is mind blowing. There is no "greater upside". The upside is in using the coin with the biggest liquidity and network effect. Of course speculators are gonna speculate but the market will go for the risk-free put if it wants to protect the value of its investment while using a particular feature.

[brg444]

You serious? Are you really comparing btc with this hypothetical scZC?

Btc incubation period was at least a decade long. The amount of innovation in the bitcoin project is huge, but more to the point the reasons why such an hypothetical  sidechain would die young are the same reasons why no other altcoin has already supplanted btc.

He doesn't understand that sidecoin = altcoin.

He can't comprehend why there is no more incentive for miners to merge mine or smaller miners to direct mine sidecoins than regular altcoins.

He doesn't want to admit that the market wants to protect the value of their investment and make it possible to use new features : the essence of sidechains.

Or maybe he does, but he is so disingenuous he will not admit it.

[brg444]

Sidechains are there to create new applications/features that are not possible on the Bitcoin chain. There's no reason why you would create a sidecoin on top because it defeats the whole purpose of the 2wp.

Unless that is the reason.

 

An inferior shitcoin will defeat the superior option of risk-averse 2wp?

Do you realise what you are saying here?

[cypherdoc]

Sidechains are there to create new applications/features that are not possible on the Bitcoin chain. There's no reason why you would create a sidecoin on top because it defeats the whole purpose of the 2wp.

Unless that is the reason.

 

An inferior shitcoin will defeat the superior option of risk-averse 2wp?

Do you realise what you are saying here?

my assumption is that the sidecoin, whatever it is, may offer features with greater appeal than Bitcoin itself.  scZC is a good example as it might give perfect anonymity.  and if it's paired with faster tx times for both scZC and scBTC, then yes, alot of ppl should be attracted to it including miners.  especially if the block rewards are being given out in the form of scZC.

[cypherdoc]

He doesn't want to admit that the market wants to protect the value of their investment

when you say this do you realize that you're only talking about Bitcoiners?

a SC can be created by anyone with any utility or an agenda, like scZC, or even scGOV.  

[cypherdoc]

why wouldn't a new investor buy scZC on a fiat exchange?  why wouldn't a miner want to not only mine tx fees for scBTC as well as mine scZC block rewards + scZC tx fees?

don't say there is no one "using" scZC.  Bitcoin's price started out at $0 when no one was "using" it.  look what happened to it.

Why? Because it's essentially a new alt coin. How is the actual zerocoin doing? Any miners bothered merged mining it?

The new investor can either buy the scZC and expose himself to all the risks or buy BTC and use the scBTC zerocoin feature pegged 1:1 with the risk-free put.

Which one would you use?

Sidechains are there to create new applications/features that are not possible on the Bitcoin chain. There's no reason why you would create a sidecoin on top because it defeats the whole purpose of the 2wp.

if the scZC is priced at, let's say $0.006/scZC compared to $342/BTC, i would buy the coin with the greater upside (scZC) that has the same anonymity feature as scBTC since the SC has MM for security with actual direct mining from small miners defecting.

 

Miners do not mergemine shitchain.

You're so dishonest in your arguments it is mind blowing. There is no "greater upside". The upside is in using the coin with the biggest liquidity and network effect. Of course speculators are gonna speculate but the market will go for the risk-free put if it wants to protect the value of its investment while using a particular feature.

again, when you say "market" you're confining your definition perspective to that of Bitcoiners only.  other ppl/entities with other agendas will look at this totally differently.

[brg444]

my assumption is that the sidecoin, whatever it is, may offer features with greater appeal than Bitcoin itself.  scZC is a good example as it might give perfect anonymity.  and if it's paired with faster tx times for both scZC and scBTC, then yes, alot of ppl should be attracted to it including miners.  especially if the block rewards are being given out in the form of scZC.

But sidecoin with feature is competing with scBTC with the same feature, greater market acceptance, more liquidity, bigger network effect.

Sidecoin reintroduces risk of greater volatility, sketchy distribution and likely inferior network security.

Sidecoin = altcoin

[brg444]

He doesn't want to admit that the market wants to protect the value of their investment

when you say this do you realize that you're only talking about Bitcoiners?

a SC can be created by anyone with any utility or an agenda, like scZC, or even scGOV.  

And your bet is that these altcoins are going to catch up to Bitcoin's network effect because?

(please don't say they have more innovative features, Bitcoin has these same features through its 2wp 1:1 sidechains)

[cypherdoc]

my assumption is that the sidecoin, whatever it is, may offer features with greater appeal than Bitcoin itself.  scZC is a good example as it might give perfect anonymity.  and if it's paired with faster tx times for both scZC and scBTC, then yes, alot of ppl should be attracted to it including miners.  especially if the block rewards are being given out in the form of scZC.

But sidecoin with feature is competing with scBTC with the same feature, greater market acceptance, more liquidity, bigger network effect.

Sidecoin reintroduces risk of greater volatility, sketchy distribution and likely inferior network security.

Sidecoin = altcoin

yes it is competing. but if scZC is only $0.006/scZC vs $340/scBTC and ppl like me like perfect anonymity but don't want to pay $340/scBTC, i will buy the $0.006/scZC with fiat on an exchange.

and once scZC establishes a value, miners will be encouraged to direct mine or MM.

[brg444]

again, when you say "market" you're confining your definition perspective to that of Bitcoiners only.  other ppl/entities with other agendas will look at this totally differently.

other ppl/entities have been trying to disrupt Bitcoin's market leading position for quite some time now. so far they have failed quite spectacularly. how is sidechains helping them again?

(please don't say merged mining)

[justusranvier]

Unless that is the reason.

I swear I saw a post once where one of the wallet developers (Hivewallet???) announced it was his personal and professional goal to break the limited issuance of Bitcoin as a currency.

[brg444]

yes it is competing. but if scZC is only $0.006/scZC vs $340/scBTC and ppl like me like perfect anonymity but don't want to pay $340/scBTC, i will buy the $0.006/scZC with fiat on an exchange.

and once scZC establishes a value, miners will be encouraged to direct mine or MM.

So finally you admit that miners will not care to mine or MM a shitsidecoin with no market acceptance/value.

Therefore you propose that some users will prefer storing their value in a sideshitcoin that is more volatile, less risk-averse, less secure and has no distinct feature.

 

btw you can buy Monero right now, perfect anonymity, and you only have to pay a fraction of BTC's price, a real bargain! don't lose your chance!

[brg444]

Unless that is the reason.

I swear I saw a post once where one of the wallet developers (Hivewallet???) announced it was his personal and professional goal to break the limited issuance of Bitcoin as a currency.

Well good luck to those party pooper going against the mass of people who want to preserve it