Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[Odalv]

who said there was?  it's only on the scBTC which is why they will moved to the ZC SC in the first place; to get anonymity.

Here is exmple how to implement ZC feature over BITCOIN block-chain

scBTC will not move to ZC.
1. We will create new SC over btc-blockchain
2. This new mixerSC can be mined by HMM  and (Timestamp server or hashing Oracle)

Now you can use 2x swaps.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with 2 people.
Or you can use 2x 2wp.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with other 2 x N people.
Or you can deposit 10 BTC and withdraw 10 x 1 BTC.
You can do few random transaction in mixerSC to mix them more using mixerZC protocol (it will use same alg. as ZC, but that is all. No other connection to ZC alt-chain).

[cypherdoc]

in the meantime, silver is being destroyed.  need i say more on this topic?

[tvbcof]

I personally don't completely write off cypherdoc's assertions that he only cares about the health of Bitcoin

this is exactly where i'm coming from.  everybody here knows i already run my mouth even before this SC issue.  so in that sense, i'm behaving normally.  and b/c i have no conflict of interest, i don't care what ppl think of me.  i'm just trying to protect Bitcoin.

Ya, you've been marvelously dead-wrong about a bunch of stuff in the past with no hint of malfeasance.  That is the primary reason I cut you the slack here that I do

it's brg444 incessant counter posting of my every thought beginning the exact day of the whitepaper that is suspicious.

I never write off observations like this.  I put them in the filing cabinet for matches against various hypotheses.

[Adrian-x]

If you've been following the pre-sidechain discussions in this thread about money as a ledger and the inseparability of currency from the Blockchain, you'll recognize the irony in this CoinDesk article about lighter regulations for "non-financial use of blockchain technology":

http://www.coindesk.com/lawsky-non-financial-block-chain-projects-exempt-current-bitlicense/

However untrue it may be, I'm starting to see that the meme "blockchain technology has a bright future but the currency-aspect is dubious" is actually in our benefit.  I'm rolling with it  .  People can accept this premise much easier and thereby recognize the importance of the Network and the Blockchain.  

Of course this meme is a Trojan horse.  Once one has accepted the importance of a decentralized, trustless, and unforgeable ledger, it's a much smaller step to realize that our most important records (and also the one's most tempting to alter) should be stored on that ledger.  These records are money itself. Bitcoin will force the world to re-learn what money is...  

Hi Peter great to have your input, the meme "blockchain technology has a bright future but the currency-aspect is dubious" was a great trojan, but if the proposed Blockstream "soft" fork is introduced it wont be a meme it'll be reality.

edit Spelling.

[Adrian-x]

Of course this meme is a Trojan horse.  Once one has accepted the importance of a decentralized, trustless, and unforgeable ledger, it's a much smaller step to realize that our most important records (and also the one's most tempting to alter) should be stored on that ledger.  These records are money itself. Bitcoin will force the world to re-learn what money is...  

The largest risk of that strategy is underestimating the intelligence of whomever the Trojan horse is supposed to fool.

this 

[cypherdoc]

who said there was?  it's only on the scBTC which is why they will moved to the ZC SC in the first place; to get anonymity.

Here is exmple how to implement ZC feature over BITCOIN block-chain

scBTC will not move to ZC.
1. We will create new SC over btc-blockchain
2. This new mixerSC can be mined by HMM  and (Timestamp server or hashing Oracle)

Now you can use 2x swaps.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with 2 people.
Or you can use 2x 2wp.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with other 2 x N people.
Or you can deposit 10 BTC and withdraw 10 x 1 BTC.
You can do few random transaction in mixerSC to mix them more using mixerZC protocol (it will use same alg. as ZC, but that is all. No other connection to ZC alt-chain).

this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself unlike brg444, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

[brg444]

i'll just recycle the same arguments i gave above calmly.

when you say NO ONE WILL USE IT, that comes from only your perspective as a Bitcoin proponent who can't see past his nose.  you ignore the fact that i keep saying that if the altcoin is designed with a fixed supply goal just like Bitcoin, it can and will attract speculators who will buy the same features that Bitcoin has plus anonoymity, but at a much lower early adopter price.  yes, it will up to the altcointo attract mining.  but b/c anonymity is a desired feature and b/c it offers a chance at getting in on a ground floor price of say $0.006/altcoin as an example, attracting miners shouldn't be a problem b/c not only will miners be getting scZC block rewards, they will be getting scBTC and scZC tx fees.  and the scBTC will be protected by the 1:1 peg.

if this scenario not possible solely from a technical standpoint of SC's, then i need to know now, otherwise i believe i'm right.

See where this is going?

Speculators can already buy the same feature of Bitcoin plus anonymity : Monero/Darkcoin

But now with sidechains Bitcoin users have access to anonymity through scBTC on a 1:1 peg.

So essentially there exist no more distinguishable feature for any altcoin/sidecoin. The utility is now available using Bitcoin and not having to expose yourself to additional volatility and security risks. Therefore, the altcoin/sidecoin have no more argument to attract users. Speculation? Speculation on what exactly? Future use? There is no future use because there is now a better, safer option offering the same features.

You have to understand, as everyone here does, that the sidecoin booted on top of the sidechain is useless, offers no additional value for the users. The experiment of innovative utility failed to catch any traction with altcoins, even considering the "discount ground floor price". Contrarily to what you think, this experiment has no better chance on a sidechain. In fact, it is stripped of all its appeal by scBTC on 1:1 peg that can offer the SAME features without any tradeoff.  

[Adrian-x]

Cypherdoc, I would like to know your real intentions. Why are you trying to confuse people.

Are you invested in an alt-coin and now your investment is evaporating ?
Are you trolling ?

  not Cypher doing the confusing its brg444 he pulls the discussion away form the issue Cypers being trolled hard.  

[cypherdoc]

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

as Bitcoin stands, it makes anything other than money very difficult to implement.  i've talked about this for years here.  how many times have i said "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money"?

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?

[brg444]

I personally don't completely write off cypherdoc's assertions that he only cares about the health of Bitcoin

this is exactly where i'm coming from.  everybody here knows i already run my mouth even before this SC issue.  so in that sense, i'm behaving normally.  and b/c i have no conflict of interest, i don't care what ppl think of me.  i'm just trying to protect Bitcoin.

it's brg444 incessant counter posting of my every thought beginning the exact day of the whitepaper that is suspicious.

My persistence is because of my duty to counter misinformation and FUD based on willful ignorance of basic concepts and inability to comprehend sidechains.

You are trying to protect Bitcoin from shadows that do not exist. This is bordeline schizophrenia.

There might be some risks to Sidechains but you are so far off them you are doing the worst possible job playing the RISK position advocate. Maybe take a moment to sharpen your tools and come back with something more plausible because your are trying to poke holes in something using arguments sporting even bigger holes in them.

[tvbcof]

...
so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

Sidechains will have to subsidize Bitcoin to a well functioning state else they cannot themselves function.  Indeed, there will probably be a competition among sidechains to subsidize Bitcoin (which has both pros and cons.)

This would hold as long as Bitcoin is seen as a credible and performant reserve currency, and driving it into reliance on and control by mainstream corporate infrastructure providers through excessive growth is the main thing which could cause Bitcoin to fail in this respect.

The magic here is that it gives Bitcoin a very credible means of survival even if native profitability fails.  This is key because there are some real question marks about how Bitcoin can achieve this on it's own given the sha256 capacity and distribution.

[brg444]

this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself unlike brg444, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

 

You are great at selective reading cypher, really, really good.

[brg444]

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

as Bitcoin stands, it makes anything other than money very difficult to implement.  i've talked about this for years here.  how many times have i said "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money"?

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?

 

Sidechains is possibly the best thing to have ever happened to Bitcoin as far as its sound money property.

It allows us to improve its money function without disrupting its ledger.

Without sidechain you can absolutely expect more inflation/fractional reserve, more centralization, and more trust in central entities.

Your analysis of sidechains has been a failure all around.

[cypherdoc]

i'll just recycle the same arguments i gave above calmly.

when you say NO ONE WILL USE IT, that comes from only your perspective as a Bitcoin proponent who can't see past his nose.  you ignore the fact that i keep saying that if the altcoin is designed with a fixed supply goal just like Bitcoin, it can and will attract speculators who will buy the same features that Bitcoin has plus anonoymity, but at a much lower early adopter price.  yes, it will up to the altcointo attract mining.  but b/c anonymity is a desired feature and b/c it offers a chance at getting in on a ground floor price of say $0.006/altcoin as an example, attracting miners shouldn't be a problem b/c not only will miners be getting scZC block rewards, they will be getting scBTC and scZC tx fees.  and the scBTC will be protected by the 1:1 peg.

if this scenario not possible solely from a technical standpoint of SC's, then i need to know now, otherwise i believe i'm right.

See where this is going?

Speculators can already buy the same feature of Bitcoin plus anonymity : Monero/Darkcoin

But now with sidechains Bitcoin users have access to anonymity through scBTC on a 1:1 peg.

So essentially there exist no more distinguishable feature for any altcoin/sidecoin. The utility is now available using Bitcoin and not having to expose yourself to additional volatility and security risks. Therefore, the altcoin/sidecoin have no more argument to attract users. Speculation? Speculation on what exactly? Future use? There is no future use because there is now a better, safer option offering the same features.

You have to understand, as everyone here does, that the sidecoin booted on top of the sidechain is useless, offers no additional value for the users. The experiment of innovative utility failed to catch any traction with altcoins, even considering the "discount ground floor price". Contrarily to what you think, this experiment has no better chance on a sidechain. In fact, it is stripped of all its appeal by scBTC on 1:1 peg that can offer the SAME features without any tradeoff.  

this is easily answered.

the scZC can "poach" its security from the MM and direct mining currently dedicated to Bitcoin.   this is enabled by the 2wp.  how does this happen?  b/c it has to happen to protect scBTC that seeks out the same anonymity features that  the ZC sidechain offers and that scZC already has.

[cypherdoc]

i actually think the underlying problem here is that some of us see Bitcoin as Sound Money who's sanctity is to be protected at all costs, like me, and others see it as an avenue to develop stocks, bonds, community currencies, assurance contracts, smart contracts, etc, etc.

as Bitcoin stands, it makes anything other than money very difficult to implement.  i've talked about this for years here.  how many times have i said "The Blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money"?

if you don't buy into this view, then SC's seem like a natural thing.  who cares if somehow a little inflation, centralization, or trust requiring needs slip in the backdoor?

 

Sidechains is possibly the best thing to have ever happened to Bitcoin as far as its sound money property.

It allows us to improve its money function without disrupting its ledger.

Without sidechain you can absolutely expect more inflation/fractional reserve, more centralization, and more trust in central entities.

Your analysis of sidechains has been a failure all around.

your insolent behavior and insults have greatly exceeded mine.  everyone needs to factor this in.

[Adrian-x]

who said there was?  it's only on the scBTC which is why they will moved to the ZC SC in the first place; to get anonymity.

Here is exmple how to implement ZC feature over BITCOIN block-chain

scBTC will not move to ZC.
1. We will create new SC over btc-blockchain
2. This new mixerSC can be mined by HMM  and (Timestamp server or hashing Oracle)

Now you can use 2x swaps.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with 2 people.
Or you can use 2x 2wp.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with other 2 x N people.
Or you can deposit 10 BTC and withdraw 10 x 1 BTC.
You can do few random transaction in mixerSC to mix them more using mixerZC protocol (it will use same alg. as ZC, but that is all. No other connection to ZC alt-chain).

this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself unlike brg444, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

miners will MM Bitcoin for posterity and love of the Bitcoin community.  

[cypherdoc]

brg444, at least take joy from the fact that i weep:

[Odalv]

who said there was?  it's only on the scBTC which is why they will moved to the ZC SC in the first place; to get anonymity.

Here is exmple how to implement ZC feature over BITCOIN block-chain

scBTC will not move to ZC.
1. We will create new SC over btc-blockchain
2. This new mixerSC can be mined by HMM  and (Timestamp server or hashing Oracle)

Now you can use 2x swaps.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with 2 people.
Or you can use 2x 2wp.  BTC to mixerBTC and mixerBTC to BTC  and you will have BTC mixed with other 2 x N people.
Or you can deposit 10 BTC and withdraw 10 x 1 BTC.
You can do few random transaction in mixerSC to mix them more using mixerZC protocol (it will use same alg. as ZC, but that is all. No other connection to ZC alt-chain).

this reminds me of another point i wanted to make, unrelated to your post.

i find it striking that you and brg444, SC's strongest proponents on this thread, are so far apart on your vision of the #SC's that will arise.  brg444 narrowmindedly tries to pidgeon hole the #SC's down to a mere two in his future vision; anonymity and faster tx times.  you, otoh, openly say there will be billions.  from your posts i can see you at least have imagination and an expansive mind, which is refreshing in and of itself, and i happen to agree with you when it comes to your estimate.

so i ask, if there are billions of SC's in action processing tx fees, where will all the badly needed tx fees come to support Bitcoin in the long run when the blockchain rewards are gone?

As I said endless times. :-)
I can imagine few MM sidechains (one of them is for testing new fork to bitcoin protocol ... if some MM chain will have 50-70% then we can do fork )

10-20 year:
Then there will be a lot of local sidechains doing local business fast => MC will be used to move wealth between regions.

I can imagine company will have its own sidechain (it will not be public SC, company do not want internal transactions to be public -> Federated Peg own server ). Companies will born and die. ->  wealth between companies will be transfered using MC.

I can imagine company can create companyShareBlockchain (backed by shares,  1:N exchange rate to BTC), b/c it is easy and safe to interact with world using block-chain techology.

Bank will operate inside insuranceSC for security reason.

People can create private SC.

Now divide 21M BTC into  1,000,000 SCs. And this SCs will timestamping thier blocks on MC.

[brg444]

To be clear I am pro secure trust free 1:1 Pegs that can be diploid within the existing feature set of the Bitcoin protocol, they are an essential innovation to the future of Bitcoin, It’s my view that this is in debate when in fact it isn’t.

Some considerations for MM SC:
Is it possible a MM SC with a 1:1 peg could provide a feature that attracts over 50% of transactions?
Possible, but doubtful. In any case, not a problem
Is it possible there will be over 2 (or 1000) other SC with a 1:1 peg competing for transaction fees?
Over 2? Maybe. 1000? Not a chance. Refer to my post about the properties and function of money. There are not 1000 ways you can improve money or its feature
Is it possible that the other 2 (or 1000) SC could represent approximately 30% of total transactions of all SC combined?
Possible, hardly a problem
Is it possible that if 80% of all transactions happened on SC’s then there would be approximately 20% of transactions happening on the Bitcoin Blockchain?
That looks like some sound calculations
Is it possible Miners will supplement their income by mining SC’s?  
It is not only possible but very likely. The problem with you logic is assuming they will stop mining Bitcoin complementary
Is it possible that the chain with the most fees would attract the most mining?  
It isn't black and white like that. Bitcoin has block subsidy. Sidechains don't so as long as miners can claim the BTC they mine 1:1 for scBTC they will continue mining
Is it possible that the chain that generated the most profit for miners would get the greatest hashing power?
Miners will MM EVERY chain that support any considerable value. It is trivial for them to do so
Is it possible that Bitcoin block rewards, supplement transaction fees? (Rhetorical question I hope)

Is it possible That the Bitcoin protocol reduces block rewards exponentially? (Rhetorical question I hope)

Is it possible that the chain with the heist profit margins for miners won’t be Bitcoin?  
Miners will MM EVERY chain that support any considerable value. It is trivial for them to do so. They will especially continue to support Bitcoin's chain until there is no more block subsidy
Is it possible that when Bitcoin’s block rewards reduce to less than the transaction fees generated by the Block reward, at least 51% of miners will still mine for profit? (not some ideological reason)  
It is actually logical to believe and quite likely that 100% of them continue to mine it for block subsidy since it is trivial to do so and naive to believe ALL transactions would disappear from this chain

[cypherdoc]

Now divide 21M BTC into  1,000,000 SCs. And this SCs will timestamping thier blocks on MC.

that's sounds terrible.

congratulations, you've just succeeded in breaking the first, and probably the last chance we'll ever have at Sound Money, into 1,000,000 Berkshare Buck locations.