justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
December 13, 2014, 01:11:34 PM |
|
He should make up his mind:
|
|
|
|
BlindMayorBitcorn
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116
|
|
December 13, 2014, 01:20:04 PM |
|
I'd say (and have said) that the guy is pretty much spot on. It will be more or less trivial to regulate Bitcoin at this point thanks to the idiots who want to take it mainstream in native form (cough...cypherdoc...cough.) I've also described how simple and effective it would be to modulate through {choose-color}listing. The fact that it has not happened yet is a testament to how much more useful it is alive than dead, and that is probably largely due to the number of moron semi-crooks who use it. Now sidechains using Bitcoin as a reserve backing could, and hopefully will, change the dynamics significantly. That is not to say that the same attacks on Bitcoin would not be possible, and that they would probably not have some grievous impacts on the userbase, but the attacks would be much more difficult to pull off and there would be a lot more flexibility in fighting them off. Bitcoin in it's present form has one and basically only one major advantage over most other instruments. No counter-party risk. That's really about it IMHO. Gold could go down 20% or maybe 30% but it can go up 50%, 100% or a lot more so it seems like a good investment especially since you can have Gold without much third party risk. Gold is certainly a good bet at this point, brother. See here for patterns and details: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=869664.msg9823983#msg9823983
|
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.
|
|
|
Jungian
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 930
Merit: 1010
|
|
December 13, 2014, 01:31:44 PM |
|
Feels like I've heard the "broken at a protocol level before".
|
|
|
|
jaredboice
|
|
December 13, 2014, 05:42:44 PM |
|
"The internet is broken at a protocol level"
|
|
|
|
jaredboice
|
|
December 13, 2014, 05:43:35 PM |
|
"The internet protocol is what's important. The internet itself is a bad idea"
|
|
|
|
NewLiberty
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
Gresham's Lawyer
|
|
December 13, 2014, 05:47:55 PM Last edit: December 13, 2014, 07:08:26 PM by NewLiberty |
|
He should make up his mind: Or at least dial back on the tautologies: "You heard it here first, now is a good time to X" and "Broken at a protocol level" Exactly which layer of the protocol is not a protocol level? To say otherwise would be to say that Bitcoin is perfect, and development is complete, and development should then stop.
|
|
|
|
tvbcof
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4704
Merit: 1276
|
|
December 13, 2014, 06:10:40 PM Last edit: December 13, 2014, 07:07:30 PM by tvbcof |
|
I don't know who the guy is, but selling in Nov 2013 was not a bad call, especially if a guy had use for money in 2014. I'll hope the same does not end up applying to 2015 as well. I also would neither agree nor dis-agree with his contention about protocol level deficiencies. The contention rests very heavily on how Bitcoin is used in native form. If as backing for sidechains, for instance, I would tentatively disagree. If as a native exchange currency for the human inhabitants of planet earth to conduct even a small fraction of their general economic transactions in the 21st century, I could not agree more. edit: slight
|
sig spam anywhere and self-moderated threads on the pol&soc board are for losers.
|
|
|
_mr_e
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 817
Merit: 1000
|
|
December 13, 2014, 06:15:38 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
jmw74
|
|
December 13, 2014, 10:10:07 PM |
|
Bittorrent was "born regulated" too. Who cares? The question of whether the law applies to bitcoin or not, is totally fucking irrelevant. Bitcoin is designed to be censorship resistant. The question is whether it will withstand the attack it was designed to withstand. Everybody knows those attacks are coming, it doesn't matter whether new laws or old laws are used to justify those attacks. Is anything in this article not obvious to everyone?
|
|
|
|
kehtolo
|
|
December 14, 2014, 12:56:29 PM |
|
|
The next 24 hours are critical!
|
|
|
hdbuck
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002
|
|
December 14, 2014, 01:33:14 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
inca
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1000
|
|
December 14, 2014, 02:20:34 PM |
|
Imagine what is possible with ethereum. Ideas like this need to wait until blockchain tech is mainstream before emerging!!
|
|
|
|
justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
December 14, 2014, 02:35:04 PM |
|
selling in Nov 2013 was not a bad call, especially if a guy had use for money in 2014. Selling on November 3rd was a good call?
|
|
|
|
600watt
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2338
Merit: 2106
|
|
December 14, 2014, 02:39:12 PM |
|
I don't know who the guy is, but selling in Nov 2013 was not a bad call, especially if a guy had use for money in 2014. I'll hope the same does not end up applying to 2015 as well. I also would neither agree nor dis-agree with his contention about protocol level deficiencies. The contention rests very heavily on how Bitcoin is used in native form. If as backing for sidechains, for instance, I would tentatively disagree. If as a native exchange currency for the human inhabitants of planet earth to conduct even a small fraction of their general economic transactions in the 21st century, I could not agree more. edit: slight selling btc on nov. 4th 2013 was actually really bad timing.
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
December 14, 2014, 05:07:07 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
December 14, 2014, 05:10:17 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
December 14, 2014, 05:19:40 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
tvbcof
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4704
Merit: 1276
|
|
December 14, 2014, 09:10:33 PM |
|
selling in Nov 2013 was not a bad call, especially if a guy had use for money in 2014. Selling on November 3rd was a good call? Well just generally late 2013 early 2014 was a good call for cash to be used in 2014. For tax reason (which ended up not panning out) I deferred most of my sales to just after Jan 1, but I did take some profits in late 2013 just to be safe. If the guy anticipated a top around the 2013->2014 transition, saying so in early Nov wasn't bad. I mean anyone who knows what they are doing is not going to be leaving multiple hundreds large laying around with easy access so it will take a lot of people some lead time for staging in order to make a block of sales.
|
sig spam anywhere and self-moderated threads on the pol&soc board are for losers.
|
|
|
|
|