|
devphp
|
 |
September 30, 2014, 04:08:28 AM |
|
Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.
The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
gmx95
|
|
September 30, 2014, 06:58:43 AM |
|
I think ultimately every "coin" project has a right to exist and only the time can tell what is scam and what is not.
|
|
|
|
superresistant
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 2128
Merit: 1120
|
|
September 30, 2014, 10:33:24 AM |
|
Truth about Bitcoin is that it is highly centralized on many points : - very few ASIC manufacturers - very few pools owning 95 % of the network - very few ASIC farms owned by few companies - most giant ASIC farms are located in China - very few developers on Bitcoin code stopping other people from adding modification - very few nodes around the world (about 7K only) - 40% of nodes are located in USA - a Bitcoin foundation with selected members - 1 Bitcoin forum owning most of discussions All these points has been discussed for a long time and neglected for the only argument that "it should get better with time". Sorry to wake you up but it is only getting worse. So if you are saying that Nxt is centralized, you must admit that Bitcoin is centralized too and that's more a problem. I'm not starting a kid fight Bitcoin vs Nxt, this is ridiculous but there is a kid on this thread pretending to be smart, repeating the recycled same crap on and on to get attention but I think that Bitcoin have some issues that are far more important at the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
|
|
September 30, 2014, 10:54:18 AM |
|
Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.
The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate. Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds? |
Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
|
|
|
kodtycoon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1568
Merit: 1002
|
|
September 30, 2014, 11:14:46 AM |
|
Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.
The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate. Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds? he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way. you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth. |
|
|
|
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
|
|
September 30, 2014, 11:20:30 AM |
|
Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.
The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate. Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds? he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way. you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth. Wow. You played the "T" card so soon? I guess your hand is played out. |
Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
|
|
|
kodtycoon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1568
Merit: 1002
|
|
September 30, 2014, 11:38:00 AM |
|
Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.
The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate. Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds? he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way. you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth. Wow. You played the "T" card so soon? I guess your hand is played out. it seems you are the one who has played and lost every hand.  |
|
|
|
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
|
|
September 30, 2014, 11:44:30 AM |
|
Bitcoin is decentralized. Satoshi wrote about the incentive to attack vs. incentive to profit. Nobody has shown a way to make a 51% attack that would have any chance at profitability. All trolls do is create FUD. Even if a trillionaire decided he had so many extra billions laying around he wanted to just burn, he could buy the gear to make a 51% attack. That would be an eye opening event indeed about how important Bitcoin must be. He would be able to buy bitcoins and then double spend them. If he bought a lot of bitcoins, he would drive up the price a lot. If he wanted to double spend he would have to buy something. Anyone willing to sell something worth millions of dollars without identification is asking for trouble. After he defrauded them, they could prosecute him. If he only wanted to prove a point that Bitcoin can be 51% attacked, that would be the most expensive hurr durr in history.
The point is not about making it unprofitable to buy 51% of hashrate to attack, nobody would do that, certainly not the would-be attackers. The point is about making it impossible to kill a crypto. The would-be attacker would have exactly that in mind - kill it off because it threatens their existence and status quo, not make a profit out of it. And that's where Bitcoin is a complete failure, as its mining operations are an easy target. Bitcoin is too small now to bother to shut it down, but rest assured, if it grows bigger, they will strike at the very core of its operations - large mining farms. However, there is a chance it will not grow bigger, and people will just migrate to more secure crypto 2.0 technologies, that run on PoS algorithms (not necessarily NXT), and which don't require vulnerable mining farms or huge waste of electricity to operate. Of course you invent some bogeyman that wants to shut Bitcoin down. Who is that exactly? If you get to invent a supervillain, I get to make up a superhero. Your Arch Nemesis that wants to destroy freedom will be met by Captain Bitcoin! Don't you see how silly your paranoid argument sounds? he isnt being paranoid.. hes dead right. everything devphp said is spot on and for what ever reason your putting it all down as paranoia and refuse to counter his argument with anything substantial and instead accuse him of being a loony paranoid person? the oligarchs of the world or banks or the best example, the ones that have the most to lose from a collapse of fiat, the FED or the US government would most certainly do everything in their power to stay in control, and if it meant sending a "terrorist" to bomb the 2-3 largest bitcoin mining farms to take it down, that wouldnt be all that difficult for them to do. i guess the americans wouldnt bomb a handful of bitcoin mines to protect the petro-dollar no? damn straight they would find a way. you are the one that just cant let go and admit that you are wrong and that bitcoin IS flawed. the majority of people who are not bias or stupid have admitted it. i guess it will just take time for the rest to give up fighting the truth. Wow. You played the "T" card so soon? I guess your hand is played out. it seems you are the one who has played and lost every hand. Nice burn dood. |
Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
|
|
|
stereotype
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1554
Merit: 1000
|
|
September 30, 2014, 05:39:02 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
nutildah
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2982
Merit: 7960
|
|
September 30, 2014, 07:13:32 PM |
|
Maybe Jeff and Josh met at a bipolar disorder anonymous meeting.
|
|
|
|
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1006
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
|
|
October 01, 2014, 02:56:26 AM |
|
Maybe Jeff and Josh met at a bipolar disorder anonymous meeting.
Nobody in the Bitcoin community has impuned Jeff's character. |
Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
|
|
|
LiteCoinGuy (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1010
In Satoshi I Trust
|
|
October 02, 2014, 06:07:34 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
habraken
|
 |
October 02, 2014, 07:35:11 PM |
|
Hilarious popcorn-thread  |
|
|
|
|
nutildah
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2982
Merit: 7960
|
|
October 02, 2014, 08:30:10 PM |
|
Maybe Jeff and Josh met at a bipolar disorder anonymous meeting.
Nobody in the Bitcoin community has impuned Jeff's character. I have. His hatred towards NXT is blind and childish. |
|
|
|
notthematrix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1000
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
|
|
October 02, 2014, 08:59:02 PM |
|
Truth about Bitcoin is that it is highly centralized on many points : - very few ASIC manufacturers - very few pools owning 95 % of the network - very few ASIC farms owned by few companies - most giant ASIC farms are located in China - very few developers on Bitcoin code stopping other people from adding modification - very few nodes around the world (about 7K only) - 40% of nodes are located in USA - a Bitcoin foundation with selected members - 1 Bitcoin forum owning most of discussions All these points has been discussed for a long time and neglected for the only argument that "it should get better with time". Sorry to wake you up but it is only getting worse. So if you are saying that Nxt is centralized, you must admit that Bitcoin is centralized too and that's more a problem. I'm not starting a kid fight Bitcoin vs Nxt, this is ridiculous but there is a kid on this thread pretending to be smart, repeating the recycled same crap on and on to get attention but I think that Bitcoin have some issues that are far more important at the moment. Cebtralized means one agreeing party! With bitcoin this is not the case ,, there is a concensis in running the bitcoin network , but the owners of asics can be in IRAN , ISRAEL , RUSSIA , USA so this means realdezentralized control , blocking any form of abuse by one single party... https://blockchain.info/pools tels evrything , NXT is centraly controled , and is as "save" as fiat , witch has an everage of 27 years..... http://georgewashington2.blogspot.nl/2011/08/average-life-expectancy-for-fiat.htmlthe power of bitcoin is in the fact that is is a concensus between enemys..... , CHINA , islamtic state , and others... |
|
|
|
|
devphp
|
|
October 02, 2014, 09:04:35 PM |
|
NXT is centraly controled
Do you have proof of that? Sort of like this:  |
|
|
|
|
notthematrix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1000
CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!
|
|
October 02, 2014, 11:16:50 PM
Last edit: October 03, 2014, 12:10:18 AM by notthematrix |
|
NXT is centraly controled
Do you have proof of that? Sort of like this: this never heppend!!!  https://blockchain.info/pools are the REAL stats..... just one of the lies lagacy would come with!!! sorry! LMAO..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LRRA1tBIS8 so please dont come up with a senario that is not feasible even with a 51% situation. 1 you need to control all the miners GHASH.io is just relaying. 2 if you want control to reverse transactions etc , its not very feasible because you can make more money with mining and blocking a evil chain is very easy. things that cant be fixed in the centralized NXT protocol..... |
|
|
|
CryptKeeper
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1055
|
|
October 03, 2014, 07:07:13 AM |
|
NXT is centraly controled
You are wrong and it seems that you are not very well informed about Nxt. If Nxt is "centrally controlled" how could it be that after the big Bter theft, the proposed rollback of the blockchain, which the Nxt chief developer supported with a special release of the client, never happened? The Nxt miners ("forgers") voted against it! So Nxt is really a decentralized system! |
Follow me on twitter! I'm a private Bitcoin and altcoin hodler. Giving away crypto for free on my Twitter feed!
|
|
|
|
habraken
|
|
October 03, 2014, 08:07:02 AM |
|
The Nxt miners ("forgers") voted against it!
Even better, there was no (centralized) 'vote' Most forgers just didn't start forging on the alternate fork (?) |
|
|
|
|
superresistant
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2128
Merit: 1120
|
|
October 03, 2014, 10:06:58 AM |
|
Cebtralized means one agreeing party!
With bitcoin this is not the case ,, there is a concensis in running the bitcoin network , but the owners of asics can be in IRAN , ISRAEL , RUSSIA , USA so this means realdezentralized control , blocking any form of abuse by one single party...
the power of bitcoin is in the fact that is is a concensus between enemys.....
, CHINA , islamtic state , and others...
I know the technique but the network will stop being decentralized if the mining power keep concentrating in the hands of few. Mining became an industrial business. Big business tend to eliminate the small ones and merge together to establish strong corporation. See the picture ?  Bitcoin mining could be owned by one single big company in a near future and nothing would stop them. What would you do ? Mine with your single old GPU and hope balancing the mining power ? I am still waiting for the very cheap ASIC that everyone can afford to decentralize the network... Where are they ? |
|
|
|
|
|
